Search
Search results
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Insurgent in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Original Review posted on <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2013/01/review-insurgent-by-veronica-roth.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>.
YAYYYYY. Le Book Club decided to go straight to Insurgent after reading Divergent. Of course, I probably would've read it right before the book came out so I wouldn't be all "anticipation is killing me!!!" But a bookworm never runs out of books to read, so I'll just sit back, chillax and wait. And wait. And wait. Until the 3rd and final book finally comes out at last so I can beg my mom to go to the bookstore JUST so I can buy it. (I can always wait for the library though.) I mean, come on. Drastic cliff-hanger there. It's agonizing. Too agonizing.
There are lots of shocking secrets here too. For one thing, WHY, CALEB, WHY?!?!?! I'm not even gonna say what he did for those who haven't read it. I just thought I was walking on my bedroom ceiling for a few minutes there when I read it. Of course... I wasn't. Or I would see clothes littering the ceiling and whatever's on the floor (not necessarily clothes). Oh, and Peter. Wow. Just wow. -_- But hey, without that, who knows what would've happened? But I am glad to say there are some peeps that are well, good riddance to them.
I didn't get what the title really meant at first. It didn't even make sense, in my opinion. Until later. Until it was explained (kinda). But oy, what a way to end. Totally unexpected. As much as I'm a bit exhausted with Dystopian Fiction (believe me, there are probably a lot that are lurking on my Kindle App and I have no clue about. Or do I?), I'll say Insurgent was a delightful read. On the overall end, I kinda liked Divergent more. By no means of bashing whatsoever, it was more... unique from The Hunger Games (I guess that applies to all first books in a series), in the means of corrupted government.
But what can I say? Perks to Veronica Roth for creating a unique world with it's own unique parts. :3
And now, I have to wait. And wait. And wait. For a few months. Or is it? *checks date on Goodreads* Oh facepalm. More than a few months. Oh wait, it comes out 10 days after I'm 16! Hey, when's the choosing ceremony for us? :p
YAYYYYY. Le Book Club decided to go straight to Insurgent after reading Divergent. Of course, I probably would've read it right before the book came out so I wouldn't be all "anticipation is killing me!!!" But a bookworm never runs out of books to read, so I'll just sit back, chillax and wait. And wait. And wait. Until the 3rd and final book finally comes out at last so I can beg my mom to go to the bookstore JUST so I can buy it. (I can always wait for the library though.) I mean, come on. Drastic cliff-hanger there. It's agonizing. Too agonizing.
There are lots of shocking secrets here too. For one thing, WHY, CALEB, WHY?!?!?! I'm not even gonna say what he did for those who haven't read it. I just thought I was walking on my bedroom ceiling for a few minutes there when I read it. Of course... I wasn't. Or I would see clothes littering the ceiling and whatever's on the floor (not necessarily clothes). Oh, and Peter. Wow. Just wow. -_- But hey, without that, who knows what would've happened? But I am glad to say there are some peeps that are well, good riddance to them.
I didn't get what the title really meant at first. It didn't even make sense, in my opinion. Until later. Until it was explained (kinda). But oy, what a way to end. Totally unexpected. As much as I'm a bit exhausted with Dystopian Fiction (believe me, there are probably a lot that are lurking on my Kindle App and I have no clue about. Or do I?), I'll say Insurgent was a delightful read. On the overall end, I kinda liked Divergent more. By no means of bashing whatsoever, it was more... unique from The Hunger Games (I guess that applies to all first books in a series), in the means of corrupted government.
But what can I say? Perks to Veronica Roth for creating a unique world with it's own unique parts. :3
And now, I have to wait. And wait. And wait. For a few months. Or is it? *checks date on Goodreads* Oh facepalm. More than a few months. Oh wait, it comes out 10 days after I'm 16! Hey, when's the choosing ceremony for us? :p
Hazel (1853 KP) rated How Not to Fall in Love, Actually: A Laugh-Out-Loud Romantic Comedy in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
“Life, as any chancer knows, is 10% planning, 10% design and 80% totally winging it …” and Catherine Bennetto’s debut novel <i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> provides a perfect example. The protagonist, Emma George, does not have the most stable of lives: a job she is not that great at, a disappointing boyfriend, and not much hope for the future. Clinging on to dreams of working in the film industry in New York, Emma plods on in her frustrating London job, however, things are due to get a lot worse.
A quick succession of events leaves Emma boyfriend-less, homeless, penniless, grandmother-less, and, to top it off, pregnant. Although letting off a woe-is-me aura, Emma does not realise how fortunate she is. A series of serendipitous incidents, a fashion-obsessed mother, and a sister on the other side of the world make Emma’s life more bearable. Moving into her late grandmother’s Wimbledon cottage and acquiring a handsome lodger, with a loving family just around the corner, Emma’s life has the potential to be happier than it has ever been before – if only she could see that.
<i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> (a title presumably inspired by the film Love Actually) is a typical British romantic comedy that provides light-hearted relief with its jovial narrative. Full of eccentric characters – a foul-mouthed four-year-old, a felony-obsessed octogenarian, and a harried mother of four – this novel is certain to entertain, although whether it deserves the “laugh-out-loud” status it promises is questionable (but then I am more of a laugh-inside type of reader).
One of the best things about this book – and many British chick-lit – is the authenticity of the characters and settings. Although a few of the scenarios may be toward the extreme end of the scale, none of the occurrences are too far-fetched, and all the characters are relatable in some way, despite their idiosyncrasies.
Personally, I tend to avoid chick-lit, finding them rather lowbrow and written for the sake of writing. Books that have love or sexual encounters as their key theme are not something I enjoy. Therefore, I was pleasantly surprised when <i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> exceeded these rather low expectations. Admittedly, there are one too many sexual references and far too much swearing, particularly from a four-year-old character – although that does add to the overall humour - but the general storyline was enjoyable. Despite the title hinting at a love-focused story, there were so many other elements to the plot, resulting in a much more interesting novel.
<i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> is obviously targeted at women, but can be enjoyed by adults of all ages. Those in their twenties and thirties may be able to relate to the struggles Emma is dealing with, whereas older generations may be able to reminisce about their past dilemmas. Whatever the reader’s situation, this book brings laughter, relaxation and the realisation that life is not so bad.
“Life, as any chancer knows, is 10% planning, 10% design and 80% totally winging it …” and Catherine Bennetto’s debut novel <i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> provides a perfect example. The protagonist, Emma George, does not have the most stable of lives: a job she is not that great at, a disappointing boyfriend, and not much hope for the future. Clinging on to dreams of working in the film industry in New York, Emma plods on in her frustrating London job, however, things are due to get a lot worse.
A quick succession of events leaves Emma boyfriend-less, homeless, penniless, grandmother-less, and, to top it off, pregnant. Although letting off a woe-is-me aura, Emma does not realise how fortunate she is. A series of serendipitous incidents, a fashion-obsessed mother, and a sister on the other side of the world make Emma’s life more bearable. Moving into her late grandmother’s Wimbledon cottage and acquiring a handsome lodger, with a loving family just around the corner, Emma’s life has the potential to be happier than it has ever been before – if only she could see that.
<i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> (a title presumably inspired by the film Love Actually) is a typical British romantic comedy that provides light-hearted relief with its jovial narrative. Full of eccentric characters – a foul-mouthed four-year-old, a felony-obsessed octogenarian, and a harried mother of four – this novel is certain to entertain, although whether it deserves the “laugh-out-loud” status it promises is questionable (but then I am more of a laugh-inside type of reader).
One of the best things about this book – and many British chick-lit – is the authenticity of the characters and settings. Although a few of the scenarios may be toward the extreme end of the scale, none of the occurrences are too far-fetched, and all the characters are relatable in some way, despite their idiosyncrasies.
Personally, I tend to avoid chick-lit, finding them rather lowbrow and written for the sake of writing. Books that have love or sexual encounters as their key theme are not something I enjoy. Therefore, I was pleasantly surprised when <i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> exceeded these rather low expectations. Admittedly, there are one too many sexual references and far too much swearing, particularly from a four-year-old character – although that does add to the overall humour - but the general storyline was enjoyable. Despite the title hinting at a love-focused story, there were so many other elements to the plot, resulting in a much more interesting novel.
<i>How Not to Fall in Love, Actually</i> is obviously targeted at women, but can be enjoyed by adults of all ages. Those in their twenties and thirties may be able to relate to the struggles Emma is dealing with, whereas older generations may be able to reminisce about their past dilemmas. Whatever the reader’s situation, this book brings laughter, relaxation and the realisation that life is not so bad.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Good Liar (2019) in Movies
Nov 20, 2019
Mirren and McKellen are acting in 2 different movies
In a time where large comic-book, CGI-infused monster fests are all the rage in the Cineplex, it is a welcome relief to find a cleverly written, acting-rich mystery story featuring two world class actors of "a certain age", defying the odds to make a memorable motion picture.
And...they almost succeeded.
Written by Twin Cities native Jeffrey Hatcher, THE GOOD LIAR tells the tale of a...well...good liar played by Ian McKEllen. His con-man, Roy Courtney, is a roguish scamp, bilking crooks and ne'er do wells out of their money. He then sets his sights on rich Widow Betty McLeish (Helen Mirren) and her millions of dollars.
We spend the first 3/4 of this film following Roy - and his con-man ways - and it is a pleasure to spend that time under the twinkling eyes of Sir Ian McKellen. He plays Roy with a bit of a light touch, driving down into the dirty work whenever he needs to, but spending most of his time outsmarting his opponents with a sly grin, a wry comment and a light step. He cares not for his marks, that is...until he meets Betty. And Mirren and McKellen have the ability to play off each other very well and this would have been a more effective film if both of them were acting in the same sort of film.
For, you see, McKellen is playing in a bit of light drama, landing his acting chops in a style reminiscent of con-man films like THE STING and NOW YOU SEE ME. Mirren, however, (who takes over the last 1/4 of the film) seems to be performing in a heavy drama like SOPHIE'S CHOICE or THE FRENCH LIEUTENANT'S WOMAN and I think it was the tone that each of these actors brought to their roles that drove both of these fine actors to this project.
Unfortunately, the dichotomy of the different acting styles, mood and tone ultimately derails this film and brings it down a peg from the austere heights it aspires to be.
I place the blame on Director Bill Condon (Mr. Holmes) who had two very good actors - and an interesting story - and just couldn't find the correct balance point for these actors, and this story. He also is not helped by Hatcher's script which really takes a dark turn (darker than is necessary for the story) that is a bit jarring. If this film wanted to be heavy and dark, then it shouldn't have been so light and fun at the beginning - and Sir Ian's performance needed to be heavier and darker at the beginning. Or it needed to "lighten up a bit" at the end and push Mirren's performance out of the darkness and a bit more into the light.
All-in-all it's a fine, throwback. A two actor film that is in short supplies these days - so well worth seeing. Though I will always pine for what could have been had the tone been evened out between these two veteran performers.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And...they almost succeeded.
Written by Twin Cities native Jeffrey Hatcher, THE GOOD LIAR tells the tale of a...well...good liar played by Ian McKEllen. His con-man, Roy Courtney, is a roguish scamp, bilking crooks and ne'er do wells out of their money. He then sets his sights on rich Widow Betty McLeish (Helen Mirren) and her millions of dollars.
We spend the first 3/4 of this film following Roy - and his con-man ways - and it is a pleasure to spend that time under the twinkling eyes of Sir Ian McKellen. He plays Roy with a bit of a light touch, driving down into the dirty work whenever he needs to, but spending most of his time outsmarting his opponents with a sly grin, a wry comment and a light step. He cares not for his marks, that is...until he meets Betty. And Mirren and McKellen have the ability to play off each other very well and this would have been a more effective film if both of them were acting in the same sort of film.
For, you see, McKellen is playing in a bit of light drama, landing his acting chops in a style reminiscent of con-man films like THE STING and NOW YOU SEE ME. Mirren, however, (who takes over the last 1/4 of the film) seems to be performing in a heavy drama like SOPHIE'S CHOICE or THE FRENCH LIEUTENANT'S WOMAN and I think it was the tone that each of these actors brought to their roles that drove both of these fine actors to this project.
Unfortunately, the dichotomy of the different acting styles, mood and tone ultimately derails this film and brings it down a peg from the austere heights it aspires to be.
I place the blame on Director Bill Condon (Mr. Holmes) who had two very good actors - and an interesting story - and just couldn't find the correct balance point for these actors, and this story. He also is not helped by Hatcher's script which really takes a dark turn (darker than is necessary for the story) that is a bit jarring. If this film wanted to be heavy and dark, then it shouldn't have been so light and fun at the beginning - and Sir Ian's performance needed to be heavier and darker at the beginning. Or it needed to "lighten up a bit" at the end and push Mirren's performance out of the darkness and a bit more into the light.
All-in-all it's a fine, throwback. A two actor film that is in short supplies these days - so well worth seeing. Though I will always pine for what could have been had the tone been evened out between these two veteran performers.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Snow like Ashes in Books
Oct 9, 2018
The world-building in this book is fascinating. At first, it seems like yet another YA novel about displaced royals trying to win back their kingdom, but this royal is in much more dire straits than most. Meira is a refugee living on the run with seven others, one of them her rightful King. All the rest of their people have been enslaved by the conquering country, and their kingdom's link to the magic inherent in the land has been broken.
A little backdrop is needed. In Meira's land, there are eight countries. The Rhythm countries, where seasons proceed as normal, and the Seasons - 4 countries locked in one season each. The rulers of each country have a magic conduit that lets them feed magic to their people - but the conduits are gender-locked. In four of the countries, only women can use the conduit; in the other four, only men. Meira and her little band are all that's left of the free people of Winter. Spring invaded sixteen years ago, killed Winter's queen, broke the locket that was their magic conduit (each ruler has one) and enslaved their people. Because the queen only had a son, he can't wield Winter's magic anyway. They're still trying to find the two pieces of the locket so when he has a daughter, she can wield it. You'd think at this point, since he's of age, he should be trying to get as many women pregnant as possible to up the odds of getting a royal heir who can wield the magic, but that...doesn't come up.
The book does delve into the country's people being oppressed, used as slaves, and being incredibly abused by the conquering country, and this is where I ran into a quandary. The Season's people reflect their countries: Autumn's people have copper skin, Spring's citizens are blond-haired and green-eyed - and Winter's people are white. Pale skin, snow-white hair, blue eyes. Writing white people as the oppressed people just rubs me the wrong way. (In that false "help I'm being oppressed because other people want equal rights!" kind of way.) Yes, this is fantasy, yes, it has nothing to do with our world's politics - but it bothers me. It's at least not white-savioring, as Meira's trying to save her own people, but I don't know. Is it better or worse to write white people as the oppressed protagonists?
That question aside, this was a well-written novel of fighting against an oppressor. There is definitely still work to be done at the end of the book, and there are two more books, as well as two short stories. While I am a little curious what ultimately happens, I don't know if the series has earned more time on my reading list.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
A little backdrop is needed. In Meira's land, there are eight countries. The Rhythm countries, where seasons proceed as normal, and the Seasons - 4 countries locked in one season each. The rulers of each country have a magic conduit that lets them feed magic to their people - but the conduits are gender-locked. In four of the countries, only women can use the conduit; in the other four, only men. Meira and her little band are all that's left of the free people of Winter. Spring invaded sixteen years ago, killed Winter's queen, broke the locket that was their magic conduit (each ruler has one) and enslaved their people. Because the queen only had a son, he can't wield Winter's magic anyway. They're still trying to find the two pieces of the locket so when he has a daughter, she can wield it. You'd think at this point, since he's of age, he should be trying to get as many women pregnant as possible to up the odds of getting a royal heir who can wield the magic, but that...doesn't come up.
The book does delve into the country's people being oppressed, used as slaves, and being incredibly abused by the conquering country, and this is where I ran into a quandary. The Season's people reflect their countries: Autumn's people have copper skin, Spring's citizens are blond-haired and green-eyed - and Winter's people are white. Pale skin, snow-white hair, blue eyes. Writing white people as the oppressed people just rubs me the wrong way. (In that false "help I'm being oppressed because other people want equal rights!" kind of way.) Yes, this is fantasy, yes, it has nothing to do with our world's politics - but it bothers me. It's at least not white-savioring, as Meira's trying to save her own people, but I don't know. Is it better or worse to write white people as the oppressed protagonists?
That question aside, this was a well-written novel of fighting against an oppressor. There is definitely still work to be done at the end of the book, and there are two more books, as well as two short stories. While I am a little curious what ultimately happens, I don't know if the series has earned more time on my reading list.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Natasha Khan recommended Bad by Michael Jackson in Music (curated)
A Spoonful of Sugar
Book
'They say you can never truly love a child that is not your own, but that goes against every...
Lucky Seven: 7-Minute Workout Challenge Musical Interval Timer with RunKeeper Integration & more
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
7 minutes to spare? That’s enough for a workout! LuckySeven is the best way to enjoy the...
Gangstar Rio: City of Saints
Games and Entertainment
App
The acclaimed Gangstar series is back on iPhone and iPad to offer you a whole new place to have...
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated When You Disappeared in Books
Sep 16, 2022
167 of 230
Kindle
When you Disappeared
By John Marrs
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
All she wanted was the truth, but she’ll wish she never found out.
When Catherine wakes up alone one morning, she thinks her husband has gone for a run before work. But Simon never makes it to the office. His running shoes are by the front door. Nothing is missing—except him.
Catherine knows Simon must be in trouble. He wouldn’t just leave her. He wouldn’t leave the children.
But Simon knows the truth—about why he left and what he’s done. He knows things about his marriage that it would kill Catherine to find out. The memories she holds onto are lies.
While Catherine faces a dark new reality at home, Simon’s halfway around the world, alive and thriving. He’s doing whatever it takes to stay one step ahead of the truth.
But he can’t hide forever, and when he reappears twenty-five years later, Catherine will finally learn who he is.
And wish she’d stayed in the dark.
Holy crap that was a bit good! It was so different to what I thought it was going to be. I couldn’t put it down the characters drew you in. Who’d have thought one simple lack of communication in a perfectly happy relationship would cause so much destruction. I don’t think I’d have been able to stop where Catherine did at the end! Also do you have after hearing an authors voice automatically hear it when read their work? Nope? Just me than kinda weird 😂.
Kindle
When you Disappeared
By John Marrs
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
All she wanted was the truth, but she’ll wish she never found out.
When Catherine wakes up alone one morning, she thinks her husband has gone for a run before work. But Simon never makes it to the office. His running shoes are by the front door. Nothing is missing—except him.
Catherine knows Simon must be in trouble. He wouldn’t just leave her. He wouldn’t leave the children.
But Simon knows the truth—about why he left and what he’s done. He knows things about his marriage that it would kill Catherine to find out. The memories she holds onto are lies.
While Catherine faces a dark new reality at home, Simon’s halfway around the world, alive and thriving. He’s doing whatever it takes to stay one step ahead of the truth.
But he can’t hide forever, and when he reappears twenty-five years later, Catherine will finally learn who he is.
And wish she’d stayed in the dark.
Holy crap that was a bit good! It was so different to what I thought it was going to be. I couldn’t put it down the characters drew you in. Who’d have thought one simple lack of communication in a perfectly happy relationship would cause so much destruction. I don’t think I’d have been able to stop where Catherine did at the end! Also do you have after hearing an authors voice automatically hear it when read their work? Nope? Just me than kinda weird 😂.
Customizing Financial Accounting in SAP
Book
Understand business processes, functions, and customizing options Find real-world, practical...