Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jun 12, 2019
Elizabeth Banks and David Denman - believable couple (2 more)
Unpredictable storyline and ending
Music, editing and pacing of direction
I thought this was a mini-classic for the genre
Loved this one. My full review is here: https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2019/06/11/one-manns-movies-film-review-brightburn-2019/
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Uninvited (2009) in Movies
Oct 8, 2020
Who Are You
The Uninvited- is a erry movie meaning its scary, terrorfying, chilling and spooky.
The Plot: After spending time in a psychiatric facility, young Anna (Emily Browning) finds significant changes in store at home. Her widowed father (David Strathairn) is now engaged to her mother's former nurse, Rachel (Elizabeth Banks). One night, the ghost of Anna's mother appears, screaming for revenge and accusing Rachel of murder. Anna and her sister, Alex (Arielle Kebbel), start to investigate, but they may be unprepared for the lethal battle of wills that ensues.
Both Emily Browning and Elizabeth Banks are excellent in this film.
A good horror film.
The Plot: After spending time in a psychiatric facility, young Anna (Emily Browning) finds significant changes in store at home. Her widowed father (David Strathairn) is now engaged to her mother's former nurse, Rachel (Elizabeth Banks). One night, the ghost of Anna's mother appears, screaming for revenge and accusing Rachel of murder. Anna and her sister, Alex (Arielle Kebbel), start to investigate, but they may be unprepared for the lethal battle of wills that ensues.
Both Emily Browning and Elizabeth Banks are excellent in this film.
A good horror film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Mary Poppins (1964) in Movies
Apr 20, 2019
Practically Perfect In Every Way
After watching MARY POPPINS RETURNS, the BankofMarquis was itching to check out the original 1964 Julie Andrews/Dick Van Dyke/Walt Disney production of MARY POPPINS to see if it holds up as well as my memory has held it up. I was a little nervous when I put the DVD in the player and hit go.
And I shouldn't have worried, for MARY POPPINS is...pardon the expression..."Practically Perfect in Every Way".
Based on the series of books by P.L. Travers and set right around 1900, the film tells the tale of the London Banks' Family - Mr., Mrs., Jane and Michael - who need a new nanny. Both parents are too busy to spend time with their children - he with his job at the Bank (get it - Mr. Banks works at a Bank) and her involvement in the Women's Suffragette movement. Into their lives flies (quite literally) Mary Poppins - a nanny with magical qualities who, along with her friend and cohort Bert, casts a spell on the children - and the Banks' family.
Julie Andrews earned the Oscar for Best Actress for her feature film debut - and it is richly deserved. Her Poppins is stern, smart, brassy and loving - oh...and a marvelous singer and dancer. Just as strong as Andrews is Dick Van Dyke as Bert (though some will quibble with his Cockney accent). I say...don't worry about his accent and watch the wonderful comedic timing, dancing and joi de vivre that Van Dyke brings to this film. He is the "secret sauce" that makes this work. Julie would not be as good - nor would this film be as interesting - without Bert by her side.
EVERY major player shines in this film from David Tomlinson's befuddled, straight-laced British Gentleman Mr. Banks to Glynnis Johns as the enthusiastic supporter of Votes for Women, Mrs. Banks, to the children - Karen Dotrice and Matthew Garber. Special notice should be made to Ed Wynn who's one scene/song/cameo as Uncle Albert - the "I Love To Laugh" scene - is pure gold.
Even the smaller, supporting roles are stellar. Reta Shaw and Hermione Baddely as the "domestics", Arthur Treacher (yes - he, of FISH AND CHIPS fame) as the Constable and Reginald Owen (Scrooge in the 1930's version of A CHRISTMAS CAROL) as Admiral Boom are all fun to watch and match the energy and timing of the leads in their limited screen time.
And...the music...Oh, the Music! Written by Richard M and Robert B Sherman - these songs are classic. Starting with the Oscar Winner for Best Song - Chim Chim Cheree and continuing through Feed The Birds, I Love To Laugh, Jolly Holiday and Let's Go Fly A Kite - ALL the songs are magical and lend a hand to the story - they serve a purpose and are not just a distraction. This film is worth watching just for the rooftop Step-In-Time song and dance number alone.
But the thing that makes this film go is the story - the characters, settings, costumes, songs and dances - are all in service to a touching, sentimental (but not cloying) simple story of a family coming together. It is charming in it's simplicity and leaves everyone with a heart full of joy.
Surprisingly to a modern audience, the special effects (especially the "Live Action and Animation" sequence) holds up really, really well. It is amazing to me how strong these effects are - even over 50 years later.
This is a wonderful, heartfelt family film that deserves a re-watch if you haven't seen it in awhile.
Letter Grade A+
10 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
And I shouldn't have worried, for MARY POPPINS is...pardon the expression..."Practically Perfect in Every Way".
Based on the series of books by P.L. Travers and set right around 1900, the film tells the tale of the London Banks' Family - Mr., Mrs., Jane and Michael - who need a new nanny. Both parents are too busy to spend time with their children - he with his job at the Bank (get it - Mr. Banks works at a Bank) and her involvement in the Women's Suffragette movement. Into their lives flies (quite literally) Mary Poppins - a nanny with magical qualities who, along with her friend and cohort Bert, casts a spell on the children - and the Banks' family.
Julie Andrews earned the Oscar for Best Actress for her feature film debut - and it is richly deserved. Her Poppins is stern, smart, brassy and loving - oh...and a marvelous singer and dancer. Just as strong as Andrews is Dick Van Dyke as Bert (though some will quibble with his Cockney accent). I say...don't worry about his accent and watch the wonderful comedic timing, dancing and joi de vivre that Van Dyke brings to this film. He is the "secret sauce" that makes this work. Julie would not be as good - nor would this film be as interesting - without Bert by her side.
EVERY major player shines in this film from David Tomlinson's befuddled, straight-laced British Gentleman Mr. Banks to Glynnis Johns as the enthusiastic supporter of Votes for Women, Mrs. Banks, to the children - Karen Dotrice and Matthew Garber. Special notice should be made to Ed Wynn who's one scene/song/cameo as Uncle Albert - the "I Love To Laugh" scene - is pure gold.
Even the smaller, supporting roles are stellar. Reta Shaw and Hermione Baddely as the "domestics", Arthur Treacher (yes - he, of FISH AND CHIPS fame) as the Constable and Reginald Owen (Scrooge in the 1930's version of A CHRISTMAS CAROL) as Admiral Boom are all fun to watch and match the energy and timing of the leads in their limited screen time.
And...the music...Oh, the Music! Written by Richard M and Robert B Sherman - these songs are classic. Starting with the Oscar Winner for Best Song - Chim Chim Cheree and continuing through Feed The Birds, I Love To Laugh, Jolly Holiday and Let's Go Fly A Kite - ALL the songs are magical and lend a hand to the story - they serve a purpose and are not just a distraction. This film is worth watching just for the rooftop Step-In-Time song and dance number alone.
But the thing that makes this film go is the story - the characters, settings, costumes, songs and dances - are all in service to a touching, sentimental (but not cloying) simple story of a family coming together. It is charming in it's simplicity and leaves everyone with a heart full of joy.
Surprisingly to a modern audience, the special effects (especially the "Live Action and Animation" sequence) holds up really, really well. It is amazing to me how strong these effects are - even over 50 years later.
This is a wonderful, heartfelt family film that deserves a re-watch if you haven't seen it in awhile.
Letter Grade A+
10 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (OfMarquis)
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
Horror Twist On A Classic Comic Book Icon
Brightburn is a 2019 superhero/horror movie produced by James Gunn and Kenneth Huang. It was directed by David Yarovesky with screenplay written by Mark and Brian Gunn. The film was produced by Screen Gems, Stage 6 Films, Troll Court Entertainment, and the H Collective. The movie stars Elizabeth Banks, David Denman, Jackson A. Dunn, Matt Jones and Meredith Hagnar.
Living in Brightburn, Kansas, Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Breyer (David Denman), a young farm couple, struggle with conceiving a child due to fertility issues. One night, a spaceship falls from the sky near their farm. A baby boy is found inside and the couple decide to adopt him and name him Brandon. Years later, it seems Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) is a typical young boy as he has been raised without the knowledge of his true origin. However this begins to change in very dramatic ways as the spaceship that he arrived in, hidden in a trapdoor in the barn, begins to glow and affect him disturbingly.
This movie was very much horror and with the R-rating it did not disappoint in that category. However for a superhero movie, I definitely felt it could have been better, especially when it came to the storytelling. I felt like the plot wasn't structured enough and it didn't always feel like it was going somewhere except for what it had shown through the trailers. You know, like it showed in the trailers the outcome and the journey to that outcome wasn't as fun or surprising as I thought it was going to be. The kill scenes though were very brutal, which for some reason I wasn't expecting as much, I guess because the one doing them is this super-powered 12 year old. But this was an awesome concept on a very familiar story that everyone has grown up with or heard, which is basically Superman. There are comics from DC and of Superman like Red Son Superman; where it's a "what if" Superman had landed in Russia instead of United States, and there is a Justice League animated film where instead of Superman, Kal-El, the baby that escapes Krypton is Generel Zod's child and instead of landing in Kansas he lands in New Mexico and is raised by Mexican migrant farmers. But I don't think there has been a story to explore this type of different way Superman could have grown up and it was shockingly entertaining to say the least. The mid-credits scene was really cool to see as well and know that the cinematic universe for Brightburn could expand if it does well financially. I'm thinking that it won't with stiff competition such as Aladdin and John Wick 3 but who knows. I give this film a 6/10.
Living in Brightburn, Kansas, Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Breyer (David Denman), a young farm couple, struggle with conceiving a child due to fertility issues. One night, a spaceship falls from the sky near their farm. A baby boy is found inside and the couple decide to adopt him and name him Brandon. Years later, it seems Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) is a typical young boy as he has been raised without the knowledge of his true origin. However this begins to change in very dramatic ways as the spaceship that he arrived in, hidden in a trapdoor in the barn, begins to glow and affect him disturbingly.
This movie was very much horror and with the R-rating it did not disappoint in that category. However for a superhero movie, I definitely felt it could have been better, especially when it came to the storytelling. I felt like the plot wasn't structured enough and it didn't always feel like it was going somewhere except for what it had shown through the trailers. You know, like it showed in the trailers the outcome and the journey to that outcome wasn't as fun or surprising as I thought it was going to be. The kill scenes though were very brutal, which for some reason I wasn't expecting as much, I guess because the one doing them is this super-powered 12 year old. But this was an awesome concept on a very familiar story that everyone has grown up with or heard, which is basically Superman. There are comics from DC and of Superman like Red Son Superman; where it's a "what if" Superman had landed in Russia instead of United States, and there is a Justice League animated film where instead of Superman, Kal-El, the baby that escapes Krypton is Generel Zod's child and instead of landing in Kansas he lands in New Mexico and is raised by Mexican migrant farmers. But I don't think there has been a story to explore this type of different way Superman could have grown up and it was shockingly entertaining to say the least. The mid-credits scene was really cool to see as well and know that the cinematic universe for Brightburn could expand if it does well financially. I'm thinking that it won't with stiff competition such as Aladdin and John Wick 3 but who knows. I give this film a 6/10.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019 (Updated Jun 20, 2019)
The concept for this fun horror subversion soars higher than a tall building, even if the plot hardly moves faster than a speeding bullet and the performances are not quite as powerful as a locomotive. Childless Kansas farming couple are startled when a falling meteorite proves to be something quite different, and adopt the infant boy they find on the scene. Aha, but it's not that story - such is the twist. What would really happen if you coupled the power of a demigod to the psyche of a messed-up boy in his early teens? (Hint: there will be blood.)
The film doesn't try anything too clever and sticks to its core idea with admirable focus and restraint; good performances from Elizabeth Banks and David Denman in particular as the not-Kents. The set piece sequences are perhaps a tiny bit repetitive, but the film has energy and isn't afraid to go into some dark places. Whether the sheer audacity of the film's raid on the story of you-know-who is commendable or shocking is probably a question of personal taste, but in an admittedly perverse way the film honours that story better than some authorised adaptations.
The film doesn't try anything too clever and sticks to its core idea with admirable focus and restraint; good performances from Elizabeth Banks and David Denman in particular as the not-Kents. The set piece sequences are perhaps a tiny bit repetitive, but the film has energy and isn't afraid to go into some dark places. Whether the sheer audacity of the film's raid on the story of you-know-who is commendable or shocking is probably a question of personal taste, but in an admittedly perverse way the film honours that story better than some authorised adaptations.
JT (287 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
What if superheroes didn’t arrive on earth with the soul purpose of saving humanity? What if their main intention was to cause pain and suffering? This is the unique premise used in Brightburn to great effect and turns the superhero genre on its head.
Kansas couple Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Breyer (David Denman) have been desperately trying to have a child, without success. When a mysterious object lands on their property they discover that all of their prayers have been answered – sound familiar? What begins as the perfect family life starts to unravel in sheer terror as their little bundle of joy turns out to be something far sinister, despite their denial that he might just might be a little misunderstood.
“It’s a boy”
I wasn’t sure what to expect with this one, but I was pleasantly surprised by how well it unfolded. There was a solid amount of tension packed with good levels of gore. The jump scare is a staple part of the horror genre but it can become tiresome if not delivered in the right way. Thankfully in this instance it works and works well.
Post credits deliver more to the story which has the potential to spawn a sequel, although I prefer the idea that this is a one off.
Kansas couple Tori (Elizabeth Banks) and Kyle Breyer (David Denman) have been desperately trying to have a child, without success. When a mysterious object lands on their property they discover that all of their prayers have been answered – sound familiar? What begins as the perfect family life starts to unravel in sheer terror as their little bundle of joy turns out to be something far sinister, despite their denial that he might just might be a little misunderstood.
“It’s a boy”
I wasn’t sure what to expect with this one, but I was pleasantly surprised by how well it unfolded. There was a solid amount of tension packed with good levels of gore. The jump scare is a staple part of the horror genre but it can become tiresome if not delivered in the right way. Thankfully in this instance it works and works well.
Post credits deliver more to the story which has the potential to spawn a sequel, although I prefer the idea that this is a one off.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated In the Shadow of David in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
In the Shadow of David</i> is Martin Baggen’s attempt at reimagining “the greatest story ever told,” i.e. the life of Jesus Christ. Beginning on the banks of the river Jordan where John the Baptist is washing away the sins of his followers, the story continues before concluding with the resurrection. Told through the eyes of supporting characters, the details of Jesus’ life, or in this instance Yeshua’s, are reinvented in fairly accurate historical settings.
Unfortunately, Braggen’s attempt at originality is going to upset 2.2 billion people. Instead of telling the story of Jesus in the manner he is portrayed in the Bible, the author pens the character Yeshua and claims that there was no “Son of God.” The names, settings and historical facts all remain the same or similar in this version of events, however the miracles: Lazarus’ death, water into wine, the resurrection of Christ/Yeshua, were all shown to be a charade. According to<i> In the Shadow of David</i>, the “Son of God” was a charlatan attempting to reunite the Jews and overthrow the ruling Romans.
By mocking Christianity, Martin Braggen has wasted his writing talent with this blasphemous novel. Granted there are many people who try to prove the inexistence of a god, however in these instances there are always counter arguments. By containing this controversial opinion in a story, it prevents any other theories or beliefs from contributing.
Many may purchase this book with the mistaken idea that it will convey an in-depth narrative of the life of Jesus. What they will find instead is a disappointing atheist version instead. It is doubtful that readers will get to the end of the book, despite it not being overly long, after slamming it shut in anger and frustration.
In the Shadow of David</i> is Martin Baggen’s attempt at reimagining “the greatest story ever told,” i.e. the life of Jesus Christ. Beginning on the banks of the river Jordan where John the Baptist is washing away the sins of his followers, the story continues before concluding with the resurrection. Told through the eyes of supporting characters, the details of Jesus’ life, or in this instance Yeshua’s, are reinvented in fairly accurate historical settings.
Unfortunately, Braggen’s attempt at originality is going to upset 2.2 billion people. Instead of telling the story of Jesus in the manner he is portrayed in the Bible, the author pens the character Yeshua and claims that there was no “Son of God.” The names, settings and historical facts all remain the same or similar in this version of events, however the miracles: Lazarus’ death, water into wine, the resurrection of Christ/Yeshua, were all shown to be a charade. According to<i> In the Shadow of David</i>, the “Son of God” was a charlatan attempting to reunite the Jews and overthrow the ruling Romans.
By mocking Christianity, Martin Braggen has wasted his writing talent with this blasphemous novel. Granted there are many people who try to prove the inexistence of a god, however in these instances there are always counter arguments. By containing this controversial opinion in a story, it prevents any other theories or beliefs from contributing.
Many may purchase this book with the mistaken idea that it will convey an in-depth narrative of the life of Jesus. What they will find instead is a disappointing atheist version instead. It is doubtful that readers will get to the end of the book, despite it not being overly long, after slamming it shut in anger and frustration.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Unforgettable (2017) in Movies
Sep 26, 2019
Characters – Julia Banks is hitting the high point of her, promotion and engagement to the man of her dream. She does have a past which is very secretive that even David doesn’t know about it. She does have a habit about losing stuff, well she starts too, her past can play into her downfall against Tessa. Tessa is the ex-wife of David, she is very controlling and hasn’t taken the idea of David moving on well, she wants him back and with her own demanding mother in her life she is acting the same towards her own daughter. She always feels distant from any human interaction as she is planning to make Julia’s life a nightmare. David is the man stuck in the middle of everything, he is trying to keep both women happy one for the new love in his life the other to keep his daughter part of his life.
Performances – Rosario Dawson is good in her role we needed to see more of the life falling apart around her though. Katherine Heigl has had a mixed reaction from the audience and business over the last few years, she does work in this role as you do get an uneasy feeling whenever she is on screen. Geoff Stults is fine, he never really gets too much to do through the movie.
Story – The story follows an ex-wife that wants to make the new girlfriends life a living nightmare in an attempt to get her husband back. This does play out like all over the stalker films we have seen before and yes, we have moved along technologically making the moves against the victim more personally. This is an easy enough watch and playing into the idea that the victim has a past which could make her easier to frame does help even if the whole thing plays out just like you would imagine.
Thriller – The film tries to give us the tension bound levels needed, only for the most part to feel like it was just being slowly building and any scenes involving Julia and Tessa feel empty for the first half of the film.
Settings – The film puts us in high-life houses which shows how the family can cope with divorce easily, while this works, a lower class of victim would make this more intense and interesting.
Scene of the Movie – The final showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There isn’t enough tension in the early part of the film.
Final Thoughts – This is the trademark yearly stalker ex movie, it checks the boxes well without needing to be anything special or dreadful.
Overall: Simple Thriller.
Performances – Rosario Dawson is good in her role we needed to see more of the life falling apart around her though. Katherine Heigl has had a mixed reaction from the audience and business over the last few years, she does work in this role as you do get an uneasy feeling whenever she is on screen. Geoff Stults is fine, he never really gets too much to do through the movie.
Story – The story follows an ex-wife that wants to make the new girlfriends life a living nightmare in an attempt to get her husband back. This does play out like all over the stalker films we have seen before and yes, we have moved along technologically making the moves against the victim more personally. This is an easy enough watch and playing into the idea that the victim has a past which could make her easier to frame does help even if the whole thing plays out just like you would imagine.
Thriller – The film tries to give us the tension bound levels needed, only for the most part to feel like it was just being slowly building and any scenes involving Julia and Tessa feel empty for the first half of the film.
Settings – The film puts us in high-life houses which shows how the family can cope with divorce easily, while this works, a lower class of victim would make this more intense and interesting.
Scene of the Movie – The final showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There isn’t enough tension in the early part of the film.
Final Thoughts – This is the trademark yearly stalker ex movie, it checks the boxes well without needing to be anything special or dreadful.
Overall: Simple Thriller.
Darren (1599 KP) rated St. Vincent (2014) in Movies
Sep 26, 2019
Characters – Julia Banks is hitting the high point of her, promotion and engagement to the man of her dream. She does have a past which is very secretive that even David doesn’t know about it. She does have a habit about losing stuff, well she starts too, her past can play into her downfall against Tessa. Tessa is the ex-wife of David, she is very controlling and hasn’t taken the idea of David moving on well, she wants him back and with her own demanding mother in her life she is acting the same towards her own daughter. She always feels distant from any human interaction as she is planning to make Julia’s life a nightmare. David is the man stuck in the middle of everything, he is trying to keep both women happy one for the new love in his life the other to keep his daughter part of his life.
Performances – Rosario Dawson is good in her role we needed to see more of the life falling apart around her though. Katherine Heigl has had a mixed reaction from the audience and business over the last few years, she does work in this role as you do get an uneasy feeling whenever she is on screen. Geoff Stults is fine, he never really gets too much to do through the movie.
Story – The story follows an ex-wife that wants to make the new girlfriends life a living nightmare in an attempt to get her husband back. This does play out like all over the stalker films we have seen before and yes, we have moved along technologically making the moves against the victim more personally. This is an easy enough watch and playing into the idea that the victim has a past which could make her easier to frame does help even if the whole thing plays out just like you would imagine.
Thriller – The film tries to give us the tension bound levels needed, only for the most part to feel like it was just being slowly building and any scenes involving Julia and Tessa feel empty for the first half of the film.
Settings – The film puts us in high-life houses which shows how the family can cope with divorce easily, while this works, a lower class of victim would make this more intense and interesting.
Scene of the Movie – The final showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There isn’t enough tension in the early part of the film.
Final Thoughts – This is the trademark yearly stalker ex movie, it checks the boxes well without needing to be anything special or dreadful.
Overall: Simple Thriller.
Performances – Rosario Dawson is good in her role we needed to see more of the life falling apart around her though. Katherine Heigl has had a mixed reaction from the audience and business over the last few years, she does work in this role as you do get an uneasy feeling whenever she is on screen. Geoff Stults is fine, he never really gets too much to do through the movie.
Story – The story follows an ex-wife that wants to make the new girlfriends life a living nightmare in an attempt to get her husband back. This does play out like all over the stalker films we have seen before and yes, we have moved along technologically making the moves against the victim more personally. This is an easy enough watch and playing into the idea that the victim has a past which could make her easier to frame does help even if the whole thing plays out just like you would imagine.
Thriller – The film tries to give us the tension bound levels needed, only for the most part to feel like it was just being slowly building and any scenes involving Julia and Tessa feel empty for the first half of the film.
Settings – The film puts us in high-life houses which shows how the family can cope with divorce easily, while this works, a lower class of victim would make this more intense and interesting.
Scene of the Movie – The final showdown.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There isn’t enough tension in the early part of the film.
Final Thoughts – This is the trademark yearly stalker ex movie, it checks the boxes well without needing to be anything special or dreadful.
Overall: Simple Thriller.
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated By Blood We Live in Books
Mar 1, 2018
This thing is an <b>enormous</b> tome! I don't know if it has been released in hardback or not, but if it has, that version has to be anchor-worthy. I requested it from the library because Elizabeth Bear and Sarah Monette had stories in it, and I'll read pretty much anything either of those worthies publish. I didn't expect to care for most of the rest, and didn't plan to do much more than flip through them.
As it happens, I read most of the other stories, and there were many surprises. I did skip some of the reprints, such as the Anne Rice story (I wouldn't have read it the first time it was published, and I wasn't about to read it simply because she was in good company now). I had read Carrie Vaughn's "Life Is the Teacher" before, but for some reason my eyes just fell into reading it again, and I felt well rewarded for doing so. On the other hand, while I had enjoyed "Twilight" by Kelley Armstrong the first time I read it a few years back, I wasn't moved to repeat the experience.
I believe my favorite story may have been "Finders, Keepers" by L.A. Banks, as I still remember it clearly and with pleasure. I've only read one of Banks' Vampire Huntress novels and didn't find it interesting at all, so I haven't read any more of her work, but I may seek out more of her short fiction in the future.
"Mama Gone" by Jane Yolen felt fresh, as Yolen's work so often does. Garth Nix's contribution, "Infestation," was a little bit predictable, but that may be due to overexposure to the genre.
I found myself returning to the cover art by David Palumbo again and again, intrigued by the fascinating faces he gave the figures there. They aren't classically alluring, and most aren't hideous—most would look perfectly at home on any street. But they also have that, that something, an element you can't quite put your finger on, an element of the other. Take a look and I believe you'll see what I mean.
Have fun!
As it happens, I read most of the other stories, and there were many surprises. I did skip some of the reprints, such as the Anne Rice story (I wouldn't have read it the first time it was published, and I wasn't about to read it simply because she was in good company now). I had read Carrie Vaughn's "Life Is the Teacher" before, but for some reason my eyes just fell into reading it again, and I felt well rewarded for doing so. On the other hand, while I had enjoyed "Twilight" by Kelley Armstrong the first time I read it a few years back, I wasn't moved to repeat the experience.
I believe my favorite story may have been "Finders, Keepers" by L.A. Banks, as I still remember it clearly and with pleasure. I've only read one of Banks' Vampire Huntress novels and didn't find it interesting at all, so I haven't read any more of her work, but I may seek out more of her short fiction in the future.
"Mama Gone" by Jane Yolen felt fresh, as Yolen's work so often does. Garth Nix's contribution, "Infestation," was a little bit predictable, but that may be due to overexposure to the genre.
I found myself returning to the cover art by David Palumbo again and again, intrigued by the fascinating faces he gave the figures there. They aren't classically alluring, and most aren't hideous—most would look perfectly at home on any street. But they also have that, that something, an element you can't quite put your finger on, an element of the other. Take a look and I believe you'll see what I mean.
Have fun!
BackToTheMovies (56 KP) Jun 16, 2019
Bob Mann (459 KP) Jun 16, 2019