Search
Search results
Stockpile
9.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Stockpile is an economic board game that combines the traditional stockholding strategy of buy low,...
BoardGames StockBrokerGames
Baseball Highlights: 2045
8.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
American baseball was on its last legs as a spectator sport. Football had become the predominant...
Baseball Cyborgs Robots Deck Builder
Lords of Scotland
7.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
The throne lies empty and the clans are restless. As a lord of Scotland with land, men and money at...
CardGames CelticGames PastedOnThemeGames
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Get Out (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“It really doesn’t matter if you’re ‘Black or White”.
Due to a mixture of holiday, work commitments and sickness (I would not wish to inflict my bronchial cough on ANY cinema audience for a while) I haven’t been to the cinema in over a month… shocking. But it has given me a chance to catch up on some of the films in 2017 (and a few from last year) that I hadn’t got to see. So this will be the first of a series of such “DVD” reviews.
“Get Out” was written and directed by Jordan Peele and was his directorial debut. And a hot item on his resume it is too.
Daniel Kaluuya (“Sicario”) plays African-American Chris Washington who, nervously, takes a trip ‘upstate’ to meet the parents of his cute white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams). The parents, Dean (Bradley Whitford, best known as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”) and Missy (Catherine Keener, “ Captain Phillips”), are extremely welcoming.
But the weekend coincides with an “annual gathering” of family and friends, and events quickly take a left turn into “The Twilight Zone”, with anti-smoking hypnosis and a bizarre game of Bingo where the win is so substantial that playing becomes a ‘no brainer’. Can Chris ‘Get Out’, with his mind still intact, before it’s too late?
This is a really clever script by Peele. The film baits you into thinking this is some redneck-inter-racial-revenge flick, but actually the colour of the skin is almost irrelevant. (Or is it? This angle is left deliciously vague). Some of the filming is spectacularly creepy, with the hypnosis scene being reminiscent to me of the excellent “Under The Skin”. And never has a teaspoon in a cup of tea been a more devastating weapon.
I seemed to have talked at length this year in this blog on the subject of the “physics of horror”: the story elements hanging together in a satisfying – albeit sometimes in an unbelievable – way. “Get Out” delivers this to perfection, keeping its powder dry until the closing moments of the film before delivering a series of satisfying “Ah!” relevatory moments.
While the ‘physics’ of the film is good the ‘biology’ is bonkers, featuring a plot point from the terrible first episode of the 3rd season of the original “Star Trek” (if you can be bothered to look that up!). But I’ll forgive this, parking my incredulity, to salute what I think is one of the year’s most novel and impressive low-budget indie horror films.
“Get Out” was written and directed by Jordan Peele and was his directorial debut. And a hot item on his resume it is too.
Daniel Kaluuya (“Sicario”) plays African-American Chris Washington who, nervously, takes a trip ‘upstate’ to meet the parents of his cute white girlfriend Rose (Allison Williams). The parents, Dean (Bradley Whitford, best known as Josh Lyman from “The West Wing”) and Missy (Catherine Keener, “ Captain Phillips”), are extremely welcoming.
But the weekend coincides with an “annual gathering” of family and friends, and events quickly take a left turn into “The Twilight Zone”, with anti-smoking hypnosis and a bizarre game of Bingo where the win is so substantial that playing becomes a ‘no brainer’. Can Chris ‘Get Out’, with his mind still intact, before it’s too late?
This is a really clever script by Peele. The film baits you into thinking this is some redneck-inter-racial-revenge flick, but actually the colour of the skin is almost irrelevant. (Or is it? This angle is left deliciously vague). Some of the filming is spectacularly creepy, with the hypnosis scene being reminiscent to me of the excellent “Under The Skin”. And never has a teaspoon in a cup of tea been a more devastating weapon.
I seemed to have talked at length this year in this blog on the subject of the “physics of horror”: the story elements hanging together in a satisfying – albeit sometimes in an unbelievable – way. “Get Out” delivers this to perfection, keeping its powder dry until the closing moments of the film before delivering a series of satisfying “Ah!” relevatory moments.
While the ‘physics’ of the film is good the ‘biology’ is bonkers, featuring a plot point from the terrible first episode of the 3rd season of the original “Star Trek” (if you can be bothered to look that up!). But I’ll forgive this, parking my incredulity, to salute what I think is one of the year’s most novel and impressive low-budget indie horror films.
Merissa (13162 KP) rated Through His Eyes (Mind's Eye #1) in Books
Apr 11, 2023
Quite simply, this book completely blew me away!
That being said, let me give you some more details. This is a story with strong paranormal elements, Trudy is a medium who can see through the killer's eyes and Levi is a medium who can speak to the dead. So when these two pair up, they approach the same "problem" from a different angle but to the same end. Some of the details given in this story are not for the faint of heart and I found myself going "ewww" a couple of times out loud - much to the delight of my husband who finds it incredibly amusing when I get that carried away with a book! The mystery and suspense continue to build throughout the book and I got half of the killer correct but the other half took me by surprise. I won't say anymore because of spoilers.
On the romance side, nothing really happens for the first 25% so you really get a chance to find out about the characters - who they are, and what makes them tick. Quintara is a wonderful character to read about and, to be honest, a bit of light relief. She is flighty and bubbly but with an amazing insight into each of her friends. Trudy is someone who has struggled with who she is even with the support of her family and will fight her attraction to Levi to the nth degree. Levi is an arrogant so-and-so who you will want to punch one moment and hug the next. He is vulnerable and hides behind his arrogance. You only find out snippets about him through the story - as Trudy calls him "a mystery man".
You know Levi and Trudy will get together - it is simply too explosive not to happen. The attraction sizzles between them but they do have their obstacles. I loved Trudy's attitude - she wasn't prepared to accept Levi's attitude and certainly knew what she wanted. Whilst he didn't appreciate having the tables turned on him, I think he needed it.
So, all in all, this is an exceptional, mind-blowing book that will burn your fingers with the heat contained within.
One thing I will add - the last paragraph completely got me!!! Nothing more to be said except - buy this, read it for yourself and see if you agree.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED for all fans of romantic suspense and paranormal romance.
* 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!
August 3, 2016
That being said, let me give you some more details. This is a story with strong paranormal elements, Trudy is a medium who can see through the killer's eyes and Levi is a medium who can speak to the dead. So when these two pair up, they approach the same "problem" from a different angle but to the same end. Some of the details given in this story are not for the faint of heart and I found myself going "ewww" a couple of times out loud - much to the delight of my husband who finds it incredibly amusing when I get that carried away with a book! The mystery and suspense continue to build throughout the book and I got half of the killer correct but the other half took me by surprise. I won't say anymore because of spoilers.
On the romance side, nothing really happens for the first 25% so you really get a chance to find out about the characters - who they are, and what makes them tick. Quintara is a wonderful character to read about and, to be honest, a bit of light relief. She is flighty and bubbly but with an amazing insight into each of her friends. Trudy is someone who has struggled with who she is even with the support of her family and will fight her attraction to Levi to the nth degree. Levi is an arrogant so-and-so who you will want to punch one moment and hug the next. He is vulnerable and hides behind his arrogance. You only find out snippets about him through the story - as Trudy calls him "a mystery man".
You know Levi and Trudy will get together - it is simply too explosive not to happen. The attraction sizzles between them but they do have their obstacles. I loved Trudy's attitude - she wasn't prepared to accept Levi's attitude and certainly knew what she wanted. Whilst he didn't appreciate having the tables turned on him, I think he needed it.
So, all in all, this is an exceptional, mind-blowing book that will burn your fingers with the heat contained within.
One thing I will add - the last paragraph completely got me!!! Nothing more to be said except - buy this, read it for yourself and see if you agree.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED for all fans of romantic suspense and paranormal romance.
* 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!
August 3, 2016
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Knock at the cabin (2023) in Movies
Feb 4, 2023
Writer/Director M. Night Shyamalan is back with his new thriller “Knock at
the Cabin” and like his earlier works; the film blends reality with
supernatural elements to put ordinary people in circumstances that are
dangerous and unnatural.
The film involves a same-sex couple named Eric (Jonathan Groff) and Andrew
(Ben Aldridge), who have taken their adopted daughter Wen (Kristen Cui),
to a secluded cabin for a relaxing vacation.
The arrival of four strangers lead by the imposing but soft-spoken Leonard
(Dave Bautista) becomes dangerous when Leonard informs them that the world
is about to end and only by choosing to sacrifice one of them can the
Apocalypse be diverted.
Leonard explains that the four had the same vision of the end of the world
and that they were drawn to save it by taking such drastic actions. They
inform their captives that they will not harm them but they will not be
allowed to leave as they must make the choice and failure to do so will
doom everyone and force the three of them to exist as the sole-survivors
of the aftermath.
Convinced that the intruders are insane; Eric and Andrew refuse the offer
and watch as one of the four captives sacrifices themselves which is soon
followed by news on the television of a massive earthquakes which resulted
in tsunamis.
Convinced it is a ruse or simply timed events to the days news; the
captives again refuse a request only to see another sacrifice followed by
more news of devastation happening around the world.
What follows is a tight thriller as Eric and Andrew learn more about their
captives and the changing world situation which forces them to confront a
world gone mad.
The film is good at setting a tone and maintaining a mild tension
throughout as the audience is left to wonder how real what is being
presented by Leonard and his associates are. I liked the fact that the
movie did not try to wrap things up nice and tidy and left the audiences
with some questions about the events as well as what would happen in the
aftermath.
Bautista gives an career-best performance and shows that his is capable of
doing more than the action-comedy genre which he has been playing to date
and I hope he continues to seek roles such as this.
While the film may not reach the levels of some of his earlier classics,
Shyamalan has crafted an entertaining film that keeps you guessing.
3.5 stars out of 5
the Cabin” and like his earlier works; the film blends reality with
supernatural elements to put ordinary people in circumstances that are
dangerous and unnatural.
The film involves a same-sex couple named Eric (Jonathan Groff) and Andrew
(Ben Aldridge), who have taken their adopted daughter Wen (Kristen Cui),
to a secluded cabin for a relaxing vacation.
The arrival of four strangers lead by the imposing but soft-spoken Leonard
(Dave Bautista) becomes dangerous when Leonard informs them that the world
is about to end and only by choosing to sacrifice one of them can the
Apocalypse be diverted.
Leonard explains that the four had the same vision of the end of the world
and that they were drawn to save it by taking such drastic actions. They
inform their captives that they will not harm them but they will not be
allowed to leave as they must make the choice and failure to do so will
doom everyone and force the three of them to exist as the sole-survivors
of the aftermath.
Convinced that the intruders are insane; Eric and Andrew refuse the offer
and watch as one of the four captives sacrifices themselves which is soon
followed by news on the television of a massive earthquakes which resulted
in tsunamis.
Convinced it is a ruse or simply timed events to the days news; the
captives again refuse a request only to see another sacrifice followed by
more news of devastation happening around the world.
What follows is a tight thriller as Eric and Andrew learn more about their
captives and the changing world situation which forces them to confront a
world gone mad.
The film is good at setting a tone and maintaining a mild tension
throughout as the audience is left to wonder how real what is being
presented by Leonard and his associates are. I liked the fact that the
movie did not try to wrap things up nice and tidy and left the audiences
with some questions about the events as well as what would happen in the
aftermath.
Bautista gives an career-best performance and shows that his is capable of
doing more than the action-comedy genre which he has been playing to date
and I hope he continues to seek roles such as this.
While the film may not reach the levels of some of his earlier classics,
Shyamalan has crafted an entertaining film that keeps you guessing.
3.5 stars out of 5
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Haunting in Venice (2023) in Movies
Sep 30, 2023
Well Crafted
Famed Agatha Christie Belgian Sleuth Hercule Poirot is a familiar figure on the screen - both large and small. He has been played numerous times by numerous performers, each one riffing on the famed mustached Detective and his “little grey cells” and and any performer who takes on this character must bear the weight of those who played the role before him.
In A HAUNTING IN VENICE, Kenneth Branagh’s 3rd go around as Poirot, Branagh has finally shaken off the Ghosts of Poirot’s Past and has made the part his own.
Based on the 1969 novel by Agatha Christie, HALLOWE’EN PARTY, Branagh (who also directed the film) imbues horror elements and the macabre to the whoddunit detective genre - largely to positive results.
As stated above, Branagh has finally made this version of Hercule Poirot his own, giving the detective (who, at the beginning of this film/novel, is in self-imposed retirement) some self-doubt and self-retrospection which helps drive the story, plot and intrigue of the story.
Branagh has populated this murder-mystery with strong performers from recent Oscar-winner Michelle Yeoh (EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, ALL AT ONCE) to Jamie Dornan (Branagh’s BELFAST) to YELLOWSTONE’s Kelly Reilly. Each brings mystery and star power to their roles.
Special notice needs to be made of Comedienne Tina Fey who is tackling her first non-comedic role and largely sticks the landing. As a friend of the Detective from NYC, Fey more than holds her own in the many, many scenes she shares with Branagh. As is often the case with comediennes, there is more to be mined in Fey’s acting chops and here’s hoping she dives deeper into more serious roles.
Director Branagh smartly uses the setting and mood of this piece to craft a film experience that is eerie, spooky and claustrophobic. While it is being billed as a HORROR film, it is not. It is a tense, taught, macabre film, filled with fish-eye lens and blurred-focus shots, which makes the set design and cinematography complimentary to the story.
Which is important for this is, in the end, a drawing room murder-mystery and the audience’s enjoyment of this film will be in direct alignment with how the mystery plays out…and this mystery plays out well (enough). What it lacks in surprises, it more than makes up for in mood, atmosphere and character
And that makes for a very entertaining time at the Cinema.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
In A HAUNTING IN VENICE, Kenneth Branagh’s 3rd go around as Poirot, Branagh has finally shaken off the Ghosts of Poirot’s Past and has made the part his own.
Based on the 1969 novel by Agatha Christie, HALLOWE’EN PARTY, Branagh (who also directed the film) imbues horror elements and the macabre to the whoddunit detective genre - largely to positive results.
As stated above, Branagh has finally made this version of Hercule Poirot his own, giving the detective (who, at the beginning of this film/novel, is in self-imposed retirement) some self-doubt and self-retrospection which helps drive the story, plot and intrigue of the story.
Branagh has populated this murder-mystery with strong performers from recent Oscar-winner Michelle Yeoh (EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, ALL AT ONCE) to Jamie Dornan (Branagh’s BELFAST) to YELLOWSTONE’s Kelly Reilly. Each brings mystery and star power to their roles.
Special notice needs to be made of Comedienne Tina Fey who is tackling her first non-comedic role and largely sticks the landing. As a friend of the Detective from NYC, Fey more than holds her own in the many, many scenes she shares with Branagh. As is often the case with comediennes, there is more to be mined in Fey’s acting chops and here’s hoping she dives deeper into more serious roles.
Director Branagh smartly uses the setting and mood of this piece to craft a film experience that is eerie, spooky and claustrophobic. While it is being billed as a HORROR film, it is not. It is a tense, taught, macabre film, filled with fish-eye lens and blurred-focus shots, which makes the set design and cinematography complimentary to the story.
Which is important for this is, in the end, a drawing room murder-mystery and the audience’s enjoyment of this film will be in direct alignment with how the mystery plays out…and this mystery plays out well (enough). What it lacks in surprises, it more than makes up for in mood, atmosphere and character
And that makes for a very entertaining time at the Cinema.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Tranquility Base Hotel & Casino by Arctic Monkeys in Music
May 14, 2018 (Updated May 15, 2018)
Eh?
So the new Arctic Monkeys album is finally here, after half a decade of speculation and anticipation and I don't think it's what anybody wanted. Most fans expected another guitar led record to follow up 2013's AM but this instead record sounds a bit like the smiths or pulp, but not as good as either of them and with a significantly less amount of guitar.
Music critics seem afraid to commit one way or the other, with most reviews from popular publications containing a verbal bashing in the body of the review, before summing it up with a positive conclusion and overall score. It's as if they don't like it on the surface, but deep down they don't have the heart to give an Arctics album a bad review.
Personally, I have a love/hate relationship with the Arctic Monkeys' music. I adore their first album so much. For me, that record was a beacon of light in a murky, mediocre musical landscape when it dropped and I genuinely thought these lads were going to be the next Oasis. I was then let down consecutively by every subsequent release as I watched this band squander their potential to become one of the most overrated groups in the industry. I did like Don't Sit Down from Suck It and See and I am a fan of Alex Turner's side project, the Last Shadow Puppets and despite my better nature, every time the Arctics release a new record I vainly get my hopes up only to be inevitably let down upon hearing it.
This album is basically the polar opposite of Whatever People Say I Am, which I fell in love with because it was an album for belting out while banging on the table with a pint in your hand at the pub. This album is for sitting with a glass of wine on your posh veranda of self indulgence.
In terms of his vocal performance, he sounds great on some tracks and elsewhere, the cheap Bowie impression really starts to grate, with 4 Out Of Five being the worst offender.
The worst thing is, it isn't a bad album, it's just painfully mediocre, which isn't really good enough. They kept their fans waiting for 5 years, didn't release any singles before the album and cryptically teased us for ages, to release this? A weak, bland rag of mediocrity?
After a few listens through, I like some elements of it. The mixing is nice and some of the hooks are pretty clever, but overall I can see what they were trying to do here and they just missed the mark. There is a difference between challenging your listeners and being tone deaf to what it is that they want to hear.
Music critics seem afraid to commit one way or the other, with most reviews from popular publications containing a verbal bashing in the body of the review, before summing it up with a positive conclusion and overall score. It's as if they don't like it on the surface, but deep down they don't have the heart to give an Arctics album a bad review.
Personally, I have a love/hate relationship with the Arctic Monkeys' music. I adore their first album so much. For me, that record was a beacon of light in a murky, mediocre musical landscape when it dropped and I genuinely thought these lads were going to be the next Oasis. I was then let down consecutively by every subsequent release as I watched this band squander their potential to become one of the most overrated groups in the industry. I did like Don't Sit Down from Suck It and See and I am a fan of Alex Turner's side project, the Last Shadow Puppets and despite my better nature, every time the Arctics release a new record I vainly get my hopes up only to be inevitably let down upon hearing it.
This album is basically the polar opposite of Whatever People Say I Am, which I fell in love with because it was an album for belting out while banging on the table with a pint in your hand at the pub. This album is for sitting with a glass of wine on your posh veranda of self indulgence.
In terms of his vocal performance, he sounds great on some tracks and elsewhere, the cheap Bowie impression really starts to grate, with 4 Out Of Five being the worst offender.
The worst thing is, it isn't a bad album, it's just painfully mediocre, which isn't really good enough. They kept their fans waiting for 5 years, didn't release any singles before the album and cryptically teased us for ages, to release this? A weak, bland rag of mediocrity?
After a few listens through, I like some elements of it. The mixing is nice and some of the hooks are pretty clever, but overall I can see what they were trying to do here and they just missed the mark. There is a difference between challenging your listeners and being tone deaf to what it is that they want to hear.
*＊✿❀ Maki ❀✿＊* (7 KP) rated The Warrior Heir (The Heir Chronicles, #1) in Books
May 3, 2018
[a:Cinda Williams Chima|125308|Cinda Williams Chima|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1291420167p2/125308.jpg] was my biggest takeaway from [b:The Way of the Wizard|8121665|The Way of the Wizard|John Joseph Adams|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1297656860s/8121665.jpg|12917149]. I absolutely adored the short story of how Linda and Hastings met, and knew that I had to read the actual series.
You can definitely tell that this was written a few years before the short story in The Way of the Wizard. The writing isn't quite on the same level - all of the key elements are still there, but in a rawer form.
That's not a bad thing. I'm not insulting the quality of the writing, at all. It was still a very enjoyable story, and the writing and the editing were solid. And I'm happy to watch the progression of the narrative, as it gets stronger over time.
...but. If I had read The Warrior Heir before I read "The Trader and the Slave", I probably would have enjoyed this book more than I did. Part of me kept waiting for the dark, grittiness that the short story had, and it never really showed up.
Were parts of The Warrior Heir heavy? Sure. There's a lot of double-crossing, morality, and self-sacrifice in there. But it wasn't quite the same.
Sorry for that slight detour there. I felt that, before I started talking about the book itself, I should explain the factors that went towards my final rating.
Because, in general, I loved this book. It was a lot of fun to read. I loved the "world" and the magic system, I loved the history and explanations of why magic works, and where it came from. The dedication to the magic system was very nice, and much appreciated in such an action-based fantasy book.
The main characters all managed to keep me interested in what was going on (even though there wasn't nearly enough Linda and Hastings in there for me), and the antagonists walked a delicate balance of being evil, and just doing what they thought would be best for themselves, or for those around them. Even some of the protagonists walked that line, which was <i>really</i> nice to see.
Morality - it's pretty important to the story.
There weren't really any surprises in the plot department. It was incredibly easy to guess the various "twists" the book had to offer. <spoiler>Especially anything having to do with Ellen.</spoiler> But personally, I was too distracted by the world-building to overly care about how predictable things were.
Because in Maki-land, well-established magic system > plot.
You can definitely tell that this was written a few years before the short story in The Way of the Wizard. The writing isn't quite on the same level - all of the key elements are still there, but in a rawer form.
That's not a bad thing. I'm not insulting the quality of the writing, at all. It was still a very enjoyable story, and the writing and the editing were solid. And I'm happy to watch the progression of the narrative, as it gets stronger over time.
...but. If I had read The Warrior Heir before I read "The Trader and the Slave", I probably would have enjoyed this book more than I did. Part of me kept waiting for the dark, grittiness that the short story had, and it never really showed up.
Were parts of The Warrior Heir heavy? Sure. There's a lot of double-crossing, morality, and self-sacrifice in there. But it wasn't quite the same.
Sorry for that slight detour there. I felt that, before I started talking about the book itself, I should explain the factors that went towards my final rating.
Because, in general, I loved this book. It was a lot of fun to read. I loved the "world" and the magic system, I loved the history and explanations of why magic works, and where it came from. The dedication to the magic system was very nice, and much appreciated in such an action-based fantasy book.
The main characters all managed to keep me interested in what was going on (even though there wasn't nearly enough Linda and Hastings in there for me), and the antagonists walked a delicate balance of being evil, and just doing what they thought would be best for themselves, or for those around them. Even some of the protagonists walked that line, which was <i>really</i> nice to see.
Morality - it's pretty important to the story.
There weren't really any surprises in the plot department. It was incredibly easy to guess the various "twists" the book had to offer. <spoiler>Especially anything having to do with Ellen.</spoiler> But personally, I was too distracted by the world-building to overly care about how predictable things were.
Because in Maki-land, well-established magic system > plot.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated On Writing in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I have not now nor ever been a fan of Stephen King's fiction, nor do I intend to change that pattern. His personal brand of fiction is simply not for me. But since this book is non-fiction, curiosity got the better of me. I am glad that I read this book very much, for both the memoir of his writing life, as well as the writing skills he attempts to impart.
The first half of the book is largely a memoir of King's life, with a focus on his writing career. The reader learns things such as what inspired him, what he liked in fiction, his initial forays into getting published, as well as his many rejections and criticisms. I found it both interesting and ironic that his first big book, Carrie, was accomplished largely thanks to his wife's encouragement, as he never really cared for the main character. He could take the simplest ideas, put two random thoughts together, and make them into these successful stories. All of this is woven into the more mundane aspects of his life, from schooling, to various jobs, to meeting his future wife.
The second part of the book is all about what King considers good writing practices, as well some of the advice that King has received over the years, such as when writing a second draft, subtract 10% from the original. He even goes into the details of good grammar and repeatedly refers to Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. He finishes off this section by showing a section of a first draft he wrote, and then the edited second draft of it to give the reader an idea of how to approach the editing process.
A final section in the book goes into the details of when King was hit and nearly killed by a "blue van" and the effect that it had on his life and his writing. The accident actually occurs before he begins the second part of this book, giving the manuscript the possibility of never being completed. This was probably the most intriguing part of the book for me, as he was able to remember in vivid detail what happened to him, and yet he seemed to be oddly emotionally-detached from its long-term consequences for his life. There is only one short paragraph in which I actually pick up on some emotion, when he discusses how quickly the driver of the blue van will likely be returning to the road. At one point he also made the observation that the driver could have stepped from the pages of one of his novels. What I do love is that his passion for writing helped him to overcome his injuries and regenerate that need to keep putting words to the page.
The first half of the book is largely a memoir of King's life, with a focus on his writing career. The reader learns things such as what inspired him, what he liked in fiction, his initial forays into getting published, as well as his many rejections and criticisms. I found it both interesting and ironic that his first big book, Carrie, was accomplished largely thanks to his wife's encouragement, as he never really cared for the main character. He could take the simplest ideas, put two random thoughts together, and make them into these successful stories. All of this is woven into the more mundane aspects of his life, from schooling, to various jobs, to meeting his future wife.
The second part of the book is all about what King considers good writing practices, as well some of the advice that King has received over the years, such as when writing a second draft, subtract 10% from the original. He even goes into the details of good grammar and repeatedly refers to Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. He finishes off this section by showing a section of a first draft he wrote, and then the edited second draft of it to give the reader an idea of how to approach the editing process.
A final section in the book goes into the details of when King was hit and nearly killed by a "blue van" and the effect that it had on his life and his writing. The accident actually occurs before he begins the second part of this book, giving the manuscript the possibility of never being completed. This was probably the most intriguing part of the book for me, as he was able to remember in vivid detail what happened to him, and yet he seemed to be oddly emotionally-detached from its long-term consequences for his life. There is only one short paragraph in which I actually pick up on some emotion, when he discusses how quickly the driver of the blue van will likely be returning to the road. At one point he also made the observation that the driver could have stepped from the pages of one of his novels. What I do love is that his passion for writing helped him to overcome his injuries and regenerate that need to keep putting words to the page.