Search

Search only in certain items:

Bondage Rescue (Kiss of Leather #3)
Bondage Rescue (Kiss of Leather #3)
Morticia Knight | 2016 | Erotica, LGBTQ+, Romance
10
10.0 (2 Ratings)
Book Rating
Reluctant Dom meets bratty sub!
Independent review for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.

Book 3 in the Kiss of Leather series, and I again STRONGLY recommend you read book one, Building Bonds, and two, Safe Limits first. There are things that happen in those books that you need to know about for this one to make sense.

Reluctant Dom meets bratty sub!

Marshall is Kyle's best friend and had disappeared. Calling on Master Josh for help was a last ditch to get the help he needs. Help that comes in the form of the private detective Kiss of Leather's law firm recommends to find the Dom who hurt Corey. Stone hasn't been in any sort of D/s lifestyle for 5 years, since the death of a sub that he was accused of. But meeting Marshall, seeing that young man all haggard looking and far too thin, releases something in Master Stone and he steps up to teach Marshall that true submission really is a beautiful thing.

If you follow you reviews (and I thank you if you do!) you'll know I'm all about the sexy time. I do love my books on the more explicit side, and I make no bones nor apologies for that. What I particularly LOVED about this one, was that Master Stone and Marshall do not get their sexy time til the last TEN MINUTES of their story! I LOVED being made to wait.

Oh, don't get me wrong, Master Stone knows just how to teach Marshall about self worth and he teaches him that punishment does not mean pain, although Marshall a pain-slut. Master Stone rather enjoys teaching the bratty subs, the brattier the better and Marshall just happens to be the most brattiest, stubborn, mouthy sub he has ever come across. And Master Stone, very quickly, makes its very clear that Marshall will have to wait, and wait PATIENTLY to have sex with him. And I LOVED IT!!!

The hunt for Corey's abuser continues, takes a shocking turn. I'm not telling you what though! Cos, you know, SPOILERS and all that! But I will tell you, when all this goes down, Master Stone has the exact same reaction as Master Derek does, and they go after THEIR boys.

Sometimes, in a series, especially when the main couples are very similar (here, big bad Dom and younger smaller guy) they get a little same old/same old. I'm NOT finding that here though. Yes all three Doms are older, and bigger, and yes, all three subs are younger and smaller, but their STORIES are so different! The on-going story arc helps a great deal, and the fact that the guys from the previous books continue to play a HUGE part in future books, too, but it's the SUBS who have the greatest differences and I LOVE that they are all friends.

Up next, are Master Josh and David. While already in a committed relationship, I can't wait to get their story. Because it's the Grand Opening of Kiss of Leather and I have a feeling it is not going to be as plain sailing as it has been and I look forward to being introduced to new characters.

Some reference to drug and alcohol abuse, but not described in any detail.

Loving these!

5 full stars

**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
  
The End Of The Tour (2015)
The End Of The Tour (2015)
2015 | Drama
8
7.0 (2 Ratings)
Movie Rating
The End of the Tour tells the story of the five-day interview between Rolling Stone reporter and novelist David Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg) and acclaimed novelist David Foster Wallace (Jason Segel), which took place right after the 1996 publication of Wallace’s groundbreaking epic novel, Infinite Jest. The film is based on Lipsky’s critically acclaimed memoir about this unforgettable encounter, written following Wallace’s 2008 suicide.

So there is the summary. And it tells you what this movie is about. However what that summary does not tell you is the depth of emotion to which both Jason Segel and Jesse Eisenberg deliver in their performances.

Jesse Eisenberg gives a performance that we come to expect from the Oscar nominated actor. Not only can you feel, but you can also and understand his curiosity and jealousy towards Segel’s success. A less successful writer, he wants the notoriety that Segel has. So much so, that he is constantly trying to find the holes in Segel’s persona under the guise of an interview and yet is forced to ponder the things that Segel is saying to him.

Jason Segel’s portrayal of David Foster Wallace is not understated by the word phenomenal. I was skeptical that Segel would not be able to deliver a dramatic performance of this caliber, but I am glad to say I was wrong. He steals every scene he is in and his performance is so deep and thoughtful that Jason Segel himself disappears and we are instead left with a performance of what I will always believe David Foster Wallace was like in real life. This performance is one of the best I have seen this year and I believe he will receive an Oscar nomination for this role. I was fascinated with Segel’s performance that I actually downloaded David Foster Wallace’s book Infinite Jest on my drive home.

Performances aside, this movie is not for everyone. If you are looking for an inactive cinematic experience then this film is not for you. This film makes you think. It is like being a part of a deep conversation with friends trying to make sense of the world. It brings perspective to the society we live in and the loneliness we find ourselves trying to avoid while clinging to meaningless things that bring us simple pleasure. A simple way of living where we go from A to B to C to find meaning, only to obtain those things and then not knowing what we do next. But for those who are looking to escape the mundane summer blockbusters and want to see stellar performances, be sure to check this one out.
  
Demon Copperhead
Demon Copperhead
Barbara Kingsolver | 2022 | Contemporary, Fiction & Poetry
10
10.0 (2 Ratings)
Book Rating
This will be one of my very favourite books of 2022, without a shadow of a doubt.

Demon Copperhead is a modern retelling of David Copperfield, which I first read years ago. It’s always stayed with me though (as Dickens books have a habit of doing). Demon Copperhead feels more personal though. It’s not because of the setting, I’ve never been to Appalachia, I’ve never seen a trailer park in the flesh, and I’m certainly lucky enough to have never experienced the opioid crisis that’s very much still ongoing in the US.

Demon is our David, born in a trailer to a mother with an addiction that she desperately tries to control. His father is dead before he’s born. His mother makes some questionable decisions: one is that she marries Stone, a controlling bully, and the reason that Demon is taken into care.

There are so many links to David Copperfield, and I’m glad that I’d read Dickens novel first. But it really isn’t necessary at all. This is a truly magnificent novel in its own right.

Demon’s desperation and depression leaps off the page: his desperate need for love and approval, and his eventual descent into addiction were so terribly sad to read. I felt I built a connection with Demon and wanted more for him than society was willing to give. He was given to foster parents who weren’t vetted and were unsuitable. No-one cared enough to help him, and by the time they did, he was past being able to accept their help - he just didn’t think he deserved it.

But there is ultimately hope. There is the chance for Demon to live a good life.

I adored this book. I’m a big Barbara Kingsolver fan anyway, but this just confirmed that for me.
I’m hoping that this book will point more people towards her books. They’re in for a treat!
  
Tea for the Tillerman by Cat Stevens
Tea for the Tillerman by Cat Stevens
1970 | Folk, Rock, Singer-Songwriter
8.0 (3 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"The thing about Cat Stevens is I probably prefer Mona Bone Jakon as far as the songs and production goes, it's a little bit starker, a little rawer than the other ones, but the reason I picked Tea For The Tillerman was because of the song 'Father And Son'. It's not my favourite Cat Stevens song at all but it was written for a musical that was never made called Revolutia, a blended word of 'revolution' and 'Russia'. The song sort of doesn't make sense - why is this one guy singing both of these characters? It's Cat Stevens singing the high voice and the low voice - and you wondered, god, this guy was probably at the height of his worldwide fame and he's obviously a master craftsman, he can crank out the songs but why couldn't he get this musical made? Or maybe he didn't want to - it seems like he wanted to and it just never happened. Then he was like, oh, just put it out on the next album. And I think there's a couple of other songs that seem like they could be from that same musical - 'But I Might Die Tonight' I think is kind of similar. All these albums that I really love from the 70s and late 60s - David Bowie's Diamond Dogs or The Kinks' Arthur, and they are songs from musicals basically, but it doesn't make sense there's this one guy singing it. Maybe it's ego or something, but that's why I picked that album. I looked up on Wikipedia what the reviewers thought of the album and I think the Rolling Stone guy talked about "Cat Stevens' occasional overuse of dynamics", which was the thing we were trying to do with Break Line, make things dynamic - start small and get big, and it's just so funny that at that time a reviewer would be like, "I'm sick of all these dynamics - I want more compression!"

Source
  
40x40

Natasha Khan recommended Bad by Michael Jackson in Music (curated)

 
Bad by Michael Jackson
Bad by Michael Jackson
1987 | Pop
8.9 (7 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"My first gig I ever went to, when I was nine, was at Wembley Stadium to see the Bad tour. When he died, I was in my bedroom in Brighton and I heard it on the radio and I just spontaneously absolutely burst into tears. Michael Jackson, when I was little, was just this God-like being. You know when you're little and you're singing in the car with your mum and your brother and the sister, the world is so good, there's nothing more fun and nothing better. I don't think I've ever listened to someone singing something with that much joy, he was channelling something so fucking out there and it's like he constantly had a bolt of creativity running through his body, like the way he danced and the way he moved. A consummate dancer, referencing Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers and James Brown and all these people that he channelled but made completely and uniquely his own. I saw a Spike Lee documentary the other night about Bad. Someone else wrote 'Man In The Mirror' but he took and did all of his - [mimics Michael Jackson] "I'm gonna make a change" - and all of that shit. It's just like, who else would do that? Who else would wear plasters all around their jacket? Who wears white socks with loafers and manages to make it look cool? Nobody was telling him to do that. He's just this fucking eccentric one-off. When he died, I thought the climate of music will never be like that again. It was like he was a child and his brain was a playground and anything he could think of, he bloody manifested that in the world; not many people can do that. The arc of music that he lived through, his education and his training all the way through, coincided with all these revolutions in music, music videos and dance. I just think that that was a one-off thing. I'm getting philosophical now [laughs], but I was watching Brian Cox the other day and his astro-physics thing and he put 50 stones all in a row on a desert floor and he was like "each of these stones represents billions of years in the history of the universe and where it's going to go." Then he went "here's one stone" and he showed about a millimetre of that stone: "in this bit, this is where the conditions were perfectly right for mankind to exist, this is this time, we're here now". When you think about culture and popular music from the 50s through 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, it does feel like there has been a bit of a cycle, and I've been lucky that I came in at the end of that cycle. People that were born in the 50s had it amazing, because they got to see fucking David Bowie and punk music, but Michael Jackson was a guy that happened in our lifetime. I get really passionate about music, but music, for some people, it's like a religion and he was like a fucking icon."

Source
  
The Laundromat (2019)
The Laundromat (2019)
2019 | Drama
Fun and Interesting
Do remember the Oscar nominated film THE BIG SHORT from 2015, where Director Adam McKay would make sense out of a dry subject (the financial crisis of 2008) by breaking the 4th wall and speaking directly to the audience, while also wrapping in a very strong emotional drama?

Well…Director Steven Soderbergh (ERIN BROCKOVICH) has taken that recipe and attached it to another dry subject (this time money laundering through off-shore “Shell Companies”) and has turned in a very good and interesting (though not quite as intense) film that got lost in the shuffle in 2019.

Starring Meryl Streep as a widow who is trying to get her Insurance Company to pay off after the death of her husband, THE LAUNDROMAT follows the trail through shell company after shell company as the money is Laundered by 2 unscrupulous Bankers (Gary Oldman and Antonio Banderas) in a series of vignettes.

While THE LAUNDROMAT doesn’t pack the punch of THE BIG SHORT (where the real life consequences of what happened impacted many, many people throughout the world), THE LAUNDROMAT falls just short in that only Meryl Streep’s character really suffers the consequences (though many unscrupulous players do get theirs in the end).

Soderbergh is a Director who’s work I have really, really liked throughout his career as he has a tendency to focus on the people, rather than spectacle, when telling a story, and it works well in this film. He gets the audience to care about the victims of the scheming money men and root like crazy for the “bad guys” to get theirs.

As for the acting, Meryl Streep (of course) is marvelous as Ellen Martin, the widow who’s tragic experience (the death of her husband - played by the great James Cromwell) sets off the course of events in this film.

Oldman and Banderas are equally as good as the narrators and antagonists of this piece. They play their roles with a slight wink in their eyes and a “devil-may-care” attitude which makes them charming, but does take a notch (or so) off of the drama of the piece.

Soderbergh, as he is want to do, fills this film with many memorable actors/characters in what amounts to extended cameos - Jeffrey Wright, Robert Patrick, David Schwimmer, Will Forte, Chris Parnell, Larry Wilmore and even Sharon Stone stop by for a moment to bring other characters into play and they all work well.

To be fair, some of the vignettes work better than the others, but all-in-all Soderbergh has crafted an interesting, fun and IMPORTANT film that will teach it’s audience about the inner workings of a system that most of us have heard about but never really looked into.

Check out THE LAUNDROMAT the next time you are scrolling through Netflix looking for something good to watch.

Letter Grade A-

8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
  
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
2016 | Fantasy
Potter goes International
It’s almost unbearable to think that Harry Potter & the Philosopher’s Stone was released…wait for it… 15 years ago this very week. I know, I can’t believe it too, and what’s even more depressing is that the eight film behemoth concluded over five years ago.

Since then, Potter aficionados have been calling on writer J.K. Rowling to release new material in the hope of creating more silver screen magic. Well, prayers were answered with the announcement of a film adaptation of her short book, Fantastic Beasts & Where to Find Them. The day is finally here, but what is the finished product like?

The year is 1926, and Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) has just completed a global excursion to find and document an extraordinary array of magical creatures. Arriving in New York for a brief stopover, he might have come and gone without incident, were it not for a No-Maj (American for Muggle) named Jacob (Dan Fogler), a misplaced magical case, and the escape of some of Newt’s fantastic beasts, which could spell trouble for both the wizarding and No-Maj worlds.

David Yates returns to the franchise after directing the final four instalments in the Harry Potter saga and manages to craft a film that’ll no doubt please fans and newcomers, but lacks the subtle touches that made its British counterparts so enthralling for 10 years.

The cast is on point however, despite Eddie Redmayne’s slightly over-the-top performance as Mr. Scamander. Ron Perlman, Jon Voight and Ezra Miller all lend themselves to the film in some form with Colin Farrell providing an excellent portrayal, though Dan Fogler’s muggle Jacob steals the show by a country mile.

Elsewhere, the cinematography is very good with 1920’s New York looking incredibly realistic and the sweeping shots of the city are beautifully juxtaposed with more intimate basement settings.

Unfortunately, the special effects occasionally let the film down. For a franchise start-up (we have four more films to look forward to) the consistency just isn’t there and Redmayne’s interactions with his unique beasts feel rough and disappointingly unfinished.

There’s also a bit of an issue with Fantastic Beasts’ pacing, something that the Potter films were also guilty of from time to time. The first hour is unacceptably slow, the plot continuously dragging its heels as it sets up the side story to Redmayne’s creature feature.

Speaking of which, that second scenario really does pull things together nicely and takes the flick into much darker territory than expected. It’s a fascinating third act that really makes up for the rather dull first. The twists and turns that the script takes the audience on making it genuinely exciting.

Overall, what made the Harry Potter movies a success was the chemistry between each and every member of the cast. Fantastic Beasts certainly has a great cast individually, but the characters lack chemistry when on screen together. Couple this with some poor special effects plus a dull first hour and what we’re left with is a reasonable start to a new franchise, but not a magical one.

https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/11/19/potter-goes-international-fantastic-beasts-and-where-to-find-them-review/
  
Justice League (2017)
Justice League (2017)
2017 | Action, Adventure
A powerful force is hidden on Earth, three Mother Boxes, previously used by Steppenwolf and his army of Parademons in an attempt to conquer Earth. As the planet mourns the loss of Superman the power is ignited again and triggers Steppenwolf's return to Earth. When Themyscira is attacked and their Mother Box is stolen, Queen Hippolyta warns her daughter of what is to come.

Bruce Wayne (Batman, shhhh don't tell anyone) enlists Diana Prince to help him gather other metahumans in an effort to stop the impending destruction of the Earth. It's time to meet the new recruits: Arthur Curry AKA Aquaman, Barry Allen AKA The Flash, and Victor Stone AKA Cyborg.



My worry here was that they couldn't come close to how well they did with Wonder Woman. Thankfully, while not everything was quite right, I really enjoyed this film and I barely felt any pain at watching this... all the pain happened when I rewatched Batman Vs Superman before going to see Justice League.

Let me get the gripes out of the way. The CGI, which seems to be a quibble from a lot of people. I'm not really sure how you manage to successfully do so much of it, and yet the villain... quite a major part of the film... looked terrible. In all honesty he kind of looked like they'd tried to recreate Liam Neeson in some shots so why not just get Liam Neeson in and wack some makeup on him. I'd totally have watched that. As for CGIing off Henry Cavill's moustache, admittedly some of the shots looked a little bit off, but I'm not convinced that if we hadn't known about it that most of us would have been able to tell, because who is going to be staring at that unless you have a fetish for his upper lip?

They also tried to make Batman/Bruce Wayne funny, which felt a little odd, and slightly forced at times. You can understand it to some degree, when you're bringing in Flash who is generally regarded as the comedian of the bunch then you're going to have to add some humour in so that he doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.

Obviously we know that I love Wonder Woman, so there isn't a lot I need to say there, she still rocked. I enjoyed Jason Momoa as Aquaman, and yes, a significant portion of that was looking at his half naked body. But I thought he played the part really well, and I loved him getting caught out by Diana's lasso. With the other two I was worried that me knowing them from other things would make it difficult getting to grips with these new incarnations. Thankfully it wasn't too bad though. As it happens I'm not a fan of either Grant Gustin or Ezra Miller in the role of Flash. This film version is probably more how I picture his character, but neither actor really brings it across to me quite how I'd hope. Finally, Ray Fisher as Cyborg, mock me if you must, but I've only seen the character in action as part of Teen Titans Go! In that he's a somewhat happy go lucky chap who loves his food, and this one is a bit more angsty as his creation is quite fresh. I enjoyed him as a character though, it was interesting to see how he developed as his powers did.

I'm not really sure how I felt about the Superman regeneration part of the story, I suppose at least he did a David Tennant and regenerated into himself.

Not a bad offering after Wonder Woman, and I'm looking forward to the follow up films that'll be coming out over the next few years.