Search
Search results
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Crime and Punishment in Books
Apr 27, 2018
**spoilers**
Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky. read by Anthony Heald.
Genre: Fiction, classic
Rating: 5
Sin, Sentence, and Salvation
The allegory of Crime and Punishment
Crime and Punishment, one of the more famous works of Fyodor Dostoevsky, is considered “the first great novel of his mature period,” (Frank, 1995) and is one of his more famous books, rivaled only by The Brothers Karamazov. What makes Crime and Punishment such a classic? Perhaps because it is a picture of the only classic, and greatest story of all time. Crime and Punishment is an allegory of Salvation.
Self-justified
The main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, was a poor student at a university, and was overcome with hate toward an old pawnbroker, and decided to rid the world of her for the greater good of everyone. He believed that she was a “louse,” and since everyone would be happier without her, his actions would be justified. He believed that he had broken the letter of the law only, but that it didn’t have any authority over him anyway because it was written by people just as low as himself. He didn’t believe in God, and in prison he was convinced that he didn’t deserve his treatment, and that it was something he simply needed to get over with. He had no higher authority, so he said “my conscience is at rest.” This is a picture of man before he is touched by the merciful salvation of Christ.
A Troubled Man
Although Raskolnikov justified his actions in killing the old woman, he still felt an overwhelming sense of guilt and fear over what he did. He worked very hard at keeping it a secret, and at first he thought he could live with the guilt that sat in back of his mind, but he was wrong. Raskolnikov had horrible dreams, was always sick, and one of the other characters noticed that he was constantly “set off by little things” for no apparent reason (though the reader knew that it was only because it reminded him of his crime). This represents a man who knows in his heart that he is a sinner, but who will not turn and repent from his sin.
Unending Love
Sonya Semyonovna Marmeladov was the daughter of a drunkard who “took the yellow card” and prostituted herself to support her family. Throughout the book, Sonya began to love Raskolnikov. Eventually, Raskolnikov told Sonya his secret. Sonya was horrified, but still loved him and forgave him after her initial shock wore off. As Raskolnikov was fighting inside with his conscience and his sins, he repeatedly snapped at her, refused her comfort, yelled at her, and so on. He was a bitter, angry, hateful man—and yet Sonya forgave him for everything he did to her, and everything he had done in his past. What redeeming quality Sonya saw in the wretch and why she forgave him, one cannot begin to comprehend; aside from the simple truth that Sonya was a loving, gentile, merciful girl. She saw that Raskolnikov needed someone to love him and she reached out to him, even when he repeatedly pushed her away. Sonya’s love for him is a picture of Christ’s unending and perfect love to His sinful people.
A Silent Witness
When Raskolnikov finally broke down and confessed his crime, Sonya moved to Siberia with him. Raskolnikov expected this, and knew that telling her not to come would be fruitless. She visited him often in prison and wrote to his family for him. But although Raskolnikov expected her to preach to him and push the Gospel in his face, she did not. Sonya followed the scripture’s instruction to Christian wives with non-Christian husbands in 1 Peter 3:1—“ Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives…” The verse tells women to be good examples of Christ to their non-Christian husbands rather than to preach to them and try to convert them, and that is exactly what Sonya did, even though she was not married to him. She did not try to convert him with words; rather she won him with her love. She did not push the Testament into Raskolnikov’s hands, he asked for it. When she did bring it, she did not pester him to read it. She had faith, and showed Raskolnikov the love of Christ through her actions. In the end, it paid off. Although Dostoevsky does not specifically say that Raskolnikov was converted, he does imply that he eventually became a Christian when he mused “Can not her own convictions now be mine?”
The truth will set you free
When Raskolnikov finally realized that he loved Sonya, he accepted that he was a criminal, and a murderer. When he finally accepted that he was a sinner, he repented and had a new life in him. He said he felt like “he had risen again” and that Sonya “lived only in his life.” By life, Dostoevsky refers to his mentality. Before, he had been a living dead man in prison. He was hated by his inmates, was almost killed by them in an outbreak, was unaffected by anything that happened to him or his family, and eventually became ill from it all. But after his resurrection, he repented from his sins, learned to move on with his life, and started to change. He began to converse with his inmates, and they no longer hated him. Sonya was alive in his “life” because of her love for him. When he was changed, she was so happy that she became sick with joy, to the point that she was ill in bed. Dostoevsky paints a picture of a redeemed man at the end of his novel—redeemed both by the law, and by God. This picture symbolizes the miracle of salvation through Christ.
An amazing Allegory
Dostoevsky was a wonderful writer because of his use of dialogue to tell the story, his descriptive scenes, his powerfully developed characters, and their inner dialogue. He often times told you that something was happening by only telling you what the character who was speaking at the time said in response to what was going on. For example, if Sonya was standing up, Dostoevsky would write “… ‘hey, what do you stand for?’ for Sonya had stood.”
He also painted such good descriptions of his characters, that by the middle of the book he didn’t have to say that Raskolnikov was musing in the corner of the room, glaring at anyone who was brave enough to look at him, while he stewed in grief under his old ratted cap, because you knew from how well he was described earlier and how well his character was developed from the dialogue, that he was doing exactly that.
His characters are so real, they almost frighten you because you see the things they do and feel and experience reflected in your own life. They are not perfect—in fact they are all incredibly flawed, but they are a joy to read.
His ending is superb, because he closes the story without actually telling you everything. He never says that Raskolnikov was converted, he never says when he got out of prison, and he never says that Sonya and he were married, but you know that it happened. The last scene of the story is so superb, it makes you want to read it again, just to experience the joy all over again.
But what really made Crime and Punishment the classic that it was is the picture of the best story in the world, the classic story of the world, showing through. The story of the Gospel, of Jesus Christ’s unending love and sin and salvation is clearly portrayed, and makes a joyous read.
Works cited:
Quotes are from Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky, 1886
Frank, Joseph (1995). Dostoevsky: The Miraculous Years, 1865–1871. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01587-2. (source found and taken from Wikipedia.com)
1 Peter 3:1 New International Version of The Holy Bible
Audio review: I had a hard time reading the book, simply because it was so huge that it was intimidating. I bought (ouch) the audio book of Crime and Punishment, recorded by Anthony Heald who did a fantastic job reading. His voices for the characters perfectly matched them, he felt for them, and he acted them. None of them were cheesy (yeah you all know how lame some male readers are at acting female voices). He read fast enough that the story didn't drag at all, but not so fast that you'd feel like you'd miss something if you didn't listen hard. I will definitely re-listen to the audio book.
Content: some gruesome descriptions of blood from the murder
Recommendation: Ages 14+
Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky. read by Anthony Heald.
Genre: Fiction, classic
Rating: 5
Sin, Sentence, and Salvation
The allegory of Crime and Punishment
Crime and Punishment, one of the more famous works of Fyodor Dostoevsky, is considered “the first great novel of his mature period,” (Frank, 1995) and is one of his more famous books, rivaled only by The Brothers Karamazov. What makes Crime and Punishment such a classic? Perhaps because it is a picture of the only classic, and greatest story of all time. Crime and Punishment is an allegory of Salvation.
Self-justified
The main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, was a poor student at a university, and was overcome with hate toward an old pawnbroker, and decided to rid the world of her for the greater good of everyone. He believed that she was a “louse,” and since everyone would be happier without her, his actions would be justified. He believed that he had broken the letter of the law only, but that it didn’t have any authority over him anyway because it was written by people just as low as himself. He didn’t believe in God, and in prison he was convinced that he didn’t deserve his treatment, and that it was something he simply needed to get over with. He had no higher authority, so he said “my conscience is at rest.” This is a picture of man before he is touched by the merciful salvation of Christ.
A Troubled Man
Although Raskolnikov justified his actions in killing the old woman, he still felt an overwhelming sense of guilt and fear over what he did. He worked very hard at keeping it a secret, and at first he thought he could live with the guilt that sat in back of his mind, but he was wrong. Raskolnikov had horrible dreams, was always sick, and one of the other characters noticed that he was constantly “set off by little things” for no apparent reason (though the reader knew that it was only because it reminded him of his crime). This represents a man who knows in his heart that he is a sinner, but who will not turn and repent from his sin.
Unending Love
Sonya Semyonovna Marmeladov was the daughter of a drunkard who “took the yellow card” and prostituted herself to support her family. Throughout the book, Sonya began to love Raskolnikov. Eventually, Raskolnikov told Sonya his secret. Sonya was horrified, but still loved him and forgave him after her initial shock wore off. As Raskolnikov was fighting inside with his conscience and his sins, he repeatedly snapped at her, refused her comfort, yelled at her, and so on. He was a bitter, angry, hateful man—and yet Sonya forgave him for everything he did to her, and everything he had done in his past. What redeeming quality Sonya saw in the wretch and why she forgave him, one cannot begin to comprehend; aside from the simple truth that Sonya was a loving, gentile, merciful girl. She saw that Raskolnikov needed someone to love him and she reached out to him, even when he repeatedly pushed her away. Sonya’s love for him is a picture of Christ’s unending and perfect love to His sinful people.
A Silent Witness
When Raskolnikov finally broke down and confessed his crime, Sonya moved to Siberia with him. Raskolnikov expected this, and knew that telling her not to come would be fruitless. She visited him often in prison and wrote to his family for him. But although Raskolnikov expected her to preach to him and push the Gospel in his face, she did not. Sonya followed the scripture’s instruction to Christian wives with non-Christian husbands in 1 Peter 3:1—“ Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives…” The verse tells women to be good examples of Christ to their non-Christian husbands rather than to preach to them and try to convert them, and that is exactly what Sonya did, even though she was not married to him. She did not try to convert him with words; rather she won him with her love. She did not push the Testament into Raskolnikov’s hands, he asked for it. When she did bring it, she did not pester him to read it. She had faith, and showed Raskolnikov the love of Christ through her actions. In the end, it paid off. Although Dostoevsky does not specifically say that Raskolnikov was converted, he does imply that he eventually became a Christian when he mused “Can not her own convictions now be mine?”
The truth will set you free
When Raskolnikov finally realized that he loved Sonya, he accepted that he was a criminal, and a murderer. When he finally accepted that he was a sinner, he repented and had a new life in him. He said he felt like “he had risen again” and that Sonya “lived only in his life.” By life, Dostoevsky refers to his mentality. Before, he had been a living dead man in prison. He was hated by his inmates, was almost killed by them in an outbreak, was unaffected by anything that happened to him or his family, and eventually became ill from it all. But after his resurrection, he repented from his sins, learned to move on with his life, and started to change. He began to converse with his inmates, and they no longer hated him. Sonya was alive in his “life” because of her love for him. When he was changed, she was so happy that she became sick with joy, to the point that she was ill in bed. Dostoevsky paints a picture of a redeemed man at the end of his novel—redeemed both by the law, and by God. This picture symbolizes the miracle of salvation through Christ.
An amazing Allegory
Dostoevsky was a wonderful writer because of his use of dialogue to tell the story, his descriptive scenes, his powerfully developed characters, and their inner dialogue. He often times told you that something was happening by only telling you what the character who was speaking at the time said in response to what was going on. For example, if Sonya was standing up, Dostoevsky would write “… ‘hey, what do you stand for?’ for Sonya had stood.”
He also painted such good descriptions of his characters, that by the middle of the book he didn’t have to say that Raskolnikov was musing in the corner of the room, glaring at anyone who was brave enough to look at him, while he stewed in grief under his old ratted cap, because you knew from how well he was described earlier and how well his character was developed from the dialogue, that he was doing exactly that.
His characters are so real, they almost frighten you because you see the things they do and feel and experience reflected in your own life. They are not perfect—in fact they are all incredibly flawed, but they are a joy to read.
His ending is superb, because he closes the story without actually telling you everything. He never says that Raskolnikov was converted, he never says when he got out of prison, and he never says that Sonya and he were married, but you know that it happened. The last scene of the story is so superb, it makes you want to read it again, just to experience the joy all over again.
But what really made Crime and Punishment the classic that it was is the picture of the best story in the world, the classic story of the world, showing through. The story of the Gospel, of Jesus Christ’s unending love and sin and salvation is clearly portrayed, and makes a joyous read.
Works cited:
Quotes are from Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky, 1886
Frank, Joseph (1995). Dostoevsky: The Miraculous Years, 1865–1871. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01587-2. (source found and taken from Wikipedia.com)
1 Peter 3:1 New International Version of The Holy Bible
Audio review: I had a hard time reading the book, simply because it was so huge that it was intimidating. I bought (ouch) the audio book of Crime and Punishment, recorded by Anthony Heald who did a fantastic job reading. His voices for the characters perfectly matched them, he felt for them, and he acted them. None of them were cheesy (yeah you all know how lame some male readers are at acting female voices). He read fast enough that the story didn't drag at all, but not so fast that you'd feel like you'd miss something if you didn't listen hard. I will definitely re-listen to the audio book.
Content: some gruesome descriptions of blood from the murder
Recommendation: Ages 14+
Midge (525 KP) rated The Next to Die in Books
Feb 17, 2019
Original And Very Unique
Five well deserved stars! This is such a good book for me - the witticisms, the sarcastic put-downs, as well as the hilarious musings and anecdotes, all help this book along for me. It’s nothing like any other novel that I can recall reading before and it is especially refreshing for a crime novel.
I love novels that feature out of the ordinary protagonists, so this one fitted right into that category. The story is actually told from the points of view of two people - stand up comedian, Kim Tribbeck & DC Simon Waterhouse.
Quirky Kim Tribbeck has a dark side, and I really enjoyed the insight into her world as told through her POV. Her contribution is told through an autobiographical book called “Origami.” DC Simon Waterhouse, the other protagonist, is inspired, well respected, and talented as a detective and he doesn’t like public speaking. The story is also told via a number of newspaper articles and random emails.
The chapters vary between different characters, excerpts from “Origami”, the emails, newspaper columns, short stories, and letters. In addition to the burning question, “Who Is Billy Dead Mates?” (the nickname of the killer who appears to be targeting pairs of best friends), there is an obsessed journalist who claims the victims have been murdered by a mad misogynist. Before they die, each of the victims is given a small white book.
I particularly loved the chapters that were told from Kim’s point-of-view. For me, Sophie Hannah’s portrayal of Kim was brilliant. She turned this novel into something much more than a police procedural. In THE NEXT TO DIE, Hannah managed to combine a wonderfully clever and complex plot with some extremely unforgettable characters.
THE NEXT TO DIE by Sophie Hannah is a highly recommended, layered mystery with a surprising and fulfilling ending.
{Thank you to Edelweiss and William Morrow for the free copy of this novel and for giving me the opportunity to provide an honest review.}
I love novels that feature out of the ordinary protagonists, so this one fitted right into that category. The story is actually told from the points of view of two people - stand up comedian, Kim Tribbeck & DC Simon Waterhouse.
Quirky Kim Tribbeck has a dark side, and I really enjoyed the insight into her world as told through her POV. Her contribution is told through an autobiographical book called “Origami.” DC Simon Waterhouse, the other protagonist, is inspired, well respected, and talented as a detective and he doesn’t like public speaking. The story is also told via a number of newspaper articles and random emails.
The chapters vary between different characters, excerpts from “Origami”, the emails, newspaper columns, short stories, and letters. In addition to the burning question, “Who Is Billy Dead Mates?” (the nickname of the killer who appears to be targeting pairs of best friends), there is an obsessed journalist who claims the victims have been murdered by a mad misogynist. Before they die, each of the victims is given a small white book.
I particularly loved the chapters that were told from Kim’s point-of-view. For me, Sophie Hannah’s portrayal of Kim was brilliant. She turned this novel into something much more than a police procedural. In THE NEXT TO DIE, Hannah managed to combine a wonderfully clever and complex plot with some extremely unforgettable characters.
THE NEXT TO DIE by Sophie Hannah is a highly recommended, layered mystery with a surprising and fulfilling ending.
{Thank you to Edelweiss and William Morrow for the free copy of this novel and for giving me the opportunity to provide an honest review.}
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Hanks Radio ( Haunted Collection book 4) in Books
Apr 2, 2022
58 of 230
Kindle
Hanks Radio ( Haunted Collection 4)
By Ron Ripley
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
A man's seductive voice emanates from an antique radio, luring women into his murderous embrace....
It's business as usual for Stefan Korzh as he continues to send haunted antiques onto unsuspecting buyers. Despite going into hiding, his desire to punish the universe for his own misfortune remains unchecked.
Victor Daniels, now more than ever, is focused on grabbing Korzh by the neck and making him feel the full extent of his pain and suffering. But plans change when a suave ghost from the 1940s leaves a trail of dead bodies in his wake. Hank, a sly and charming specter, uses a mahogany-colored radio to reach his victims...lonely, elderly women in nursing homes who find him hard to resist.
Meanwhile, Tom Crane is slowly adjusting to the life of a home-schooled student, spending his days immersed in books from the local library. But brewing underneath his scholarly demeanor is his insatiable thirst for revenge. With Victor occupied, Tom embarks on a dangerous mission to confront the man behind his misery.
The lives of Stefan, Victor, and Tom become more and more intertwined as they continue to play the blood-riddled sport. When old friends - and enemies - reveal themselves, they discover that anything is possible in a game filled with ghosts and vengeance.
Even the hunter can become the hunted....
I really enjoy these books and the character development. We pick up with Victor And Tom in this one and how they are dealing with Jeremy’s death and there continued search for Korzh. They get split up and things go a little haywire. These are so good and they involve a different vengeful spirit each time. This on also brought back the doll Anne that thing really gives me the bloody creeps. Recommended if you enjoy a good ghost story.
Kindle
Hanks Radio ( Haunted Collection 4)
By Ron Ripley
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
A man's seductive voice emanates from an antique radio, luring women into his murderous embrace....
It's business as usual for Stefan Korzh as he continues to send haunted antiques onto unsuspecting buyers. Despite going into hiding, his desire to punish the universe for his own misfortune remains unchecked.
Victor Daniels, now more than ever, is focused on grabbing Korzh by the neck and making him feel the full extent of his pain and suffering. But plans change when a suave ghost from the 1940s leaves a trail of dead bodies in his wake. Hank, a sly and charming specter, uses a mahogany-colored radio to reach his victims...lonely, elderly women in nursing homes who find him hard to resist.
Meanwhile, Tom Crane is slowly adjusting to the life of a home-schooled student, spending his days immersed in books from the local library. But brewing underneath his scholarly demeanor is his insatiable thirst for revenge. With Victor occupied, Tom embarks on a dangerous mission to confront the man behind his misery.
The lives of Stefan, Victor, and Tom become more and more intertwined as they continue to play the blood-riddled sport. When old friends - and enemies - reveal themselves, they discover that anything is possible in a game filled with ghosts and vengeance.
Even the hunter can become the hunted....
I really enjoy these books and the character development. We pick up with Victor And Tom in this one and how they are dealing with Jeremy’s death and there continued search for Korzh. They get split up and things go a little haywire. These are so good and they involve a different vengeful spirit each time. This on also brought back the doll Anne that thing really gives me the bloody creeps. Recommended if you enjoy a good ghost story.
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Fifty Shades Darker (2017) in Movies
Jan 12, 2020 (Updated Jan 12, 2020)
Contains spoilers, click to show
This trilogy is an odd one for me. I think that this is one of the stronger films of the three, maybe the strongest, then Fifty Shades Freed, then the first one. My biggest gripe with all of the films, though, is how much of the books they leave out. I understand that you can't get everything in a film that you can get in a novel, there's a lot of scenes that are important in the books but would just be dead screen time in a film. I think at times both Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson lack diversity. I know that Christian is meant to be this pensive, too tough for anybody, never lets anyone get close kind of man, but there are times where that doesn't come across. I love Jamie, I think he's great, I don't think anyone could've played Christian better, but I think that there are times in the film where it's obvious that the story wasn't as important as the sex. Or at least that's how it comes across. I find Dakota to be a very believable Ana, I think that she's who I would envision and I not seen the movies, but the scene where Christian is missing and he comes back and she's crying? She's not actually crying, it's obvious and it just feels forced.
Lastly, the strongest part of this film is the music, without a doubt. Actually, the strongest part of any of these films is the music. The soundtracks are so incredibly picked and each song fits exactly what's happening. Plus, there are a few that just really stuck with me and I listen to them pretty regularly.
Overall, it's strong, but not the greatest. Definitely a guilty pleasure though.
Lastly, the strongest part of this film is the music, without a doubt. Actually, the strongest part of any of these films is the music. The soundtracks are so incredibly picked and each song fits exactly what's happening. Plus, there are a few that just really stuck with me and I listen to them pretty regularly.
Overall, it's strong, but not the greatest. Definitely a guilty pleasure though.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Mile 22 (2018) in Movies
Sep 20, 2018 (Updated Sep 20, 2018)
The Movie Equivelant of a Shrug
I saw Mile 22 last night and when I got in my dad asked me how it was. I replied with a simple shrug and that is honestly the best way to sum up this movie. It's not bad and it's not great. The worst thing about that is that Peter Berg and Mark Wahlberg have worked together 3 times prior to this movie and all 3 times have resulted in fantastic movies, not mediocre ones like this. I was looking forward to this going in knowing that it was Berg and Wahlberg working together again and I have really liked everything else they have made together, (especially Patriot's Day,) but this is unfortunately the worst film that they have made together so far, but it's still not awful.
The best thing about this film is definitely Iko Uwais. Whenever we get to see him doing his thing on screen, it is electrifying. The issue here though is the way that Jacques Jouffret decided to shoot these sequences is choppy and incoherent at times. Why would you cast one of the best fight choreographers in the world in your movie and then every time he get to fight onscreen, you decided to shake the camera about and make 10+ jump-cuts in the space of a few minutes?
Rhonda Rousey is in the movie too and surprisingly I didn't cringe every time she spoke and instead felt that she did a pretty decent job with what she was given. Lauren Cohen was fine too, we all know that she can do a pretty solid American accent at this point because of her work on The Walking Dead. Wahlberg is perfectly serviceable here too, he has been better in other things, but he also been far worse. It is hard to waste an actor like John Malkovich in a film and yet they manage it here, literally any actor could have played his role.
The end is also pretty rubbish. There is a flimsy twist followed by a sequel tease and then the credits abruptly appear. They are clearly aiming for a sequel, but it would have been nice if they could have tied this movie up a bit better first.
Overall, this is an okay action flick with some cool stunts that doesn't live up to what it could have been and ends too abruptly. There are some cool stunts and satisfying kills in the film, but they could have been shot a lot better.
The best thing about this film is definitely Iko Uwais. Whenever we get to see him doing his thing on screen, it is electrifying. The issue here though is the way that Jacques Jouffret decided to shoot these sequences is choppy and incoherent at times. Why would you cast one of the best fight choreographers in the world in your movie and then every time he get to fight onscreen, you decided to shake the camera about and make 10+ jump-cuts in the space of a few minutes?
Rhonda Rousey is in the movie too and surprisingly I didn't cringe every time she spoke and instead felt that she did a pretty decent job with what she was given. Lauren Cohen was fine too, we all know that she can do a pretty solid American accent at this point because of her work on The Walking Dead. Wahlberg is perfectly serviceable here too, he has been better in other things, but he also been far worse. It is hard to waste an actor like John Malkovich in a film and yet they manage it here, literally any actor could have played his role.
The end is also pretty rubbish. There is a flimsy twist followed by a sequel tease and then the credits abruptly appear. They are clearly aiming for a sequel, but it would have been nice if they could have tied this movie up a bit better first.
Overall, this is an okay action flick with some cool stunts that doesn't live up to what it could have been and ends too abruptly. There are some cool stunts and satisfying kills in the film, but they could have been shot a lot better.
Sam (74 KP) rated The Possession of Mr Cave in Books
Mar 27, 2019
The Possession of Mr Cave is the story of a father’s mental breakdown after the tragic loss of many people close to him. Terrence is mentally unwell through the whole novel and is fighting his dead son’s influence on his mind. It’s completely disturbing, surprising and scary.
I’ll start this off by saying that I know that this book wasn’t for me. As I said, the blurb didn’t sound like anything I would usually enjoy reading and I only bought the book because it was by Matt Haig. But just because the book wasn’t for me didn’t stop me from still giving it 3/5.
The Possession of Mr Cave is very Shakespearean which isn’t a surprise coming from Matt Haig, as he has written a few novels inspired by Shakespeare’s plays. This is written as if it is one of Shakespeare’s tragedies, so if you do enjoy that sort of thing, the book will be perfect. To begin with, it reminded me a lot of Romeo and Juliet because the novel begins at the end with Terrence Cave explaining that he has killed his daughter, and the novel is a letter to her, retelling exactly how the events led to her death. I did quite like this format, because it meant the suspense rose throughout the whole novel and left me guessing as to why he would kill his own daughter right up until the end.
I’m not the biggest fan of Shakespeare, which is why I feel that this was just not the book for me. Like I said, this reads exactly like a Shakespearean Tragedy, which I think in a way is also why I struggled to get into it. The language seemed clunky and drawn out in places and made it a bit hard to read, as well as Terrence’s conversations with his own mind.
It’s disturbing, and that is exactly what pulled me in. Terrence takes his protectiveness over Bryony too far to the point where I was wondering where his relationship with her was going to lead. I found it upsetting that nobody around Terrence spoke to him about how he was too protective of his daughter, and also how despite everything, nobody took the time to see if Terrence was okay.
I’ll start this off by saying that I know that this book wasn’t for me. As I said, the blurb didn’t sound like anything I would usually enjoy reading and I only bought the book because it was by Matt Haig. But just because the book wasn’t for me didn’t stop me from still giving it 3/5.
The Possession of Mr Cave is very Shakespearean which isn’t a surprise coming from Matt Haig, as he has written a few novels inspired by Shakespeare’s plays. This is written as if it is one of Shakespeare’s tragedies, so if you do enjoy that sort of thing, the book will be perfect. To begin with, it reminded me a lot of Romeo and Juliet because the novel begins at the end with Terrence Cave explaining that he has killed his daughter, and the novel is a letter to her, retelling exactly how the events led to her death. I did quite like this format, because it meant the suspense rose throughout the whole novel and left me guessing as to why he would kill his own daughter right up until the end.
I’m not the biggest fan of Shakespeare, which is why I feel that this was just not the book for me. Like I said, this reads exactly like a Shakespearean Tragedy, which I think in a way is also why I struggled to get into it. The language seemed clunky and drawn out in places and made it a bit hard to read, as well as Terrence’s conversations with his own mind.
It’s disturbing, and that is exactly what pulled me in. Terrence takes his protectiveness over Bryony too far to the point where I was wondering where his relationship with her was going to lead. I found it upsetting that nobody around Terrence spoke to him about how he was too protective of his daughter, and also how despite everything, nobody took the time to see if Terrence was okay.
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2434 KP) rated Judge Thee Not in Books
Sep 13, 2019
I’m Still Trying to Judge My Reaction to This Book
Midwife Rose Carroll is surprised to step into the Amesbury, Mass., post office one June afternoon and find Mayme Settle complaining loudly about postmistress Bertie Winslow. The problem isn’t poor service but Bertie’s untraditional lifestyle, specifically that she lives with another woman. Mrs. Settle doesn’t feel this is proper, and is making her feelings known. While Rose is upset for her friend, Bertie is more than willing to let the slight go. However, one morning Mrs. Settle is found dead in her bed, and the police are quick to rule it murder. Unfortunately, they are just as quick to focus on Bertie as their prime suspect. Can Rose help the police find the truth?
The mystery is good with several viable suspects; however, I felt the pacing was off. It was a bit too slow in the beginning and a bit rushed at the end. While it wraps everything up, we get a lot of information thrown at us rather quickly to do so. It is always fun to spend time with Rose, and I love her friends. There were some interesting developments with her family in this book, which I enjoyed. The suspects were strong, but I felt the victim was a bit of a cliché, needing more time alive to become more real to me. My feelings on the victim also plays into my issues with the theme. As the title suggests, we get a few passages that look at how humans judge others. The problem was I felt these were too modern for a book set in the 1880’s. Mind you, I haven’t done the research, so maybe I’m the one judging too harshly. Other viewpoints were certainly not shown as anything other than wrong, and Rose comes off as almost judging others a few times herself. The title comes from a version in Matthew 7 in the Bible, and is taken out of context, as it usually is. These issues pulled me out of the book (and certainly bothered me) when they popped up, but the focus of the book was mostly on the mystery. Those who have enjoyed previous books will want to pick up this book and judge it for themselves. Most will probably be glad they did.
The mystery is good with several viable suspects; however, I felt the pacing was off. It was a bit too slow in the beginning and a bit rushed at the end. While it wraps everything up, we get a lot of information thrown at us rather quickly to do so. It is always fun to spend time with Rose, and I love her friends. There were some interesting developments with her family in this book, which I enjoyed. The suspects were strong, but I felt the victim was a bit of a cliché, needing more time alive to become more real to me. My feelings on the victim also plays into my issues with the theme. As the title suggests, we get a few passages that look at how humans judge others. The problem was I felt these were too modern for a book set in the 1880’s. Mind you, I haven’t done the research, so maybe I’m the one judging too harshly. Other viewpoints were certainly not shown as anything other than wrong, and Rose comes off as almost judging others a few times herself. The title comes from a version in Matthew 7 in the Bible, and is taken out of context, as it usually is. These issues pulled me out of the book (and certainly bothered me) when they popped up, but the focus of the book was mostly on the mystery. Those who have enjoyed previous books will want to pick up this book and judge it for themselves. Most will probably be glad they did.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated H2O (The Rain, #1) in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>Thank you to NetGalley and Pan Macmillan for providing a proof copy to read and review.</i>
The world has already had to deal with worldwide pandemics spread by animals and birds such as swine flu and bird flu. What if there was a fatal disease in the rain? How would humanity cope? This is what Virginia Bergin explores in her debut novel aptly titled <i>The Rain</i>. If anyone were to come into contact with the rain, even a single drop, or contaminated water they would have an immediate reaction and be dead in less than three hours. Fifteen-year-old Ruby Morris, who has so far managed to survive this disaster, narrates the story starting from the first day that the disease arrived in Britain.
Ruby describes the losses of her friends and immediate family, the surprising improvement with her relationship with her stepfather Simon. She explains at length the things she had to face in order to survive, firstly with Simon and then with a particularly nerdy boy from school.
Despite hints from the title (and the blurb, of course) it is a long time before Ruby reveals what has actually happened. She talks to the reader as if they are experiencing the same thing and therefore know what she is referring to. Whilst this was probably an attempt to create suspense and to encourage the reader to keep reading it was slightly galling. What was really wanted was for Ruby to get to the point so that she and her audience would be on the same wavelength.
Whilst some readers may be able to relate to the main character: a teenage girl who loves to spend time with her friends and going to parties but has strict parents (and/or step-parents) who never let her do any of those things, which means she cannot easily have the thing she most desires – a boyfriend; she is actually a rather annoying, snobbish brat. She’s the kind of person that could be described as a “clueless bully”, a selfish girl who mostly, if not only, cares about appearances. Even in the face of the potential end of the world, or at least mankind, she is constantly worrying about the way she looks and what she wears, and is thrilled that she can break into expensive shops and take whatever make-up or clothing she wishes. There was probably a point in this character flaw – the exploration of how not only a young person copes on there own in dire situations, but someone of this particular mindset – however it was exasperating to read. She did change a little over the course of the story but not enough for her to become a likable character.
<i>The Rain</i> is more appropriate for young adult readers due to the nature of the main character, however it does deal with rather disturbing themes such as death and violence. Having said that there is nothing to stop older readers from enjoying the novel. It is an interesting concept, which, although highly unlikely to occur, will make people question how they would behave in the given situation. Would they be one of the first to die, or would they be in supermarkets fighting for the quickly disappearing food and drink? It is a thought-provoking idea!
The world has already had to deal with worldwide pandemics spread by animals and birds such as swine flu and bird flu. What if there was a fatal disease in the rain? How would humanity cope? This is what Virginia Bergin explores in her debut novel aptly titled <i>The Rain</i>. If anyone were to come into contact with the rain, even a single drop, or contaminated water they would have an immediate reaction and be dead in less than three hours. Fifteen-year-old Ruby Morris, who has so far managed to survive this disaster, narrates the story starting from the first day that the disease arrived in Britain.
Ruby describes the losses of her friends and immediate family, the surprising improvement with her relationship with her stepfather Simon. She explains at length the things she had to face in order to survive, firstly with Simon and then with a particularly nerdy boy from school.
Despite hints from the title (and the blurb, of course) it is a long time before Ruby reveals what has actually happened. She talks to the reader as if they are experiencing the same thing and therefore know what she is referring to. Whilst this was probably an attempt to create suspense and to encourage the reader to keep reading it was slightly galling. What was really wanted was for Ruby to get to the point so that she and her audience would be on the same wavelength.
Whilst some readers may be able to relate to the main character: a teenage girl who loves to spend time with her friends and going to parties but has strict parents (and/or step-parents) who never let her do any of those things, which means she cannot easily have the thing she most desires – a boyfriend; she is actually a rather annoying, snobbish brat. She’s the kind of person that could be described as a “clueless bully”, a selfish girl who mostly, if not only, cares about appearances. Even in the face of the potential end of the world, or at least mankind, she is constantly worrying about the way she looks and what she wears, and is thrilled that she can break into expensive shops and take whatever make-up or clothing she wishes. There was probably a point in this character flaw – the exploration of how not only a young person copes on there own in dire situations, but someone of this particular mindset – however it was exasperating to read. She did change a little over the course of the story but not enough for her to become a likable character.
<i>The Rain</i> is more appropriate for young adult readers due to the nature of the main character, however it does deal with rather disturbing themes such as death and violence. Having said that there is nothing to stop older readers from enjoying the novel. It is an interesting concept, which, although highly unlikely to occur, will make people question how they would behave in the given situation. Would they be one of the first to die, or would they be in supermarkets fighting for the quickly disappearing food and drink? It is a thought-provoking idea!
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Dragon Wing in Books
Jan 9, 2020
Dragon Wing by Rebecca Bush was one of the books I was more looking forward to reading here recently. Sadly I was disappointed by this book. The back of the book talks about how the village Sigrun lives in wanted her killed even as a baby. This is not reflected in the book very well because for the most part Sigrun is treated fairly good by most of the other village faeries. This book turned out to be more of a teen romance than I expected, so be prepared.
Sigrun is a fairy that lives in a small village with her brother and father. One evening while on the beach with her friends Sigrun falls asleep and dreams her father and brother are in trouble. She rushes home to find her father dead, the family sword is stolen, and her brother (who went missing earlier) still gone. The council creates a search party for her brother but quickly gives up. Frustrated Sigrun tries to find her brother herself but ends up attacked by a lizard due to being unprepared for the dangers of the wild.
It is then that Khalon finds her and is able to rescue her. After he helps Sigrun heal she convinces him to go back to the village with her. Sadly Khalon is originally from a tribe that attacks villages and it is with reluctance that the council agrees to let Khalon stay since he warned them of a coming attack. Khalon trains Sigrun and her friends to fight but one of Sigrun’s friends, Jae, is not happy about Khalon’s presence. It is during the training that Sigrun learns that she was a child born of a prophecy and that is why she is so different from everyone else and what she must do to protect her village. Jae and Khalon are going to have to learn to get along because Sigrun is going to need all the support she can get.
What I liked best about this book was Sigrun’s transformation. She has to learn about who she is as a person and how to trust herself, a valuable lesson for anyone. I really have a hard time picking what it is that I did not like about this book. I can not seem to figure out why but something felt very off about the book. I think maybe it had something to do with the size of the fairies. At times they appear to be about the size of a human and at other times they were only about the size of a bee and that really bothered me.
The target readers for this book are teens as I do not think even a young adult would really like this book all that much. It seems to lack some of the depth that older, more frequent readers would enjoy. Also, the “love triangle” between Sigrun, Khalon, Jae, and Ainia leans more toward the interest of a young girl. I rate this book to be a 2 out of 4. While this book was good it did not really stand out to me as something that I will really remember. It sits at a steady middle ground for a book. I would not go out of my way to say everyone should read it but at the same time, I would not discourage anyone from reading. If teen romance and faeries are for you, go for it.
Sigrun is a fairy that lives in a small village with her brother and father. One evening while on the beach with her friends Sigrun falls asleep and dreams her father and brother are in trouble. She rushes home to find her father dead, the family sword is stolen, and her brother (who went missing earlier) still gone. The council creates a search party for her brother but quickly gives up. Frustrated Sigrun tries to find her brother herself but ends up attacked by a lizard due to being unprepared for the dangers of the wild.
It is then that Khalon finds her and is able to rescue her. After he helps Sigrun heal she convinces him to go back to the village with her. Sadly Khalon is originally from a tribe that attacks villages and it is with reluctance that the council agrees to let Khalon stay since he warned them of a coming attack. Khalon trains Sigrun and her friends to fight but one of Sigrun’s friends, Jae, is not happy about Khalon’s presence. It is during the training that Sigrun learns that she was a child born of a prophecy and that is why she is so different from everyone else and what she must do to protect her village. Jae and Khalon are going to have to learn to get along because Sigrun is going to need all the support she can get.
What I liked best about this book was Sigrun’s transformation. She has to learn about who she is as a person and how to trust herself, a valuable lesson for anyone. I really have a hard time picking what it is that I did not like about this book. I can not seem to figure out why but something felt very off about the book. I think maybe it had something to do with the size of the fairies. At times they appear to be about the size of a human and at other times they were only about the size of a bee and that really bothered me.
The target readers for this book are teens as I do not think even a young adult would really like this book all that much. It seems to lack some of the depth that older, more frequent readers would enjoy. Also, the “love triangle” between Sigrun, Khalon, Jae, and Ainia leans more toward the interest of a young girl. I rate this book to be a 2 out of 4. While this book was good it did not really stand out to me as something that I will really remember. It sits at a steady middle ground for a book. I would not go out of my way to say everyone should read it but at the same time, I would not discourage anyone from reading. If teen romance and faeries are for you, go for it.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Nov 27, 2017
Decent cast performances (1 more)
Good fun
Varying quality of SFX (1 more)
Painfully safe
Justice At Last For DC Fans?
Last weekend, a movie dropped that most comic book fans have been hotly anticipating for the last few decades. The follow up to the disappointment that was Dawn of Justice, Justice League had a lot to live up to. I’m not going to try and convince you that it is a perfect movie, but I enjoyed it. If I was judging the movie on it’s own I would probably be much harsher with my rating etc, but in the context of other DCEU movies, it’s a breath of fresh air.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.
The first half of the movie is extremely choppy and unfocused and feels more like a grab bag of scenes cut together to resemble a story rather than any sort of coherent story. Then the last half of the movie plays it incredibly safe and plays out exactly how you would predict. There are no surprises or twists and then the credits roll and half heartedly set up a potential sequel, although with the huge amount of money Warner Bros lost on this movie if the rumoured budget amount of 300 million is to be believed, we may not be getting another entry any time soon. Which is sort of a shame because there are aspects of this movie that I really like, such as Batfleck and Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
There isn’t really much to talk about here, which is disappointing. Although Batman V Superman left a great deal to be desired as a decent comic book movie, it at least gave all of us something to talk about. The cast is alright, Affleck was just as great as Batman as he’s been up until now, Cavill puts in a decent Superman performance if you can get by that dodgy CGI upper lip, Gal Gadot is great as Wonder Woman, Ray Fisher does fine as Cyborg, Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is pretty one dimensional, but I think that’s more to do with the script than with the actor. Ezra Miller is annoying but clearly supposed to be the comic relief in the film. JK Simmons is wasted as Jim Gordon, but it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a reduced role here. I don’t hate Amy Adams, but I am not a fan of her portrayal as Lois Lane and surprisingly, she actually serves a purpose in this film, as opposed to pondering about with a camera looking surprised. The SFX varies greatly, with some really impressive visual effects and some that look like absolute garbage.
Slight spoilers going forwards I guess, but it’s not exactly a shocking revelation that they resurrect Superman from the dead in this movie, which as a long time comic book fan, I feel like could have been handled better.
Overall, it’s not the worst movie in the world; it’s not even the worst movie in this universe, but really it should be great. This movie should be so much better than, ‘okay,’ it’s the Justice League for Christssake. This film isn’t even as good as Thor Ragnarok, the third sequel in one of the least popular Avenger’s solo film. Justice League should have blown Thor out of the water, both commercially and critically! However, as a standalone film, without any context around it, it is a fun film and I did enjoy my time with it.