Search
Search results
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Blast from the Past (Where Are They Now? #3) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
In this third entry into the Where Are They Now? series, Tilda Harper finds herself doubting her abilities as a journalist after two unfortunate incidents go awry. Invited to meet and interview the star of the movie, which itself is based on a comic from the eighties that is now a cult classic, Tilda sets off. As she interviews the star, John Laryea, who was also in a musical-adventure television show as a teen, and various others involved with the film project, she witnesses the hit-and-run of Laryea and his assistant. While she discovers who was behind that "accident" and works to clear the main suspect's name, she also is hired to find out who Leviathan, the mysterious creator of the classic comic book series, Pharos, actually is.
A smart main character, Tilda may make some mistakes but she's never dumb and never annoying. She goes about her work in a very professional way even if she may have some sarcastic thoughts about someone or something. I really do like her, she's not a silly nitwit who gets by on luck or relies on a guy. The cast of characters are, as usual, interesting and incorporated very well into the plot. Along with the new faces, some familiar ones are here as well. Cooper, Tilda's best friend who always brings some lightheartedness, isn't as prominent in this book as he has been in the others, I believe it's only through phone conversations, but luckily the book doesn't suffer because of this. Tilda's sister, June is in it for a short amount of time that doesn't diminish her repartee with Tilda. Nick (Tilda's former and maybe future love interest) and his dad, Dom, are the two who feature predominantly since Dom's company is in charge of the film's security. Following the pattern of each book, a new roommate is introduced, though I'm sure she'll be gone by the next outing, this time the roommate is an animal collector, the latest being a snake Tilda's not too fond of.
The two plots are well-paced and complement each other nicely. Pretty much every page of the book was interesting, with clues so subtly embedded I didn't always pick up on them, that it held my attention to the very end. I love the concept of this series and while I liked the previous books, I believe this may just be the best one to date and hope there are many more to come.
Series order:
[b:Curse of the Kissing Cousins|2384227|Curse of the Kissing Cousins (Where are They Now?, #1)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266777949s/2384227.jpg|2391239]
[b:Who Killed the Pinup Queen?|7518303|Who Killed the Pinup Queen? (Where are They Now?, #2)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1277167352s/7518303.jpg|9733117]
[b:Blast from the Past|8592435|Blast from the Past (Where Are They Now? #3)|Toni L. P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327922876s/8592435.jpg|13462058]
A smart main character, Tilda may make some mistakes but she's never dumb and never annoying. She goes about her work in a very professional way even if she may have some sarcastic thoughts about someone or something. I really do like her, she's not a silly nitwit who gets by on luck or relies on a guy. The cast of characters are, as usual, interesting and incorporated very well into the plot. Along with the new faces, some familiar ones are here as well. Cooper, Tilda's best friend who always brings some lightheartedness, isn't as prominent in this book as he has been in the others, I believe it's only through phone conversations, but luckily the book doesn't suffer because of this. Tilda's sister, June is in it for a short amount of time that doesn't diminish her repartee with Tilda. Nick (Tilda's former and maybe future love interest) and his dad, Dom, are the two who feature predominantly since Dom's company is in charge of the film's security. Following the pattern of each book, a new roommate is introduced, though I'm sure she'll be gone by the next outing, this time the roommate is an animal collector, the latest being a snake Tilda's not too fond of.
The two plots are well-paced and complement each other nicely. Pretty much every page of the book was interesting, with clues so subtly embedded I didn't always pick up on them, that it held my attention to the very end. I love the concept of this series and while I liked the previous books, I believe this may just be the best one to date and hope there are many more to come.
Series order:
[b:Curse of the Kissing Cousins|2384227|Curse of the Kissing Cousins (Where are They Now?, #1)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266777949s/2384227.jpg|2391239]
[b:Who Killed the Pinup Queen?|7518303|Who Killed the Pinup Queen? (Where are They Now?, #2)|Toni L.P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1277167352s/7518303.jpg|9733117]
[b:Blast from the Past|8592435|Blast from the Past (Where Are They Now? #3)|Toni L. P. Kelner|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327922876s/8592435.jpg|13462058]
Ross (3282 KP) rated Good Omens in Books
Jun 12, 2019
Fun, charming romp towards the end of the world
Good Omens is a strange one. If you're a fan of Pratchett's Discworld, I can see you not being overly keen on this book (while his trademark humour is there and his funny Billy Connolly-esque tangents are in the footnotes, there is less of the fantastic about it). And likewise Gaiman fans might be missing his usual gothic flair and be somewhat alarmed at the amount of silliness in the book.
This is probably what put me off reading this until now. I seem to recall trying to read it about 20 years ago, but for some reason I gave up inside a couple of pages. That was 17 year old me as a Pratchett fan, and I must have opted for the 20+ Discworld books I still had yet to read instead, and had no idea who Neil Gaiman was.
Sadly, that makes me your common or garden bandwagon-jumper as I have only now read this for the first time with the TV series on my to-be-watched list.
I cannot say why I never returned to the book. I love Pratchett, had the honour of meeting him at signings a few times in the 90s, and he got me into Robert Rankin, Douglas Adams, Tom Holt and Tom Sharpe. This book is so in line with the flavour of the books I have enjoyed most in my life that it beggars belief I never gave it another thought.
I am so glad I eventually did, and did so before watching the TV series.
While there are epic expectations of the quality of the book, from the hype and cult status, I always read with an open mind.
The story underlying the book is a Fawlty Towers-esque attempt at the end of days, where one bumbling fool's error in the early stages completely changes the plans for the end of the human race.
I won't go into the plot in detail, and will only say that the read is a thoroughly enjoyable ride. It isn't laugh-out-loud funny, it is smirk-I-know-what-you-mean funny. This may not appeal to non-British readers as much as it is written with a very British sense of humour. It is very silly quite a lot of the time, but there is a good, deep story in there if you take a moment to think about it.
My only criticism would be that there was a little too much silliness and while enjoyable this may have distracted from the book at times. But you know you'll get that with Pratchett, he takes his little tangents and he adds in nonsense dialogues for sheer entertainment value - he very much sees that not every word has to be vital to the overall story, you can have a little fun along the way.
Now, to get into the TV series ....
This is probably what put me off reading this until now. I seem to recall trying to read it about 20 years ago, but for some reason I gave up inside a couple of pages. That was 17 year old me as a Pratchett fan, and I must have opted for the 20+ Discworld books I still had yet to read instead, and had no idea who Neil Gaiman was.
Sadly, that makes me your common or garden bandwagon-jumper as I have only now read this for the first time with the TV series on my to-be-watched list.
I cannot say why I never returned to the book. I love Pratchett, had the honour of meeting him at signings a few times in the 90s, and he got me into Robert Rankin, Douglas Adams, Tom Holt and Tom Sharpe. This book is so in line with the flavour of the books I have enjoyed most in my life that it beggars belief I never gave it another thought.
I am so glad I eventually did, and did so before watching the TV series.
While there are epic expectations of the quality of the book, from the hype and cult status, I always read with an open mind.
The story underlying the book is a Fawlty Towers-esque attempt at the end of days, where one bumbling fool's error in the early stages completely changes the plans for the end of the human race.
I won't go into the plot in detail, and will only say that the read is a thoroughly enjoyable ride. It isn't laugh-out-loud funny, it is smirk-I-know-what-you-mean funny. This may not appeal to non-British readers as much as it is written with a very British sense of humour. It is very silly quite a lot of the time, but there is a good, deep story in there if you take a moment to think about it.
My only criticism would be that there was a little too much silliness and while enjoyable this may have distracted from the book at times. But you know you'll get that with Pratchett, he takes his little tangents and he adds in nonsense dialogues for sheer entertainment value - he very much sees that not every word has to be vital to the overall story, you can have a little fun along the way.
Now, to get into the TV series ....
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Followers in Books
Dec 17, 2018
My rating: 3.5
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
The Followers</i> is the compelling second novel of the British author Rebecca Wait. Stephanie is living a mundane life with her daughter, making what little money she can at a local coffee shop. But then she meets Nathaniel, a man who says he wants to love her, look after her and make her happy. Stephanie and Judith move in with Nathaniel at a place known as the Ark, with a bunch of other people who are part of a religious cult. Nathaniel, who proclaims himself as a prophet, is determined for Stephanie to forget about her past and turn herself to God. Judith, however, is not so easy to persuade. However a turn of events raise questions as to whether Nathaniel should really be trusted.
The story begins with Stephanie in prison where she is serving her sentence for a crime the reader has no knowledge of. It then switches between “before” and “after” with “before” being when Stephanie meets Nathaniel and “after” involving the prison scenes. From the very start the reader knows something bad is going to happen, that Stephanie is going to break a law bad enough for her to be imprisoned. The following chapters keep readers guessing what exactly that offence would be.
The novel gets darker and darker as the truth about the running of the Ark is revealed. With violence and punishments being doled out, Nathaniel is no longer the man he originally appeared. As the book climaxes it is shocking when the reader realizes what it is that Stephanie is going to do.
As well as Judith there are other children living in the Ark, but the difference is they were born there and have known nothing else except doing things in the name of God. Judith on the other hand was not sheltered from the “evils” of the outside world and thus has a different opinion about the way Nathaniel treats his followers. As it turns out, Judith is right to distrust the ways of this man, but there is nothing she can do about her situation.
Although containing a strong religious theme, <i>The Followers</i> is not a piece of Christian fiction. The behaviour of Nathaniel and the members of the Ark does not reflect the average Christian, and everyone, whether religious or not, will be shocked by the happenings in this book.
It took a while to get into the storyline and the first few chapters did not feel particularly well written, however readers will quickly be sucked into the plot and will want to keep reading to find out what happens. <i>The Followers</i> is not a happy story and there are a few sad and distressing scenes, which make the reader really feel for some of the characters. Overall it is a very interesting read.
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
The Followers</i> is the compelling second novel of the British author Rebecca Wait. Stephanie is living a mundane life with her daughter, making what little money she can at a local coffee shop. But then she meets Nathaniel, a man who says he wants to love her, look after her and make her happy. Stephanie and Judith move in with Nathaniel at a place known as the Ark, with a bunch of other people who are part of a religious cult. Nathaniel, who proclaims himself as a prophet, is determined for Stephanie to forget about her past and turn herself to God. Judith, however, is not so easy to persuade. However a turn of events raise questions as to whether Nathaniel should really be trusted.
The story begins with Stephanie in prison where she is serving her sentence for a crime the reader has no knowledge of. It then switches between “before” and “after” with “before” being when Stephanie meets Nathaniel and “after” involving the prison scenes. From the very start the reader knows something bad is going to happen, that Stephanie is going to break a law bad enough for her to be imprisoned. The following chapters keep readers guessing what exactly that offence would be.
The novel gets darker and darker as the truth about the running of the Ark is revealed. With violence and punishments being doled out, Nathaniel is no longer the man he originally appeared. As the book climaxes it is shocking when the reader realizes what it is that Stephanie is going to do.
As well as Judith there are other children living in the Ark, but the difference is they were born there and have known nothing else except doing things in the name of God. Judith on the other hand was not sheltered from the “evils” of the outside world and thus has a different opinion about the way Nathaniel treats his followers. As it turns out, Judith is right to distrust the ways of this man, but there is nothing she can do about her situation.
Although containing a strong religious theme, <i>The Followers</i> is not a piece of Christian fiction. The behaviour of Nathaniel and the members of the Ark does not reflect the average Christian, and everyone, whether religious or not, will be shocked by the happenings in this book.
It took a while to get into the storyline and the first few chapters did not feel particularly well written, however readers will quickly be sucked into the plot and will want to keep reading to find out what happens. <i>The Followers</i> is not a happy story and there are a few sad and distressing scenes, which make the reader really feel for some of the characters. Overall it is a very interesting read.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Drive Angry (2011) in Movies
Mar 13, 2020
What Happens When a Movie Meets Zero Effort
Ok, let’s not waste time with this: Drive Angry is easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever watched in my life. To be more specific, third worst behind the awful 1994 version of Fantastic Four (look that doozy up when you have a chance) and Battlefield Earth where we got to see John Travolta sporting dreads. Yes, folks, Drive Angry is bad in every single way imaginable. It is a movie you will long to forget. As far as the plot is concerned, there is a lot I tried to blot out about this movie but I’m pretty sure it’s about a man who has returned from Hell in a car he stole from the set of Fast and the Furious to prevent the sacrifice of his granddaughter by an evil cult. You say what now?
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Acting: 5
I feel like these actors knew after the first week of filming that this was going to be a shit-show so they all mailed it in. Nicholas Cage, star of said shit-show, delivers his lines with the excitement of someone getting a flu shot. I won’t linger on this point, but let’s just say I’ve seen the cast of a Hallmark movie do better than these lame-duck performances.
Beginning: 1
Much like the middle and the end, the beginning is an awful disaster. It sports one of the worst setups I think I have ever seen for a movie. After ten minutes, I knew I was in for a world of pain.
Characters: 2
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
Honestly, the visuals could be a lot worse. There were some decent moments particularly when things slowed down that were bordering on looking pretty cool. While a lot of action sequences were pretty cheesy it was nice to see they at least put in a smidgeon of effort with the special effects.
Conflict: 5
Entertainment Value: 2
Memorability: 0
After the movie was over, I instantly started thinking, “Is there a time machine that I can use to get part of my life back?” There is absolutely no value in this movie, nothing to remember with the exception of the absolutely horrid filmmaking. I am still appalled this project made it through completion.
Pace: 0
Plot: 0
Story? We don’t need no stinking story! Oh, how I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during this pitch meeting. It seriously made my head hurt. They try and give you a story then throw it all out the window with repeated implausible occurrences that beat you into submission.
Resolution: 1
Overall: 24
In light of the Black Mamba Kobe Bryant’s passing, the number 24 should represent greatness. Not with my scoring of Drive Angry. Unless, of course, I’m referring to the greatness of sucking. If that’s the case, then yes, this movie is indeed great. Great and terrible.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Nice Guys (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
This is how it’s supposed to be done. Though it’s not the most original flick to grace the silver screen, Shane Black’s follow-up to his instant cult classic Kiss Kiss Bang Bang has everything you could want in an action/comedy romp. A solid dynamic between its two charming yet flawed leads, a strong plot that has enough twists and turns to keep you thrilled but not lost, and plenty of quotably razor-sharp dialogue. Imagine the Lethal Weapon type meets a less obtuse Inherent Vice. Besides the return of Jason Bourne in July, it will undoubtedly be the most entertaining thing you’ll see in another summer season of mediocrity. Is anybody really that interested in a ninth X-Men film?
Russell Crowe is the muscle-for-hire opposite Ryan Gosling as the P.I. referred to by his daughter as “the worst detective in the world”. They are thrust together by circumstance and, after a couple of amusing altercations, come to find out they are both involved in a larger case of conspiracy and cover-up as they race to find the girl at the center of it all. Crowe and Gosling make a winning team with chemistry in spades and, though the dialogue they’re given may not feel as fresh as what Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. had to work with in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang; they still pull it off marvelously. Between Gosling’s unfortunate directorial debut, Lost River, and Crowe’s string of misfires since 2010’s Robin Hood, these were the type of roles their fading stars were in dire need of and they both certainly look at home in a 70’s-era Hollywood detective story. For Gosling especially, this is probably the most likable he’s ever been. Well done also to the casting department for finding Angourie Rice. As Gosling’s daughter, she’s does an admirably fine job of playing a girl who can stand up to an incredibly hostile world and give some back. Here’s hoping she’s got a decent agent that will keep her in rich, multi-dimensional characters.
Shane Black, already having proved that he knows his way around a screenplay or two, is firmly coming into his own as a director (though the Christmas thing has got to stop), and I’ll be eagerly anticipating his next foray behind the camera. It’s also another excellent job from Warner’s marketing team, with a trailer that gave just enough of the one-liners and snippets of action without spoiling too many of the fun and twisty plot points. The action beats and moments of violence themselves, due to a tightly-structured script, feel earned and well-placed. Not once did I get that overwhelming feeling of action fatigue I’ve been experiencing so much in film lately (I’m looking at you, Marvel). The Nice Guys is all-around great filmmaking and one I can’t wait to revisit. I wouldn’t doubt it’ll be a day-one buy for me when it hits the home video market.
Russell Crowe is the muscle-for-hire opposite Ryan Gosling as the P.I. referred to by his daughter as “the worst detective in the world”. They are thrust together by circumstance and, after a couple of amusing altercations, come to find out they are both involved in a larger case of conspiracy and cover-up as they race to find the girl at the center of it all. Crowe and Gosling make a winning team with chemistry in spades and, though the dialogue they’re given may not feel as fresh as what Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. had to work with in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang; they still pull it off marvelously. Between Gosling’s unfortunate directorial debut, Lost River, and Crowe’s string of misfires since 2010’s Robin Hood, these were the type of roles their fading stars were in dire need of and they both certainly look at home in a 70’s-era Hollywood detective story. For Gosling especially, this is probably the most likable he’s ever been. Well done also to the casting department for finding Angourie Rice. As Gosling’s daughter, she’s does an admirably fine job of playing a girl who can stand up to an incredibly hostile world and give some back. Here’s hoping she’s got a decent agent that will keep her in rich, multi-dimensional characters.
Shane Black, already having proved that he knows his way around a screenplay or two, is firmly coming into his own as a director (though the Christmas thing has got to stop), and I’ll be eagerly anticipating his next foray behind the camera. It’s also another excellent job from Warner’s marketing team, with a trailer that gave just enough of the one-liners and snippets of action without spoiling too many of the fun and twisty plot points. The action beats and moments of violence themselves, due to a tightly-structured script, feel earned and well-placed. Not once did I get that overwhelming feeling of action fatigue I’ve been experiencing so much in film lately (I’m looking at you, Marvel). The Nice Guys is all-around great filmmaking and one I can’t wait to revisit. I wouldn’t doubt it’ll be a day-one buy for me when it hits the home video market.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Evil Dead (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
One of the greatest horror movies of all time would have to be “The Evil Dead” which had been spawned by Sam Raimi and his original short film “Within the Woods”. “Within the Woods” was filmed with the intent of gaining investors to collaborate on a full length film starring the then unknown God of “B” horror movies Bruce Campbell. “The Evil Dead” and its predecessor “Within the Woods” was meant to be serious and horrifying, though that proved to be hard with a smaller budget that Raimi and Campbell had originally hoped for. Little did they know that Evil Dead would become one of the largest trilogies in cult film histories.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
addappt: Live Contacts+Weather
Social Networking, Business and Stickers
App
PRIVACY (more on addappt.com) - We DO NOT store your address book on our servers. - We DO NOT spam...
Icycle: On Thin Ice
Games and Entertainment
App
Ever kissed a fish? Cult of Mac's Best Damn iOS Games of 2013! Games and art become one in the...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated What's Done in Darkness: A Novel in Books
Jun 24, 2021
An excellent dark and foreboding mystery
Sarabeth is seventeen when she's held captive for nearly a week and then dumped along the side of the road, bound and blindfolded. She doesn't know who took her, or where. The police doubt her story and her parents do not even report her missing from their rural Arkansas farm . Sarabeth had argued with her religious parents, who insisted she follow their strict rules and marry someone of their choosing. As she returns home and finds her family appalled by her kidnapping, she realizes something good may come from the abduction: she can escape life on the farm for good. Five years later, she's now known as Sara when investigator Nick Farrow asks her to help with the missing persons case of another girl--one incredibly similar to Sara's. Reluctantly, Sara returns home, where she must face her darkest fears (and her family) to assist in bringing this girl home.
"Sarabeth had come to think of her time on the farm as a sentence that she had to serve, one with an end date. Now it seemed like she'd have to plan an escape."
I adore Laura McHugh's writing at this point. She's an excellent writer, and this is a great mystery in her deft hands. The religious, almost cult-like aspect of Sarabeth's family seems extremely timely in this era. We see how they narrow her options, forcing her to choose between her family and her own life. Religion and darkness are major themes in this book, with darkness playing not just in the title but across the entire novel. McHugh weaves it in and out of her story--Sara being afraid of the dark, darkness and shadows lurking at every turn. And it's a dark book to read too, even if it has its light moments. Still there's hope here as well.
I loved how Sara was a complicated heroine, with a complex past and many scars. She reminded me of Joanna Schaffhausen's Ellery Hathaway in that sense--a troubled soul who must overcome her own darkness to try to save others. Her interactions with Nick were an excellent respite, and I certainly could see myself reading about these two again.
"A piece of me was still there in Arkansas, but I was gone. No one in my new life knew who I was, what had happened to me, and I wanted to keep it that way."
The book is atmospheric, sucking us into both the deep religious aspect of the Ozarks and the Arkansas countryside. The Arkansas hills seem to play their own role in the book--another character so to speak. This one kept me guessing and even as I worked out some pieces, there were plenty of twists and turns. It's a fairly quick read, but an excellent one. Certainly recommend to mystery fans and those who enjoy a character-driven read.
"Sarabeth had come to think of her time on the farm as a sentence that she had to serve, one with an end date. Now it seemed like she'd have to plan an escape."
I adore Laura McHugh's writing at this point. She's an excellent writer, and this is a great mystery in her deft hands. The religious, almost cult-like aspect of Sarabeth's family seems extremely timely in this era. We see how they narrow her options, forcing her to choose between her family and her own life. Religion and darkness are major themes in this book, with darkness playing not just in the title but across the entire novel. McHugh weaves it in and out of her story--Sara being afraid of the dark, darkness and shadows lurking at every turn. And it's a dark book to read too, even if it has its light moments. Still there's hope here as well.
I loved how Sara was a complicated heroine, with a complex past and many scars. She reminded me of Joanna Schaffhausen's Ellery Hathaway in that sense--a troubled soul who must overcome her own darkness to try to save others. Her interactions with Nick were an excellent respite, and I certainly could see myself reading about these two again.
"A piece of me was still there in Arkansas, but I was gone. No one in my new life knew who I was, what had happened to me, and I wanted to keep it that way."
The book is atmospheric, sucking us into both the deep religious aspect of the Ozarks and the Arkansas countryside. The Arkansas hills seem to play their own role in the book--another character so to speak. This one kept me guessing and even as I worked out some pieces, there were plenty of twists and turns. It's a fairly quick read, but an excellent one. Certainly recommend to mystery fans and those who enjoy a character-driven read.
Cardiio: Heart Rate Monitor
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
Cardiio helps you measure your pulse (heart rate) using your phone camera, learn how the numbers...