Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) in Movies
Feb 13, 2019
Great Mystery
A strange mystery unfolds at a seedy motel that resides on the border of California and Nevada.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The cinematics of Bad Times At the El Royale are both vibrant and dark at the same time. The El Royale hotel itself is captured in a nostalgic sense where you get the feel that it’s full of history and not all good history either. There is a seedy undertone that’s unshakeable throughout. I love how director Drew Goddard plays with different elements like rain and close spaces. The two-way mirror scenes definitely increase the intensity of the film. There is so much to appreciate here, I will probably have to watch this again to get the full grasp.
Conflict: 7
While the film definitely could have used more action, the scenes that do exist are pretty solid. It leaves you guessing as you have no idea how things are going to play out. Who will die next? Will this person find what they’re looking for? The conflict is not always driven through direct action, but tension as well. There is one scene in particular involving Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, and Dakota Johnson that is easily my favorite in the entire movie.
Genre: 9
The characters really contribute in making this a strong mystery. Most times, it’s hard to tell up from down and you get just a little bit closer as you learn the backstory of each of the motel residents. From beginning to end, you wonder how things will ultimately play out amongst the group. Clever twists and turns along the way help to give the film life.
Memorability: 8
Never quite seen anything like it which makes Bad Times memorable in and of itself. It all goes back to the one scene I mentioned above, a scene that paralyzed me and had me on the edge of my seat. It was masterfully crafted and I can think of about three other scenes (at least) that come almost as close. Much discussion was had on the drive home.
Pace: 7
Although the twists keep things interesting the movie does get slow in some spots. It’s almost like it’s lulling you to sleep before picking up the pace yet again, like a car shifting gears. Some may have balked at the singing interludes, but I welcomed them. Erivo’s voice is captivating and heartwarming.
Plot: 10
Great storytelling here filled with intrigue and misdirection. From beginning to end, I felt pretty entertained for the most part. Watching everything unfold and all the stories collide was a definite treat.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 91
Great beginning that hooks you immediately. A shady cast of characters. Solid performances from the likes of Bridges and Chris Hemsworth. Solid ending. Bad Times At the El Royale is an awesome movie that is well worth your time.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The cinematics of Bad Times At the El Royale are both vibrant and dark at the same time. The El Royale hotel itself is captured in a nostalgic sense where you get the feel that it’s full of history and not all good history either. There is a seedy undertone that’s unshakeable throughout. I love how director Drew Goddard plays with different elements like rain and close spaces. The two-way mirror scenes definitely increase the intensity of the film. There is so much to appreciate here, I will probably have to watch this again to get the full grasp.
Conflict: 7
While the film definitely could have used more action, the scenes that do exist are pretty solid. It leaves you guessing as you have no idea how things are going to play out. Who will die next? Will this person find what they’re looking for? The conflict is not always driven through direct action, but tension as well. There is one scene in particular involving Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, and Dakota Johnson that is easily my favorite in the entire movie.
Genre: 9
The characters really contribute in making this a strong mystery. Most times, it’s hard to tell up from down and you get just a little bit closer as you learn the backstory of each of the motel residents. From beginning to end, you wonder how things will ultimately play out amongst the group. Clever twists and turns along the way help to give the film life.
Memorability: 8
Never quite seen anything like it which makes Bad Times memorable in and of itself. It all goes back to the one scene I mentioned above, a scene that paralyzed me and had me on the edge of my seat. It was masterfully crafted and I can think of about three other scenes (at least) that come almost as close. Much discussion was had on the drive home.
Pace: 7
Although the twists keep things interesting the movie does get slow in some spots. It’s almost like it’s lulling you to sleep before picking up the pace yet again, like a car shifting gears. Some may have balked at the singing interludes, but I welcomed them. Erivo’s voice is captivating and heartwarming.
Plot: 10
Great storytelling here filled with intrigue and misdirection. From beginning to end, I felt pretty entertained for the most part. Watching everything unfold and all the stories collide was a definite treat.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 91
Great beginning that hooks you immediately. A shady cast of characters. Solid performances from the likes of Bridges and Chris Hemsworth. Solid ending. Bad Times At the El Royale is an awesome movie that is well worth your time.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Halloween II (2009) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Michael Myers has returned, again! But this time it’s personal. Halloween II is the brainchild of Rob Zombie who directed the remake of the 1978 John Carpenter original.
However, in this, the first sequel of the rebooted slasher series, Zombie has been able to splash his creative wisdom all over the celluloid with somewhat successful results. Unfortunately, in some parts, the phrase somewhat successful seems even more appropriate.
By now, we all know that having Sheri Moon in a Rob Zombie film is a given, but her role here is perhaps slightly too implausible for even the most hardened fans to appreciate, playing what seems like a schizophrenic Michael’s dead mother. Unfortunately, the idea, whilst being excellent at the pre-production stages of the movie, is badly executed on screen and what we’re left with, is a mess of a storyline that doesn’t ever know which way it is going; supernatural thriller one-minute and slasher flick the next.
Regrettably, Zombie has made some horrific choices concerning Michael’s character. Of course we have to give him credit for taking on a Halloween sequel without any prior experience. The inexperience shows in Michael, who has been turned into a Jason Voorhees rip off; grunting as he kills and not using the typical kitchen knife as the primary weapon. Here, Zombie also decides to remove Michael’s iconic mask, which should in theory become an iconic cinema moment; unfortunately it does not and is forgotten in a mass of blood and gore.
Negativity aside, the story is pretty much the same as last time around, though Zombie has focused in on Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor Compton) and the way her character changes from the events of Halloween night. As with giving the characters a back-story in the 2007 Halloween, this storyline change really does work and gives the film something which isn’t usually necessary for the horror genre; depth.
The acting is surprisingly superb; Compton is much better this time around and really brings a whole new grungy side to her character and most of the other returning characters are given much more room to grown and develop, probably due to the film’s long running time. On the other hand, Malcolm McDowell’s portrayal of the iconic Sam Loomis has been shoddily remastered into a greedy, fame-obsessed man whose objectives are simply to make as much money as possible. This doesn’t suit the role and leaves the usually excellent McDowell wanting.
Overall, Halloween II is a decent stab at recreating the old franchise; Zombie has made it work on so many levels and it certainly moves the game on. Unfortunately, he has tried to pack too many elements into the film and the pay off for that is a messy looking cinema encounter. Enjoyable as a film, yes, but the jury is still out on whether this deserves a spot on the Halloween collector’s shelf.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/19/halloween-ii-2009/
However, in this, the first sequel of the rebooted slasher series, Zombie has been able to splash his creative wisdom all over the celluloid with somewhat successful results. Unfortunately, in some parts, the phrase somewhat successful seems even more appropriate.
By now, we all know that having Sheri Moon in a Rob Zombie film is a given, but her role here is perhaps slightly too implausible for even the most hardened fans to appreciate, playing what seems like a schizophrenic Michael’s dead mother. Unfortunately, the idea, whilst being excellent at the pre-production stages of the movie, is badly executed on screen and what we’re left with, is a mess of a storyline that doesn’t ever know which way it is going; supernatural thriller one-minute and slasher flick the next.
Regrettably, Zombie has made some horrific choices concerning Michael’s character. Of course we have to give him credit for taking on a Halloween sequel without any prior experience. The inexperience shows in Michael, who has been turned into a Jason Voorhees rip off; grunting as he kills and not using the typical kitchen knife as the primary weapon. Here, Zombie also decides to remove Michael’s iconic mask, which should in theory become an iconic cinema moment; unfortunately it does not and is forgotten in a mass of blood and gore.
Negativity aside, the story is pretty much the same as last time around, though Zombie has focused in on Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor Compton) and the way her character changes from the events of Halloween night. As with giving the characters a back-story in the 2007 Halloween, this storyline change really does work and gives the film something which isn’t usually necessary for the horror genre; depth.
The acting is surprisingly superb; Compton is much better this time around and really brings a whole new grungy side to her character and most of the other returning characters are given much more room to grown and develop, probably due to the film’s long running time. On the other hand, Malcolm McDowell’s portrayal of the iconic Sam Loomis has been shoddily remastered into a greedy, fame-obsessed man whose objectives are simply to make as much money as possible. This doesn’t suit the role and leaves the usually excellent McDowell wanting.
Overall, Halloween II is a decent stab at recreating the old franchise; Zombie has made it work on so many levels and it certainly moves the game on. Unfortunately, he has tried to pack too many elements into the film and the pay off for that is a messy looking cinema encounter. Enjoyable as a film, yes, but the jury is still out on whether this deserves a spot on the Halloween collector’s shelf.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/19/halloween-ii-2009/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
An absolute snooze
Here comes yet another superhero film. Ending Marvel’s year that has included the charming Big Hero 6, the overstuffed Avengers: Age of Ultron and the surprisingly excellent Ant-Man, the Fox produced Fantastic Four reboot has a tough job trying to get audiences to forget the horror that came before it.
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Big Hero 6 (2014) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Genuinely Moving
The Marvel Studios movie train has been non-stop over the last few years, from Iron Man to The Avengers, it shows no signs of slowing. Now though, a take-over by Disney has ensured both studios enter into rather unknown territory.
The first film from this collaboration is Big Hero 6, an animated superhero film in the same vein as Pixar’s The Incredibles. But does it reach those dizzying heights?
Big Hero 6 follows Hiro Hamada, a 14-year-old robotics prodigy as he goes about his life in the fictional city of San Fransokyo alongside his brother Tadashi. Hiro has lost his way after a family tragedy and it takes his brother’s robot Baymax to help find himself again.
The story unfortunately is the film’s weakest link, being predictable at best and downright clichéd at its worst. In this respect, Big Hero 6 falls well short of the standards set by the majority of Pixar’s movies.
Thankfully, the visuals are absolutely stunning, a match for Disney’s best, if not quite up to the level of last year’s How to Train YourBig_Hero_6_Poster_2 Dragon 2. The city of San Fransokyo is beautifully realised in sweeping, gloriously colourful shots that show of the animation best when they’re from above.
The characters themselves are rendered in painstaking detail and in particular sequences it becomes difficult to tell the film apart from a live-action feature.
Vocal performances are also very good. Ryan Potter plays Hiro as a vulnerable, pre-pubescent teen who by the end of the film comes to realise just who he is exceptionally well. James Cromwell, Maya Rudolph and Damon Wayans also lend their recognisable voices to people in the film.
However, by far the stand-out is Baymax, a hilariously funny healthcare robot. Disney’s animators should be given plaudits for crafting a character which despite its lack of facial features and emotive tones is so engaging to watch.
Unfortunately, when Baymax evolves into super-Baymax, his characterisation suffers and the funny, caring nature of him is lost somewhat.
The final third of the film delves into generic superhero fodder, but picks up again just before the end credits role with a deeply emotive.
Big Hero 6 also gets increasingly dark the further into the movie you get, the comedic elements get muddled in a plot which isn’t quite sure which way it wants to go and young children may find it a little to scary to stomach.
Thankfully the negatives here are far outweighed by the positives and Big Hero 6 steamrolls itself into a moving finale which leaves itself open for a sequel nicely.
Overall, from stunning visuals to engaging characters, Big Hero 6 continues Disney’s penchant for creating fun and watchable films. Despite a lack of originality, the character of Baymax makes up for most of the other shortcomings and ensures the generic story is genuinely moving.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/05/genuinely-moving-big-hero-6-review/
The first film from this collaboration is Big Hero 6, an animated superhero film in the same vein as Pixar’s The Incredibles. But does it reach those dizzying heights?
Big Hero 6 follows Hiro Hamada, a 14-year-old robotics prodigy as he goes about his life in the fictional city of San Fransokyo alongside his brother Tadashi. Hiro has lost his way after a family tragedy and it takes his brother’s robot Baymax to help find himself again.
The story unfortunately is the film’s weakest link, being predictable at best and downright clichéd at its worst. In this respect, Big Hero 6 falls well short of the standards set by the majority of Pixar’s movies.
Thankfully, the visuals are absolutely stunning, a match for Disney’s best, if not quite up to the level of last year’s How to Train YourBig_Hero_6_Poster_2 Dragon 2. The city of San Fransokyo is beautifully realised in sweeping, gloriously colourful shots that show of the animation best when they’re from above.
The characters themselves are rendered in painstaking detail and in particular sequences it becomes difficult to tell the film apart from a live-action feature.
Vocal performances are also very good. Ryan Potter plays Hiro as a vulnerable, pre-pubescent teen who by the end of the film comes to realise just who he is exceptionally well. James Cromwell, Maya Rudolph and Damon Wayans also lend their recognisable voices to people in the film.
However, by far the stand-out is Baymax, a hilariously funny healthcare robot. Disney’s animators should be given plaudits for crafting a character which despite its lack of facial features and emotive tones is so engaging to watch.
Unfortunately, when Baymax evolves into super-Baymax, his characterisation suffers and the funny, caring nature of him is lost somewhat.
The final third of the film delves into generic superhero fodder, but picks up again just before the end credits role with a deeply emotive.
Big Hero 6 also gets increasingly dark the further into the movie you get, the comedic elements get muddled in a plot which isn’t quite sure which way it wants to go and young children may find it a little to scary to stomach.
Thankfully the negatives here are far outweighed by the positives and Big Hero 6 steamrolls itself into a moving finale which leaves itself open for a sequel nicely.
Overall, from stunning visuals to engaging characters, Big Hero 6 continues Disney’s penchant for creating fun and watchable films. Despite a lack of originality, the character of Baymax makes up for most of the other shortcomings and ensures the generic story is genuinely moving.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/02/05/genuinely-moving-big-hero-6-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Everest (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
A by the numbers adventure
The 1996 Everest disaster remains one of the greatest true stories to have ever been told. From made-for-TV movies to award-winning documentaries, it appears that audiences simply cannot get enough of this tale of survival.
Now, Universal Pictures ends its record-breaking summer campaign with Everest, a high-budget thriller based on those events in 1996. But does it get the balance between all-out spectacle and human characterisation spot on?
Everest follows the fortunes of two climbing teams planning on making it to the top of the deadly mountain. The Adventure Consultants, led by Rob Hall, and Mountain Madness, guided by Scott Fischer, all make their way to the summit of Everest, battling against horrific storms, avalanches and the mountain itself along the way.
The film features an all-star cast, something not forgotten in its marketing campaign, with the likes of Jason Clarke as Hall, Jake Gyllenhaal as Fischer, Josh Brolin, Keira Knightley, Emily Watson and Sam Worthington all making an appearance as climbers and base-camp attendees.
There’s some great talent here but Everest simply cannot cope with that many characters jostling for screen time and the majority of the cast, bar Clarke, feel like cardboard cut-outs – this is a real shame given the true-story that the writers had to work with.
Knightley in particular is wasted with only ten minutes of screen time and Brolin’s side story is never fully explored to make you remember his character – especially when the onslaught of stormy weather makes it difficult to pick out each person at a glance.
Effects-wise, this is a huge spectacle. The cinematography is absolutely astounding and every shot is filled to the brim with colours, sounds and ragged landscapes – it’s absolutely stunning.
The scenes before the mountaineers start their final climb are particularly beautiful and the summit sequences themselves feel ridiculously real, all culminating in a film that looks and sounds spectacular, but just lacks that human touch needed to make it matter.
Unfortunately, there are no risks here, despite the ones being taken by our intrepid explorers and whilst the true-story elements lend the film some gravitas, everything else feels a little clichéd with a been there, done that attitude.
Naturally, the finale is when the emotional side comes into play with a selection of real video footage and photographs. This ensures that Everest finishes on a thought-provoking and intentionally sombre note. Yes, this is Hollywood at work, but this is not a film to be ‘enjoyed’ in the traditional sense.
Overall, Everest is a fine film with some breath-taking action sequences and top-notch special effects. Unfortunately, despite the fascinating true-story, the human characters don’t register until the final act and this stops it from being as memorable as it should be.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/09/27/a-by-the-numbers-adventure-everest-review/
Now, Universal Pictures ends its record-breaking summer campaign with Everest, a high-budget thriller based on those events in 1996. But does it get the balance between all-out spectacle and human characterisation spot on?
Everest follows the fortunes of two climbing teams planning on making it to the top of the deadly mountain. The Adventure Consultants, led by Rob Hall, and Mountain Madness, guided by Scott Fischer, all make their way to the summit of Everest, battling against horrific storms, avalanches and the mountain itself along the way.
The film features an all-star cast, something not forgotten in its marketing campaign, with the likes of Jason Clarke as Hall, Jake Gyllenhaal as Fischer, Josh Brolin, Keira Knightley, Emily Watson and Sam Worthington all making an appearance as climbers and base-camp attendees.
There’s some great talent here but Everest simply cannot cope with that many characters jostling for screen time and the majority of the cast, bar Clarke, feel like cardboard cut-outs – this is a real shame given the true-story that the writers had to work with.
Knightley in particular is wasted with only ten minutes of screen time and Brolin’s side story is never fully explored to make you remember his character – especially when the onslaught of stormy weather makes it difficult to pick out each person at a glance.
Effects-wise, this is a huge spectacle. The cinematography is absolutely astounding and every shot is filled to the brim with colours, sounds and ragged landscapes – it’s absolutely stunning.
The scenes before the mountaineers start their final climb are particularly beautiful and the summit sequences themselves feel ridiculously real, all culminating in a film that looks and sounds spectacular, but just lacks that human touch needed to make it matter.
Unfortunately, there are no risks here, despite the ones being taken by our intrepid explorers and whilst the true-story elements lend the film some gravitas, everything else feels a little clichéd with a been there, done that attitude.
Naturally, the finale is when the emotional side comes into play with a selection of real video footage and photographs. This ensures that Everest finishes on a thought-provoking and intentionally sombre note. Yes, this is Hollywood at work, but this is not a film to be ‘enjoyed’ in the traditional sense.
Overall, Everest is a fine film with some breath-taking action sequences and top-notch special effects. Unfortunately, despite the fascinating true-story, the human characters don’t register until the final act and this stops it from being as memorable as it should be.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/09/27/a-by-the-numbers-adventure-everest-review/
Kyera (8 KP) rated Frozen (Heart of Dread, #1) in Books
Feb 1, 2018
The story Frozen, by Melissa de la Cruz and Michael Johnston, is a tale about a girl with powers who lives in a world unlike our own. In post-apocalyptic New Vegas, Nat fins the one object that might allow her to escape the frozen landscape. The map to help her find the Blue, a promised land untainted by the cold and destruction her world knows. A place that maybe she can live a good life and not spend each day fearful that she will be discovered.
For an established YA writer, this book is surprisingly wrought with errors and would make an English major cringe. It was a poorly written novel with a multitude of punctuation, grammar, and spelling errors. Those completely detracted from the book and made it difficult to read the novel fluidly. There was an overuse of commas, "For days upon days she had been left in the room, alone, in total silence, with little food and water, the weight of solitude becoming ever more oppressive, the silence a heaviness that she could not shake, punishment for refusing to do as she was told, punishment for being what she was." I ran out of breath just reading that incredibly long, run on sentence. It also illustrates another example, the banal repetitiveness. Some examples would be, "She walked down the road, the road that was smooth." Or "The fire that raged within her. The fire that destroyed and consumed. The fire that would destroy and consume her..." How many times does one need to write the fire? Many of the sentences are just reworded versions of the one that came before it. Unnecessarily repetitive and it makes the book sound like a novice writer threw it together in a slap-dash manner with no editor to speak of.
It also cannot decide what genre it wishes to fall under. The magical elements and new species lend itself to a label of fantasy, like books about faeries or nymphs. Paranormal romance perhaps, for the love story that blossoms over the course of the novel? Or the more recently popular zombie novels, with their diseases and alterations of the human dNA, like Forest of Teeth and Bones? Perhaps its a post-apocalyptic or dystopian style novel, akin to Divergent or the Hunger Games - with its frozen world, scarce resources, and tyrannical governments. Whatever it is, the fact that it cannot decide makes the book quite confusing. It does not flow well as a result of the colliding and conflicting worlds. There also is no world-building, which is incredibly important to me in a book. And character building, or even character personalities? Almost non-existent. I would recommend this book to young teen readers, but not anyone who finds themselves frequently noticing errors in novels (even minor ones)as this will drive you crazy. I almost didn't finish the first chapter because the book was so poorly written, but I wanted to see if it would improve.
For an established YA writer, this book is surprisingly wrought with errors and would make an English major cringe. It was a poorly written novel with a multitude of punctuation, grammar, and spelling errors. Those completely detracted from the book and made it difficult to read the novel fluidly. There was an overuse of commas, "For days upon days she had been left in the room, alone, in total silence, with little food and water, the weight of solitude becoming ever more oppressive, the silence a heaviness that she could not shake, punishment for refusing to do as she was told, punishment for being what she was." I ran out of breath just reading that incredibly long, run on sentence. It also illustrates another example, the banal repetitiveness. Some examples would be, "She walked down the road, the road that was smooth." Or "The fire that raged within her. The fire that destroyed and consumed. The fire that would destroy and consume her..." How many times does one need to write the fire? Many of the sentences are just reworded versions of the one that came before it. Unnecessarily repetitive and it makes the book sound like a novice writer threw it together in a slap-dash manner with no editor to speak of.
It also cannot decide what genre it wishes to fall under. The magical elements and new species lend itself to a label of fantasy, like books about faeries or nymphs. Paranormal romance perhaps, for the love story that blossoms over the course of the novel? Or the more recently popular zombie novels, with their diseases and alterations of the human dNA, like Forest of Teeth and Bones? Perhaps its a post-apocalyptic or dystopian style novel, akin to Divergent or the Hunger Games - with its frozen world, scarce resources, and tyrannical governments. Whatever it is, the fact that it cannot decide makes the book quite confusing. It does not flow well as a result of the colliding and conflicting worlds. There also is no world-building, which is incredibly important to me in a book. And character building, or even character personalities? Almost non-existent. I would recommend this book to young teen readers, but not anyone who finds themselves frequently noticing errors in novels (even minor ones)as this will drive you crazy. I almost didn't finish the first chapter because the book was so poorly written, but I wanted to see if it would improve.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Hold Still in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Maya is an English professor (her specialty is Woolf) dealing with her daughter Ellie's drug addiction and general disinterest with life. The daughter of two college professors, Ellie has never lived up to her familial expectations. Instead, she's drifting, experimenting, and causing her mother great angst. So Maya sends Ellie to Florida, to stay with her friend, Annie and her family: husband Stephen and five-year-old son, Jack. Annie is having her own issues with Jack and looking for some help. But Maya doesn't tell her friend all of Ellie's woes. Then one day, disaster strikes on Ellie's watch, and things will never be the same again. Now, both Ellie and Maya must confront the aftermath of their actions.
This was an interesting book. It's told in chapters that alternate between Ellie's perspective and Maya's; they also alternate in time: before the event and after. The before chapters lead right up to said event. You know generally what has happened, but not how, so it's surprisingly suspenseful for a book that's mainly about emotions and feelings. As such, the novel conveys a stressful tension immediately. It also does an excellent job of delving into the frightening ramifications of becoming a parent. How much do we influence what our kids become? We see Maya--herself so influenced by her own family situation--and then realize her own effects on Ellie. It's startling and humbling.
However, there is a little bit of a "been there, done that" feeling when reading, of experiencing yet another novel of well-off New York parents screwing up their kids. Neither Maya nor Ellie are really likable in any capacity, and while that's not a problem per se, they are harder to relate to than one would think. (Also not likable: her husband. I felt great sympathy for the younger son, Ben.) There were moments I found myself drawn to Maya, but overall, she was too distant and too horrible to really feel any connection to whatsoever. That fact that she's nearly as immature as her daughter was perhaps the point, but I'm not sure it was one I enjoyed or felt was worth making. Also, the plotlines related to Maya's teaching assistant and other friends seem odd and inserted into the story at times.
Still, it was a well-written novel and the somewhat parallel storylines of a lost and drifting mother and daughter were well-done. I'm not sure about the ending, though. In fact, for a good part of the book, I found myself wondering more about Maya's friend, Annie. I think her story might have been one I would have enjoyed more. Overall, the novel certainly makes you feel and the parenting elements resonate. But will it stay with me? I don't think so.
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley (thank you!); it is available for U.S. publication on 3/21/16. You can check out a review of this novel and many others on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
This was an interesting book. It's told in chapters that alternate between Ellie's perspective and Maya's; they also alternate in time: before the event and after. The before chapters lead right up to said event. You know generally what has happened, but not how, so it's surprisingly suspenseful for a book that's mainly about emotions and feelings. As such, the novel conveys a stressful tension immediately. It also does an excellent job of delving into the frightening ramifications of becoming a parent. How much do we influence what our kids become? We see Maya--herself so influenced by her own family situation--and then realize her own effects on Ellie. It's startling and humbling.
However, there is a little bit of a "been there, done that" feeling when reading, of experiencing yet another novel of well-off New York parents screwing up their kids. Neither Maya nor Ellie are really likable in any capacity, and while that's not a problem per se, they are harder to relate to than one would think. (Also not likable: her husband. I felt great sympathy for the younger son, Ben.) There were moments I found myself drawn to Maya, but overall, she was too distant and too horrible to really feel any connection to whatsoever. That fact that she's nearly as immature as her daughter was perhaps the point, but I'm not sure it was one I enjoyed or felt was worth making. Also, the plotlines related to Maya's teaching assistant and other friends seem odd and inserted into the story at times.
Still, it was a well-written novel and the somewhat parallel storylines of a lost and drifting mother and daughter were well-done. I'm not sure about the ending, though. In fact, for a good part of the book, I found myself wondering more about Maya's friend, Annie. I think her story might have been one I would have enjoyed more. Overall, the novel certainly makes you feel and the parenting elements resonate. But will it stay with me? I don't think so.
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley (thank you!); it is available for U.S. publication on 3/21/16. You can check out a review of this novel and many others on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Unravelling Oliver in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Why must I be disappointed by books I’m so eager to read? I didn’t end up loving this novel as much as I would have liked to, but I didn’t exactly hate it.
This novel started strong. It’s first line, “I expected more of a reaction the first time I hit her“, is brutal and shocking, it lures you in in an instant. What I expected to follow was a taut, heart racing novel about why such a “loving husband” would beat his wife into a coma. And, I guess I got the “why” bit, but I didn’t get the taut, heart racing bit. It was snail pace and didn’t really get exciting until the very end.
I saw another reviewer talk about the lack of character in the characters in the novel and she’s right. Considering this whole book was a character study, the people we got to study weren’t that special. I was most interested in Veronique so I was glad she had a good few chapters to herself, but I wasn’t particularly interested in reading about what other people thought of Oliver. Even Oliver’s own chapters could get irritating.
I can’t fault the writing in this one. For a debut, it’s really good! If you connected with the characters, the writing could definitely put you in their shoes and make you feel exactly how they felt, but because I didn’t connect with anyone, I didn’t get that pleasure. All I know is that the descriptions were realistic and insightful.
Obviously the plot for this one was what interested me and it sounded like a great story. Unfortunately it was too slow in revealing it’s secrets to keep my interest high, and so I began losing interest about the halfway mark. This was a short book but it felt long. I know we were supposed to get to know Oliver and all his troubles and worries in life, but it all felt like waffle. There were no definitive markers in this book to signify any sort of middle event that would lead us to the end event and so until the plot finally revealed itself this felt like one long biography of Oliver, with not a lot going on.
To give this novel credit, elements of the plot and the reveal are very unique to other books I’ve read. And I read a lot of this kinds of books. I suppose you could say the “why” in this book isn’t as dark as you would originally think. It’s almost trivial, I guess.
I sound a bit negative in this review but that’s just because I was so excited about reading it in the first place. In the end, a 3 star rating isn’t the worst thing ever, it’s just not great.
<i>Thank you so much to Ali @The Sunday Feeling for sending me your copy to read!</i>
This novel started strong. It’s first line, “I expected more of a reaction the first time I hit her“, is brutal and shocking, it lures you in in an instant. What I expected to follow was a taut, heart racing novel about why such a “loving husband” would beat his wife into a coma. And, I guess I got the “why” bit, but I didn’t get the taut, heart racing bit. It was snail pace and didn’t really get exciting until the very end.
I saw another reviewer talk about the lack of character in the characters in the novel and she’s right. Considering this whole book was a character study, the people we got to study weren’t that special. I was most interested in Veronique so I was glad she had a good few chapters to herself, but I wasn’t particularly interested in reading about what other people thought of Oliver. Even Oliver’s own chapters could get irritating.
I can’t fault the writing in this one. For a debut, it’s really good! If you connected with the characters, the writing could definitely put you in their shoes and make you feel exactly how they felt, but because I didn’t connect with anyone, I didn’t get that pleasure. All I know is that the descriptions were realistic and insightful.
Obviously the plot for this one was what interested me and it sounded like a great story. Unfortunately it was too slow in revealing it’s secrets to keep my interest high, and so I began losing interest about the halfway mark. This was a short book but it felt long. I know we were supposed to get to know Oliver and all his troubles and worries in life, but it all felt like waffle. There were no definitive markers in this book to signify any sort of middle event that would lead us to the end event and so until the plot finally revealed itself this felt like one long biography of Oliver, with not a lot going on.
To give this novel credit, elements of the plot and the reveal are very unique to other books I’ve read. And I read a lot of this kinds of books. I suppose you could say the “why” in this book isn’t as dark as you would originally think. It’s almost trivial, I guess.
I sound a bit negative in this review but that’s just because I was so excited about reading it in the first place. In the end, a 3 star rating isn’t the worst thing ever, it’s just not great.
<i>Thank you so much to Ali @The Sunday Feeling for sending me your copy to read!</i>
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) in Movies
Oct 6, 2018
Still the "Fairest of Them All"
It's always a fear of mine when I go back to visit a beloved film of mine - especially a film that was beloved to me in my childhood. Will it hold up? Is it as good as I remember it? Will the re-visitation tarnish the precious memory of this film that I have?
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
Carma (21 KP) rated Cowboy SEAL Christmas (Navy SEAL Cowboys, #3) in Books
Jun 17, 2019
Love and a Llama, how can a book get any better than this?! Cowboy Seal Christmas is the 3rd book in the Navy Seal Cowboy series (a sort of spin off of Helms Big Sky Cowboy series). I have not read the first 2 books in this series (time constraints and a overwhelming TBR pile but I did read all the books in the Big Sky Cowboy series). This book has all the elements I loved from those books and more. Nicole Helm has a way of getting you right into the moment as if you were standing right there alongside the characters. 5/5 for Grouchy Gabe!!!
Gabe Cortez is a grouchy, ex Navy SEAL who hates Christmas. He hates most things actually and is more than happy to tell you how much it all sucks. He had a horrible childhood that led to him entering the military and losing a good friend in one horrifying instance. He comes to Revival ranch with his 2 friends, Jack and Alex, to help start a new program for injured military servicemen and women to get back on their feet. Jack and Alex both find love (spoiler for the first 2 books haha) and he is once again the odd man out. Then he meets the new ranch therapist Monica Finley and hope starts to rise in him again.
Monica Finley is looking forward to working with all the men and women headed to Revival Ranch for therapy and help getting back to civilian life. Growing up with a Marine father suffering from PTSD has helped her understand some of the struggles men and women face upon returning home. She has a 10 year old son named Colin, with her late Air Force husband Dex, who is her entire world. She protects him, well overprotects, as well as she can as a single mother and is hoping the closeness of the ranch will help them all start a new life. Gabe has been the only one to deny needing therapy and keeps his distance from her both literally and figuratively. She has to find a way to crack his shell. Can Gabe help her understand not only his struggles but some of her own struggles since her husband died?
This story flows really well from start to finish. I was able to get a great idea of where Monica and Gabe are in their lives as well as some past situations that have molded their current state of mind. Throw in great friends (who meddle), a Montana snowstorm, being snowed in for days without heat (snuggle alert), past secrets, daily questions (1 for her, 2 for him) and a llama and you have pretty much the perfect love story. Nicole Helm once again draws me into her cowboy world and makes me sad to leave when the story ends.
Gabe Cortez is a grouchy, ex Navy SEAL who hates Christmas. He hates most things actually and is more than happy to tell you how much it all sucks. He had a horrible childhood that led to him entering the military and losing a good friend in one horrifying instance. He comes to Revival ranch with his 2 friends, Jack and Alex, to help start a new program for injured military servicemen and women to get back on their feet. Jack and Alex both find love (spoiler for the first 2 books haha) and he is once again the odd man out. Then he meets the new ranch therapist Monica Finley and hope starts to rise in him again.
Monica Finley is looking forward to working with all the men and women headed to Revival Ranch for therapy and help getting back to civilian life. Growing up with a Marine father suffering from PTSD has helped her understand some of the struggles men and women face upon returning home. She has a 10 year old son named Colin, with her late Air Force husband Dex, who is her entire world. She protects him, well overprotects, as well as she can as a single mother and is hoping the closeness of the ranch will help them all start a new life. Gabe has been the only one to deny needing therapy and keeps his distance from her both literally and figuratively. She has to find a way to crack his shell. Can Gabe help her understand not only his struggles but some of her own struggles since her husband died?
This story flows really well from start to finish. I was able to get a great idea of where Monica and Gabe are in their lives as well as some past situations that have molded their current state of mind. Throw in great friends (who meddle), a Montana snowstorm, being snowed in for days without heat (snuggle alert), past secrets, daily questions (1 for her, 2 for him) and a llama and you have pretty much the perfect love story. Nicole Helm once again draws me into her cowboy world and makes me sad to leave when the story ends.