Search
William Morris: A Life for Our Time
Book
Winner of the Wolfson History Prize, this is the essential biography of the father of the Arts and...
Protecting Your Internet Identity: Are You Naked Online?
Ted Claypoole, Theresa M. Payton and Chris Swecker
Book
People research everything online - shopping, school, jobs, travel - and other people. Your online...
This is only a fairly short book with a limited focus, but nevertheless I found it very interesting. It's odd really, because opinion on the subject tends to be so polarised that it's easy to lose sight of a few simple facts and some of what Ashdown-Hill presents here should really be so obvious! For starters, for all the association of Bosworth with Richard III he didn't know it was going to happen and obviously didn't go in 'knowing' that he was going to be defeated - hindsight may be a great thing, but not if you want to look at historical events in context!
The Portuguese marriage proposals was something that I did know about, but here it's presented so logically it makes absolute sense. The chosen bride was a princes of Portugal, with a Spanish Infanta also in the playing as a reserve option. Both of these princesses were descended from the legitimate and senior branch of the House of Lancaster! Furthermore, it seems that a Portuguese marriage was also in the offing for Elizabeth of York. That being so, the letter supposedly written by her (reported by Buck, but now seemingly lost) makes more sense as does the confusion over Richard II wanting to marry Elizabeth, his niece, which never made any real sort of sense as, if we accept the truth of the Eleanor Butler pre-contract, then the children of Edward IV by Elizabeth Woodville were undoubtedly illegitimate, so there would be absolutely no point in Richard marrying her. On the other hand, Elizabeth and her sisters were the closest things available to Royal Princesses to be traded on the dynastic marriage market.
The Portuguese marriage proposals was something that I did know about, but here it's presented so logically it makes absolute sense. The chosen bride was a princes of Portugal, with a Spanish Infanta also in the playing as a reserve option. Both of these princesses were descended from the legitimate and senior branch of the House of Lancaster! Furthermore, it seems that a Portuguese marriage was also in the offing for Elizabeth of York. That being so, the letter supposedly written by her (reported by Buck, but now seemingly lost) makes more sense as does the confusion over Richard II wanting to marry Elizabeth, his niece, which never made any real sort of sense as, if we accept the truth of the Eleanor Butler pre-contract, then the children of Edward IV by Elizabeth Woodville were undoubtedly illegitimate, so there would be absolutely no point in Richard marrying her. On the other hand, Elizabeth and her sisters were the closest things available to Royal Princesses to be traded on the dynastic marriage market.
Regulating Preventive Justice: Principle, Policy and Paradox
Tamara Tulich, Rebecca Ananian-Welsh, Simon Bronitt and Sarah Murray
Book
Like medicine, law is replete with axioms of prevention. 'Prevention is better than cure' has a long...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Maidens in Books
Jun 24, 2021
A lackluster and dull thriller
Mariana Andros is a group therapist and Cambridge University graduate. She is mourning her late husband, Sebastian, when their niece, Zoe, calls, upset because a friend at Cambridge has been murdered. Mariana and Sebastian raised Zoe as a surrogate daughter, so Mariana heads to Cambridge and St. Christopher's College to be there for her. There, Mariana feels she can help her friend and fellow therapist, Julian Ashcroft, in looking into the murder. Mariana is convinced that Greek tragedy professor Edward Fosca is responsible. He is followed around by a group of female students, deemed The Maidens, who seem obsessed with Fosca and his teachings. When another girl, a Maiden, is found dead, Mariana vows she will do anything to stop him.
"Death was no stranger to Mariana; it had been her traveling companion since she was a child--keeping close behind her, hovering just over her shoulder. She sometimes felt she had been cursed, as if by some malevolent goddess in a Greek myth, to lose everyone she ever loved."
Unpopular opinion time... this book did not work for me. I did not find it engaging nor interesting. I had to force myself to keep reading, as I did not care for any of the characters, including Mariana and Zoe. Mariana is fixated on Edward Fosca from the beginning and seems convinced she should insert herself in a rather serious murder investigation despite not seeming one bit qualified. I'm not sure how her group therapist qualifications lend her any credentials and she lies constantly, much to the annoyance (justified) and detriment of the police. There are basically no sympathetic characters, and there seems to be no reason to care about the murdered women, as we're given no background on them. Some characters (e.g., Julian) seem inserted for no reason whatsoever.
There is a lot of Greek mythology tucked into the story and perhaps I was just over it, as I've read several books revolving around Greek myths lately. It was a lot, though, and sometimes did not seem relevant to our story.
This thriller is certainly atmospheric, with Cambridge playing a strong role in the setting. You definitely feel a part of the academic setting, and I learned a lot about the university while reading. It's dark and somewhat foreboding, but since I was not fully invested in the story, I could only feel so tense. There are some twists, but the big twist came too late and seemed too preposterous to be truly exciting. The author throws in so many red herrings that you find yourself almost rolling your eyes.
Still, this is a very popular thriller for many readers, so chances are it may work for you. For me, it just didn't hold my interest or seem all that, well, thrilling. 2 stars.
"Death was no stranger to Mariana; it had been her traveling companion since she was a child--keeping close behind her, hovering just over her shoulder. She sometimes felt she had been cursed, as if by some malevolent goddess in a Greek myth, to lose everyone she ever loved."
Unpopular opinion time... this book did not work for me. I did not find it engaging nor interesting. I had to force myself to keep reading, as I did not care for any of the characters, including Mariana and Zoe. Mariana is fixated on Edward Fosca from the beginning and seems convinced she should insert herself in a rather serious murder investigation despite not seeming one bit qualified. I'm not sure how her group therapist qualifications lend her any credentials and she lies constantly, much to the annoyance (justified) and detriment of the police. There are basically no sympathetic characters, and there seems to be no reason to care about the murdered women, as we're given no background on them. Some characters (e.g., Julian) seem inserted for no reason whatsoever.
There is a lot of Greek mythology tucked into the story and perhaps I was just over it, as I've read several books revolving around Greek myths lately. It was a lot, though, and sometimes did not seem relevant to our story.
This thriller is certainly atmospheric, with Cambridge playing a strong role in the setting. You definitely feel a part of the academic setting, and I learned a lot about the university while reading. It's dark and somewhat foreboding, but since I was not fully invested in the story, I could only feel so tense. There are some twists, but the big twist came too late and seemed too preposterous to be truly exciting. The author throws in so many red herrings that you find yourself almost rolling your eyes.
Still, this is a very popular thriller for many readers, so chances are it may work for you. For me, it just didn't hold my interest or seem all that, well, thrilling. 2 stars.
Tim McGuire (301 KP) rated Stone (2010) in Movies
Jan 21, 2020
Old Movie Revisted: Stone. A movie I passed on a few times, because I thought, hmmm, a movie with Robert DeNiro, Edward Norton, and Milla Jovovich, that I never heard of, it must be crap. Because that's snart. But anyways, turns out it was a pretty awesome flick. So, we got Jack (DeNiro), he listens to church radio, goes to church on sundays, talk to his pastor with personal issues, cheats on his wife, drinks heavily, and one time threatened to throw his own child out the second story window if his wife left him, in other words, a normal christian. Well he is a parole officer nearing retirement when he meets Stone (Norton) who is a convicted arsonist and approaching his eligible for parole date and ya gotta talk to Jack before you can go home. And really all Jack wants to hear is that, yes, you are responsible for your actions, blah blah blah. Does he??? Well he says he can hear god talking to him through sound, of course he mentions this after he mentions that he hasnt slept in quite some time and may be going crazy, or it could be god, Jack ain't having it. But then he starts getting calls from Stones' wife Lucetta (Jovovich) saying please let hubby out, he's changed his ways, and she misses him... She lets Jack know just how much she misses him all right. Will she use poor ol Jack to get Stone out of jail, or is it all just bullshit? I dug it. I felt they were all good at the characters they played which seemed different for each of them... Well has Milla done anything but fight Disney...err the Umbrella Corporation for the past 2 decades lolz. Filmbufftim on FB
Up is a beautifully crafted film that is full of child’s play and adult in jokes. The magicians at Pixar have again triumphed and added another winning film to a growing list of previous hits.
Carl Fredrickson (Edward Asner) is a 70s something old man who has spent his life in love with Ellie, an aspiring day dreaming adventurer he met when he was a small boy. The pair marry and seem to live happily ever after. When Ellie dies (shown in a tear jerking montage) Carl loses the biggest piece of his life yet but must battle on and keep a promise he made to her years before – to reach a set of falls deep in the South-American jungle.
The opening is extremely moving. It shows Ellie and Carl growing up together and facing life’s troubled times and happiest moments. Even for the most hardened film critic Pixar knows how to tap into our emotions. As with any Pixar film it’s the characters that make it. Up is no different. Russell (Jordan Nagai) is an over enthusiastic wilderness scout who teams up with Carl on his adventure. Russell also harbours a secret in his life which is not that dissimilar to Carl’s. Dug (Bob Peterson) is a loveable but slightly dimwitted talking dog, and as for Kevin, his (or should I say her) inclusion is the icing on the cake.
The moment Carl unleashes the balloons from his house in a explosion of colour you know that you’re in for the ride of your life. What follows is a true adventure story. The humour flows right from the beginning and the quirky simplicity of the jokes are brilliant. There are more tear jerking moments and of course a happy ending. Up may surely be Pixar’s finest work yet!
Carl Fredrickson (Edward Asner) is a 70s something old man who has spent his life in love with Ellie, an aspiring day dreaming adventurer he met when he was a small boy. The pair marry and seem to live happily ever after. When Ellie dies (shown in a tear jerking montage) Carl loses the biggest piece of his life yet but must battle on and keep a promise he made to her years before – to reach a set of falls deep in the South-American jungle.
The opening is extremely moving. It shows Ellie and Carl growing up together and facing life’s troubled times and happiest moments. Even for the most hardened film critic Pixar knows how to tap into our emotions. As with any Pixar film it’s the characters that make it. Up is no different. Russell (Jordan Nagai) is an over enthusiastic wilderness scout who teams up with Carl on his adventure. Russell also harbours a secret in his life which is not that dissimilar to Carl’s. Dug (Bob Peterson) is a loveable but slightly dimwitted talking dog, and as for Kevin, his (or should I say her) inclusion is the icing on the cake.
The moment Carl unleashes the balloons from his house in a explosion of colour you know that you’re in for the ride of your life. What follows is a true adventure story. The humour flows right from the beginning and the quirky simplicity of the jokes are brilliant. There are more tear jerking moments and of course a happy ending. Up may surely be Pixar’s finest work yet!
Merissa (11800 KP) rated The Fulbourn (Pitch & Sickle, #5) in Books
Apr 18, 2023
THE FULBOURN is the fifth book in the Pitch & Sickle series and oh, man. Hold on to your seatbelt as you're in for a bumpy ride!!
I said in my review of The Greensward that it was the best one. Well, let me rephrase that. It was the best one up to that point! THE FULBOURN takes Pitch and Silas' story to another level and I loved every single word.
Pitch and Silas are now close to realising just how much the other one means and it is so well-written! Their relationship may seem gruff to some but that is only until they know them. The bonds between the two are there to see and I'm loving it. The slow burn that started them off is now moving to steamy - whenever their lives give them a moment's peace. And sometimes, you just have to make the time!
Not only is their relationship changing, but the overall story arc is moving along swiftly too. You honestly don't get a chance to catch your breath. Filled with characters from previous books, Pitch and Silas are on the hunt for Charlie and Edward. It takes them to London and Cambridgeshire. The descriptions of the asylum are horrific - exactly as they are supposed to be during that time.
Absolutely gripping, I am thoroughly loving every book in this series and have no hesitation in recommending any of them. Just make sure you start at the beginning or you will miss the full effect.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Apr 17, 2023
I said in my review of The Greensward that it was the best one. Well, let me rephrase that. It was the best one up to that point! THE FULBOURN takes Pitch and Silas' story to another level and I loved every single word.
Pitch and Silas are now close to realising just how much the other one means and it is so well-written! Their relationship may seem gruff to some but that is only until they know them. The bonds between the two are there to see and I'm loving it. The slow burn that started them off is now moving to steamy - whenever their lives give them a moment's peace. And sometimes, you just have to make the time!
Not only is their relationship changing, but the overall story arc is moving along swiftly too. You honestly don't get a chance to catch your breath. Filled with characters from previous books, Pitch and Silas are on the hunt for Charlie and Edward. It takes them to London and Cambridgeshire. The descriptions of the asylum are horrific - exactly as they are supposed to be during that time.
Absolutely gripping, I am thoroughly loving every book in this series and have no hesitation in recommending any of them. Just make sure you start at the beginning or you will miss the full effect.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Apr 17, 2023
The Fulbourn (Pitch & Sickle, #5)
10.0
Rate It
Book
When the King of Daemonkind comes to call, be ready for hell to follow. After Lucifer’s...
MM Historical Gaslamp Fantasy
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Nocturnal Animals (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Putting the crisis into mid-life crisis.
“Do you think your life has turned into something you never intended?” So asks Susan Morrow (Amy Adams) to her young assistant, who obviously looks baffled. “Of course, not – you’re still young”. Susan is in a mid-life crisis. While successful within the opulent Los Angeles art scene her personal life is crashing to the ground around her: her marriage (to Hutton (Armie Hammer, “The Man From Uncle”) ) appears to be cooling fast amid financial worries.
In the midst of this rudderless time a manuscript from her ex-husband, struggling writer Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), turns up out of the blue. As we see in flashback, Edward is a man let down on multiple levels by Susan in the past. His novel – “Nocturnal Animals”, dedicated to Susan – is a primal scream of twenty years worth of hurt, pain, regret and vengeance; a railing against a loss of love; a railing against a loss of life.
As Susan painfully turns the pages we live the book as a ‘film within a film’ – with characters casually modelled on Edward, Susan and Susan’s daughter, actually played by Gyllenhaal, Amy-Adams-lookalike Isla Fisher (“Grimsby”) and Ellie Bamber (“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”) respectively. The insomniac Susan is seriously moved. She feels likes someone who’s fallen asleep on the train of life and doesn’t recognise any of the stations when she wakes up. How will Susan’s regrets translate into action? Should she take up Edwards offer to meet up for dinner?
This Tom Ford film – only his second after the wildly successful “A Single Man” in 2009 – is a challenging film to watch. The opening titles of naked overweight woman ‘twerkers’ is challenging enough (#wobble). After this shocking opening (that morphs into an art gallery installation) the LA scenes have a gloriously Hitchcockian/noir feel to them, being gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (“The Accountant”, “The Avengers”) – an Oscar nomination I would suggest should be in the offing.
And then comes the start of the “book” segment: one of the most uncomfortably tense scenes I’ve seen this year. A Texan family horror film featuring a lonely highway and a trio of “deplorables” (to quote an unfortunate put-down by Hilary Clinton). As stark contrast to the sharp lines and glamour of LA, these scenes are reminiscent of “No Country for Old Men” with a searingly unpleasant performance from Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and an equally queasy turn by local law enforcer Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon, Zod in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”). Either or both of these gentlemen could be contenders for a Supporting Actor nomination. The tension is superbly notched up by a mesmerising cello/violin score by Polish composer Abel Korzeniowski.
Amy Adams is fantastic in the leading role (what with “Arrival” this month, this is quite a month for the actress) as is Jake Gyllenhaal, channelling so much emotion, angst and guilt at his own impotence. After “Nightcrawler” Gyllenhaal is building up a formidable reputation that must translate into an Oscar some time soon: possibly this is it. Some excellent cameos from Laura Linney (as Susan’s sad-eyed mother) and Michael Sheen (in a superb purple jacket) rounds off an excellent ensemble cast.
The concept of a “film within a film” is not new. The most memorable example (I realise with a shock – #midlifecrisis) was “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” with a young but striking Meryl Streep 35 years ago. Here the LA sequence, the book and the flashback scenes are beautifully merged into a seamless whole where you never seem to get lost or disorientated.
If there is a criticism to be made, the second half of the ‘book’ is not as satisfying as the first with some rather clunky plot points that fall a little too easily.
However, this is a nuanced film where every step and every scene feels sculpted and filled with meaning. It is a film that deserves repeat viewings, since it raises questions and thoughts that survive long after the lights have come up. Tom Ford’s output may be of a sparsity of Kubrick proportions, but like Kubrick his output is certainly worth waiting for.
Recommended, but go mentally prepared: this was a UK 15 certificate, but it felt like it should be more of a UK 18.
In the midst of this rudderless time a manuscript from her ex-husband, struggling writer Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), turns up out of the blue. As we see in flashback, Edward is a man let down on multiple levels by Susan in the past. His novel – “Nocturnal Animals”, dedicated to Susan – is a primal scream of twenty years worth of hurt, pain, regret and vengeance; a railing against a loss of love; a railing against a loss of life.
As Susan painfully turns the pages we live the book as a ‘film within a film’ – with characters casually modelled on Edward, Susan and Susan’s daughter, actually played by Gyllenhaal, Amy-Adams-lookalike Isla Fisher (“Grimsby”) and Ellie Bamber (“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”) respectively. The insomniac Susan is seriously moved. She feels likes someone who’s fallen asleep on the train of life and doesn’t recognise any of the stations when she wakes up. How will Susan’s regrets translate into action? Should she take up Edwards offer to meet up for dinner?
This Tom Ford film – only his second after the wildly successful “A Single Man” in 2009 – is a challenging film to watch. The opening titles of naked overweight woman ‘twerkers’ is challenging enough (#wobble). After this shocking opening (that morphs into an art gallery installation) the LA scenes have a gloriously Hitchcockian/noir feel to them, being gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (“The Accountant”, “The Avengers”) – an Oscar nomination I would suggest should be in the offing.
And then comes the start of the “book” segment: one of the most uncomfortably tense scenes I’ve seen this year. A Texan family horror film featuring a lonely highway and a trio of “deplorables” (to quote an unfortunate put-down by Hilary Clinton). As stark contrast to the sharp lines and glamour of LA, these scenes are reminiscent of “No Country for Old Men” with a searingly unpleasant performance from Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and an equally queasy turn by local law enforcer Bobby Andes (Michael Shannon, Zod in “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”). Either or both of these gentlemen could be contenders for a Supporting Actor nomination. The tension is superbly notched up by a mesmerising cello/violin score by Polish composer Abel Korzeniowski.
Amy Adams is fantastic in the leading role (what with “Arrival” this month, this is quite a month for the actress) as is Jake Gyllenhaal, channelling so much emotion, angst and guilt at his own impotence. After “Nightcrawler” Gyllenhaal is building up a formidable reputation that must translate into an Oscar some time soon: possibly this is it. Some excellent cameos from Laura Linney (as Susan’s sad-eyed mother) and Michael Sheen (in a superb purple jacket) rounds off an excellent ensemble cast.
The concept of a “film within a film” is not new. The most memorable example (I realise with a shock – #midlifecrisis) was “The French Lieutenant’s Woman” with a young but striking Meryl Streep 35 years ago. Here the LA sequence, the book and the flashback scenes are beautifully merged into a seamless whole where you never seem to get lost or disorientated.
If there is a criticism to be made, the second half of the ‘book’ is not as satisfying as the first with some rather clunky plot points that fall a little too easily.
However, this is a nuanced film where every step and every scene feels sculpted and filled with meaning. It is a film that deserves repeat viewings, since it raises questions and thoughts that survive long after the lights have come up. Tom Ford’s output may be of a sparsity of Kubrick proportions, but like Kubrick his output is certainly worth waiting for.
Recommended, but go mentally prepared: this was a UK 15 certificate, but it felt like it should be more of a UK 18.