Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated He Walks Among Us: Encounters with Christ in a Broken World in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<b>Synopsis</b>
Richard Stearns is the president of World Vision United States who, along with his wife Reneé, regularly visits the poorer countries of our world to see the ways the charity is helping to change people's lives. <i>He Walks Among Us</i> is a compilation of short thoughts and observations (two-to-three pages, including photographs) they have both had while conducting their work. As they alternate the writing, we are given opinions and experiences that we may be able to relate to our own. As Richard is the president of the organisation, he can give an insight into the way World Vision works, however, he can also express his opinions as a father, grandfather and believer in Christ. Reneé is also a World Vision worker, but due to her nature, gives a more maternal impression of the scenes she witnesses.
The individuals written about in this book come from all over the world. Most are located in Africa, but there are also similar stories in Asia, South and North America, and even Eastern Europe. The terrors these people have faced are shocking (AIDs, war, sexual abuse, natural disasters etc), but each family has been aided in some way by World Vision and their donors.
The purpose of <i>He Walks Among Us</i> is not to promote World Vision, but to encourage us to let God and Jesus into our lives. Richard and Reneé assume their readers are Christians, however, they realise that being a Christian does not equate to fully accepting God's plans. The victims of war, rape, and poverty mentioned have also been touched by Jesus. Many did not know him before World Vision came into their lives, but they have now been transformed through the power of his love - although their situation may not have significantly improved.
The actual stories used to illustrate the work of World Vision are only brief mentions, providing the bare bones of the situations. What Richard and Reneé have focused on is linking these lives, their lives and our lives to passages from the Bible. Either taken literally or metaphorically, the pair manage to relate everything to the actions and fates of a number of key Biblical characters. This emphasises that Our Lord is walking among us, giving life, peace, hope and steadfast faith.
<b>Ideas</b>
Giving someone new hope or purpose in their life can be related to Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. Whether people are literally dying, or on the edge of hopelessness and despair, improving their situation can turn their lives around.
The donors and workers at World Vision are like the Good Samaritan in Jesus' parable. We do not know these people, know their religion or circumstances, yet we send money and aid. To do nothing would make us the Priest or Levite in the story.
David was only a young boy when he had to face Goliath, yet, against all odds, he defeated him. The children mentioned in this book are similar to David. They each have their metaphorical Goliath's: poverty, illness, loss of parents, war, hunger etc, but with God working through us, these can be overcome.
<b>Noteworthy Bible Verses</b>
Each chapter of the book begins with a Bible verse, and often more are included within the text. Here are a few that really relate to the work of World Vision and the ways in which we can involve ourselves:
Philippians 4:12-13
Luke 21:3-4
Luke 6:20-21
Psalm 23:4
<b>Statistics</b>
23 million people in sub-Sahara Africa are suffering from HIV.
In Soviet-controlled Georgia, churches were banned. Some villages are only just seeing their first church in over 400 years.
20 thousand children under the age of 5 die every day.
Every 4 seconds a child under 5 dies.
Over 2 billion people in the world are living on $2 or less a day.
1 billion people have no access to clean drinking water.
41% of the population in Niger have no clean water.
<b>Citations</b>
Helen Keller: "So much has been given to me, I have no time to ponder over that which is denied."
Oswald Chambers: "The great hindrance in spiritual life is that we will look for big things to do. Jesus took a towel ... and began to wash the disciples' feet."
Mother Theresa: "I am a pencil in the hand of a writing God who is sending a love letter to the world."
C.S. Lewis: "Humility is not thinking less of yourself but thinking of yourself less."
<b>Other Mentions</b>
Hymn - Frances R. Havergal, <i>Take my Life and let it be.</i>
Film - <i>Pushing the Elephant</i>
Richard Stearns is the president of World Vision United States who, along with his wife Reneé, regularly visits the poorer countries of our world to see the ways the charity is helping to change people's lives. <i>He Walks Among Us</i> is a compilation of short thoughts and observations (two-to-three pages, including photographs) they have both had while conducting their work. As they alternate the writing, we are given opinions and experiences that we may be able to relate to our own. As Richard is the president of the organisation, he can give an insight into the way World Vision works, however, he can also express his opinions as a father, grandfather and believer in Christ. Reneé is also a World Vision worker, but due to her nature, gives a more maternal impression of the scenes she witnesses.
The individuals written about in this book come from all over the world. Most are located in Africa, but there are also similar stories in Asia, South and North America, and even Eastern Europe. The terrors these people have faced are shocking (AIDs, war, sexual abuse, natural disasters etc), but each family has been aided in some way by World Vision and their donors.
The purpose of <i>He Walks Among Us</i> is not to promote World Vision, but to encourage us to let God and Jesus into our lives. Richard and Reneé assume their readers are Christians, however, they realise that being a Christian does not equate to fully accepting God's plans. The victims of war, rape, and poverty mentioned have also been touched by Jesus. Many did not know him before World Vision came into their lives, but they have now been transformed through the power of his love - although their situation may not have significantly improved.
The actual stories used to illustrate the work of World Vision are only brief mentions, providing the bare bones of the situations. What Richard and Reneé have focused on is linking these lives, their lives and our lives to passages from the Bible. Either taken literally or metaphorically, the pair manage to relate everything to the actions and fates of a number of key Biblical characters. This emphasises that Our Lord is walking among us, giving life, peace, hope and steadfast faith.
<b>Ideas</b>
Giving someone new hope or purpose in their life can be related to Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. Whether people are literally dying, or on the edge of hopelessness and despair, improving their situation can turn their lives around.
The donors and workers at World Vision are like the Good Samaritan in Jesus' parable. We do not know these people, know their religion or circumstances, yet we send money and aid. To do nothing would make us the Priest or Levite in the story.
David was only a young boy when he had to face Goliath, yet, against all odds, he defeated him. The children mentioned in this book are similar to David. They each have their metaphorical Goliath's: poverty, illness, loss of parents, war, hunger etc, but with God working through us, these can be overcome.
<b>Noteworthy Bible Verses</b>
Each chapter of the book begins with a Bible verse, and often more are included within the text. Here are a few that really relate to the work of World Vision and the ways in which we can involve ourselves:
Philippians 4:12-13
Luke 21:3-4
Luke 6:20-21
Psalm 23:4
<b>Statistics</b>
23 million people in sub-Sahara Africa are suffering from HIV.
In Soviet-controlled Georgia, churches were banned. Some villages are only just seeing their first church in over 400 years.
20 thousand children under the age of 5 die every day.
Every 4 seconds a child under 5 dies.
Over 2 billion people in the world are living on $2 or less a day.
1 billion people have no access to clean drinking water.
41% of the population in Niger have no clean water.
<b>Citations</b>
Helen Keller: "So much has been given to me, I have no time to ponder over that which is denied."
Oswald Chambers: "The great hindrance in spiritual life is that we will look for big things to do. Jesus took a towel ... and began to wash the disciples' feet."
Mother Theresa: "I am a pencil in the hand of a writing God who is sending a love letter to the world."
C.S. Lewis: "Humility is not thinking less of yourself but thinking of yourself less."
<b>Other Mentions</b>
Hymn - Frances R. Havergal, <i>Take my Life and let it be.</i>
Film - <i>Pushing the Elephant</i>
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Da Vinci Code (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
No film since “The Last Temptation of Christ” has invoked as much controversy as The Da Vinci Code based on the book of the same name by Dan Brown. Prior to the film even being screened for the press, cries ran out to ban the film and its message that some find blasphemous. Fortunately calmer heads have prevailed and the film by Director Ron Howard has arrived in a wash of media frenzy not seen since Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ.
If you are seeing a pattern forming, you would be correct as it seems that few topics can raise ire and wrath more than the topic of religion, especially if the film proposes a viewpoint that differs from the traditional beliefs that are given by the church, bible, and history.
In the film, a monk appears to murder an elderly man who with his last ounces of strength, manages to leave a cryptic riddle on his body. The bizarre nature of the crime prompts French police inspector Fache (Jean Reno) to travel to the Louvre to investigate the crime. A clue at the crime scene causes the police to summer Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) from a lecture hall where he is signing his latest book on symbols. Since the deceased was supposed to meet Langdon earlier in the day Langdon has fallen under suspicion for the crime.
As he attempts to decipher the message at the crime scene, Langdon encounters a police cryptologists named Sophie (Audrey Tautou), who informs Robert that he is in danger and soon the duo are fleeing from the police after deciphering some hidden clues at the crime scene.
Before either Robert or Audrey knows what is happening, they are being accused of multiple murders and on the run. As the clues begin to mount, the mystery takes an even stranger turn by the discovery of an artifact that when unlocked, should contain a map.
Seeking refuge and help, the duo arrive at the estate of Sir Leigh Teabing (Sir Ian Mc Kellen), who proceeds to tell Robert and Sophie that the clues they have uncovered are part of a cover-up that segments of the church will stop at nothing to keep secret. The nature of this secret is such that should it become public knowledge, then they very foundations of history, faith, and the church could be shaken to their core.
As the mystery becomes clearer, the group are attacked by a Monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), who has been doing the violent work of someone know as The Teacher in an effort to discover the location of artifacts and those attempting to uncover the mystery.
What follows is a frantic race that travels from Paris to London in an effort to get to the bottom of the mystery and unravel the true nature of the mystery and the secret that people are willing to kill for in order to protect.
While some may find the mystery, the players, and their motivations confusing, the film does grab hold and moves along at a solid pace. Ron Howard once again shows his skill by directing a film that is different from his other works, yet rich in its visuals and complexity. The scenic locales of the film enhance the mystery (For those who have not read the book), as they attempt to decipher the clues along with the characters.
The work from the cast was solid as Hanks gives a very good if restrained performance in his portrayal. Mc Kellen is a very nice blend of elegance and old world charm that lifts up every scene in which he is in.
While there are those who will lambaste the film for the message it provides, I chose to look at it as a film that does what movies should, entertain and make you think. The film is not saying its assertions are hard and cold facts, what it is doing is providing a vehicle for debate.
In college I was told that through debate comes knowledge and growth for a society. This was common in ancient Greek and Roman society where issues of the day would be debated in open forums. It seems that we as a society have become too insistent to take things at face value and have forgotten that the very nature of the human experience is to question, grow, and seek our own answers. As such the film is a great example of how Hollywood at times gets it right and provides solid entertainment that will stimulate as well as entertain.
If you are seeing a pattern forming, you would be correct as it seems that few topics can raise ire and wrath more than the topic of religion, especially if the film proposes a viewpoint that differs from the traditional beliefs that are given by the church, bible, and history.
In the film, a monk appears to murder an elderly man who with his last ounces of strength, manages to leave a cryptic riddle on his body. The bizarre nature of the crime prompts French police inspector Fache (Jean Reno) to travel to the Louvre to investigate the crime. A clue at the crime scene causes the police to summer Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) from a lecture hall where he is signing his latest book on symbols. Since the deceased was supposed to meet Langdon earlier in the day Langdon has fallen under suspicion for the crime.
As he attempts to decipher the message at the crime scene, Langdon encounters a police cryptologists named Sophie (Audrey Tautou), who informs Robert that he is in danger and soon the duo are fleeing from the police after deciphering some hidden clues at the crime scene.
Before either Robert or Audrey knows what is happening, they are being accused of multiple murders and on the run. As the clues begin to mount, the mystery takes an even stranger turn by the discovery of an artifact that when unlocked, should contain a map.
Seeking refuge and help, the duo arrive at the estate of Sir Leigh Teabing (Sir Ian Mc Kellen), who proceeds to tell Robert and Sophie that the clues they have uncovered are part of a cover-up that segments of the church will stop at nothing to keep secret. The nature of this secret is such that should it become public knowledge, then they very foundations of history, faith, and the church could be shaken to their core.
As the mystery becomes clearer, the group are attacked by a Monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), who has been doing the violent work of someone know as The Teacher in an effort to discover the location of artifacts and those attempting to uncover the mystery.
What follows is a frantic race that travels from Paris to London in an effort to get to the bottom of the mystery and unravel the true nature of the mystery and the secret that people are willing to kill for in order to protect.
While some may find the mystery, the players, and their motivations confusing, the film does grab hold and moves along at a solid pace. Ron Howard once again shows his skill by directing a film that is different from his other works, yet rich in its visuals and complexity. The scenic locales of the film enhance the mystery (For those who have not read the book), as they attempt to decipher the clues along with the characters.
The work from the cast was solid as Hanks gives a very good if restrained performance in his portrayal. Mc Kellen is a very nice blend of elegance and old world charm that lifts up every scene in which he is in.
While there are those who will lambaste the film for the message it provides, I chose to look at it as a film that does what movies should, entertain and make you think. The film is not saying its assertions are hard and cold facts, what it is doing is providing a vehicle for debate.
In college I was told that through debate comes knowledge and growth for a society. This was common in ancient Greek and Roman society where issues of the day would be debated in open forums. It seems that we as a society have become too insistent to take things at face value and have forgotten that the very nature of the human experience is to question, grow, and seek our own answers. As such the film is a great example of how Hollywood at times gets it right and provides solid entertainment that will stimulate as well as entertain.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Messengers 2: The Scarecrow (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
John Rollins is a guy who's just trying to catch a break. He lives on a farm with his wife and two children, but his crops just won't grow. His cornfield is infested with crows and his water pump won't work. Stress and fatigue don't begin to describe what John is currently going through. He's a man of faith that's just trying to figure out how he can support his family with no income. He's pretty much lost all hope until he stumbles upon the scarecrow in his barn. After being convinced by his neighbor, he puts the scarecrow up in his cornfield. Besides, he has nothing to lose and everything to gain. John wakes up to a field full of dead crows and his water pump begins working again. Everything looks to finally be turning in John's favor, but there's two sides to every coin. People that get in the way of John's crops or his family begin to turn up dead. What makes matters worse is that John finds possessions of the victims in his cornfield and he is the only person all the evidence points to. Once he realizes that the scarecrow is the root of his newfound problems and that he could wind up losing his family, John knows he has to get rid of it but he may already be too late...
In my movie watching experience, I've learned that it's usually important to watch an original film before its sequel. With this day and age though where sequels are actually prequels and we get prequel trilogies sixteen years AFTER the original trilogy, there aren't really any guidelines to follow when it comes to watching films anymore. So being somebody who had no interest in seeing The Messengers, the sequel didn't really interest me until they announced Norman Reedus in the title role. Since Reedus had been impressive in films such as The Boondock Saints, Blade II, and even his brief (but rather incredible) cameo in Antibodies, I felt it was my obligation to at least give this film a chance. The results are pretty much what you'd expect for a direct to DVD horror film.
The acting isn't terrible, but doesn't really do much to stand out. Norman Reedus, Heather Stephens, and Richard Riehle are pretty much the cream of the crop as far as acting goes. Reedus does a good job of acting like a farmer who's going through troubled times and just wants to support his family. He was easy to relate to since just about everyone is either going through tough times or has so in the past. Stephens played the concerned wife and was able to portray the widest range of emotions in the film. Riehle always seemed to show up to encourage John Rollins to do mischievous things, so the seeds are planted from the get-go that something isn't quite right with him. The boy who played John's son, Michael, is the only actor in the film that could really be considered atrocious as his lines are delivered so nonchalantly.
The way the rest of the film plays out just feels like it borrowed heavily from Jeepers Creepers 2 and the Children of the Corn films. The scarecrow drags its scythe on the ground as it's stalking its victims, which was a nice touch but was really the only enjoyable part of the scarecrow. Once it reveals itself at the end of the film and starts walking around, it makes pterodactyl sounds and trust me, that's just as incredible as it sounds. The film actually starts going downhill in the second half, which is when the cheesy effects come in and unanswered questions begin. The latter half of the film is filled with a lot of moments that will leave you scratching your head wondering why you even decided to watch this film to begin with.
Messengers 2: The Scarecrow isn't exactly the greatest film to watch, but it isn't the worst either. While it does have its fair share of blood and isn't half bad at times, it doesn't really offer anything most horror fans haven't seen before. Messengers 2 is really only recommended for die hard fans of Norman Reedus since it's basically just a rehash of Jeepers Creepers 2 with a lower budget. It's the type of film that's a decent watch at 3 o' clock in the morning when you stumble across it channel surfing, but isn't worth deliberately tracking down on DVD.
In my movie watching experience, I've learned that it's usually important to watch an original film before its sequel. With this day and age though where sequels are actually prequels and we get prequel trilogies sixteen years AFTER the original trilogy, there aren't really any guidelines to follow when it comes to watching films anymore. So being somebody who had no interest in seeing The Messengers, the sequel didn't really interest me until they announced Norman Reedus in the title role. Since Reedus had been impressive in films such as The Boondock Saints, Blade II, and even his brief (but rather incredible) cameo in Antibodies, I felt it was my obligation to at least give this film a chance. The results are pretty much what you'd expect for a direct to DVD horror film.
The acting isn't terrible, but doesn't really do much to stand out. Norman Reedus, Heather Stephens, and Richard Riehle are pretty much the cream of the crop as far as acting goes. Reedus does a good job of acting like a farmer who's going through troubled times and just wants to support his family. He was easy to relate to since just about everyone is either going through tough times or has so in the past. Stephens played the concerned wife and was able to portray the widest range of emotions in the film. Riehle always seemed to show up to encourage John Rollins to do mischievous things, so the seeds are planted from the get-go that something isn't quite right with him. The boy who played John's son, Michael, is the only actor in the film that could really be considered atrocious as his lines are delivered so nonchalantly.
The way the rest of the film plays out just feels like it borrowed heavily from Jeepers Creepers 2 and the Children of the Corn films. The scarecrow drags its scythe on the ground as it's stalking its victims, which was a nice touch but was really the only enjoyable part of the scarecrow. Once it reveals itself at the end of the film and starts walking around, it makes pterodactyl sounds and trust me, that's just as incredible as it sounds. The film actually starts going downhill in the second half, which is when the cheesy effects come in and unanswered questions begin. The latter half of the film is filled with a lot of moments that will leave you scratching your head wondering why you even decided to watch this film to begin with.
Messengers 2: The Scarecrow isn't exactly the greatest film to watch, but it isn't the worst either. While it does have its fair share of blood and isn't half bad at times, it doesn't really offer anything most horror fans haven't seen before. Messengers 2 is really only recommended for die hard fans of Norman Reedus since it's basically just a rehash of Jeepers Creepers 2 with a lower budget. It's the type of film that's a decent watch at 3 o' clock in the morning when you stumble across it channel surfing, but isn't worth deliberately tracking down on DVD.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Red Dawn (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Back in 1984 in the late stages of the Cold War, the movie named “Red Dawn” was released. It starred several young actors and actresses who went on to a variety of success including Patrick Swayze, Charlie Sheen, Jennifer Grey, and Lea Thompson. The film follows a group of high school students who fight to defend their town, families, and country after an invasion of Soviet and Cuban forces occupies mainland America.
Despite being delayed for nearly 3 years due to financial issues, the new version of “Red Dawn” has arrived and also features an impressive young cast of future stars. Chris Hemsworth has gone on to find fame as Thor while Josh Hutcherson has found fame playing Peeta in “The Hunger Games”. The fact that this movie was filmed before either of those actors appeared in their signature roles allows the studio to now benefit from the increased name recognition of the cast.
Instead of a California town, the new film is set in Spokane, Washington where thanks to news clip segments at the beginning of the film, we understand that the country is involved in numerous conflicts around the globe and some question whether or not we have enough forces to secure our borders. Enter Jed Eckert (Hemsworth), who’s just returned home on leave after serving combat duty in the Middle East. His younger brother Matt (Josh Peck), is a quarterback at the local high school team and he bears resentment toward his brother for leaving shortly after the death of their mother. Their father is a well-respected member of the force and does his best to ensure harmony between the brothers as well as their local community.
The brothers are literally shaken awake by an airborne assault as North Korea lands troops throughout their community. Unsure what is happening, Jed, Matt, and several of their friends managed to escape into the wilderness and devise a plan for survival. Further complicating matters is the fact that Matt’s girlfriend Erica (Isabel Lucas), has been taken prisoner. Jed, with his military background quickly assumes control of the group, but Matt finds himself distracted from following orders and missions whenever he sees an opportunity to pursue Erica’s freedom.
The group calls itself “The Wolverines” after the local football team, and engages in a series of hit-and-run tactics against the invading forces. The plan is to make the occupation so costly that they will eventually give up. While they do have initial success, they soon realize that they are fighting against substantial odds not the least of which is their own internal conflicts and agendas as well as diminishing supplies.
When a recon group from the military under the command of Col. Andy Tanner (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), arrives and tells the Wolverines about a device that may hold the key to their victory. The two sides must team up in an all-out assault on enemy headquarters in an effort to save the day.
While the film has plenty of action, the leaps of logic and common sense it requires the audience to take are astronomical. I understand that for a film of this type you must suspend a lot of reality in order for it to work. I’m not supposed asked questions about the logistics of the enemy’s plan and their actions. Suffice it to say that I could think of at least a dozen factors that were not brought into play. While the enemy may indeed have the ability to shut down various electronics and defensive capabilities which enabled the invasion. That does not explain where the military outside of the combat zone is, why our allies and remaining military are not dropping bombs and nukes on North Korea in retaliation, and scores of other inconsistencies. It is essentially left to our imaginations as to why this is not happening and we’re just supposed to accept on blind faith that there’s a good reason for this even though the recon unit manages to infiltrate Spokane in a helicopter and makes mentions of Missouri to Arizona as being free of any enemy influence.
The best thing I can say about the film said if you are willing to overlook the abundance of plot holes and logic gaps, as well as some at times stiff acting and dialogue, there are some enjoyable action seems to be found. The young cast works well with one another and often gave a very energetic and physical performance.
If you are a fan of the original, you may enjoy this film from a nostalgia standpoint, otherwise leave your common sense behind, sit back and enjoy the ride.
Despite being delayed for nearly 3 years due to financial issues, the new version of “Red Dawn” has arrived and also features an impressive young cast of future stars. Chris Hemsworth has gone on to find fame as Thor while Josh Hutcherson has found fame playing Peeta in “The Hunger Games”. The fact that this movie was filmed before either of those actors appeared in their signature roles allows the studio to now benefit from the increased name recognition of the cast.
Instead of a California town, the new film is set in Spokane, Washington where thanks to news clip segments at the beginning of the film, we understand that the country is involved in numerous conflicts around the globe and some question whether or not we have enough forces to secure our borders. Enter Jed Eckert (Hemsworth), who’s just returned home on leave after serving combat duty in the Middle East. His younger brother Matt (Josh Peck), is a quarterback at the local high school team and he bears resentment toward his brother for leaving shortly after the death of their mother. Their father is a well-respected member of the force and does his best to ensure harmony between the brothers as well as their local community.
The brothers are literally shaken awake by an airborne assault as North Korea lands troops throughout their community. Unsure what is happening, Jed, Matt, and several of their friends managed to escape into the wilderness and devise a plan for survival. Further complicating matters is the fact that Matt’s girlfriend Erica (Isabel Lucas), has been taken prisoner. Jed, with his military background quickly assumes control of the group, but Matt finds himself distracted from following orders and missions whenever he sees an opportunity to pursue Erica’s freedom.
The group calls itself “The Wolverines” after the local football team, and engages in a series of hit-and-run tactics against the invading forces. The plan is to make the occupation so costly that they will eventually give up. While they do have initial success, they soon realize that they are fighting against substantial odds not the least of which is their own internal conflicts and agendas as well as diminishing supplies.
When a recon group from the military under the command of Col. Andy Tanner (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), arrives and tells the Wolverines about a device that may hold the key to their victory. The two sides must team up in an all-out assault on enemy headquarters in an effort to save the day.
While the film has plenty of action, the leaps of logic and common sense it requires the audience to take are astronomical. I understand that for a film of this type you must suspend a lot of reality in order for it to work. I’m not supposed asked questions about the logistics of the enemy’s plan and their actions. Suffice it to say that I could think of at least a dozen factors that were not brought into play. While the enemy may indeed have the ability to shut down various electronics and defensive capabilities which enabled the invasion. That does not explain where the military outside of the combat zone is, why our allies and remaining military are not dropping bombs and nukes on North Korea in retaliation, and scores of other inconsistencies. It is essentially left to our imaginations as to why this is not happening and we’re just supposed to accept on blind faith that there’s a good reason for this even though the recon unit manages to infiltrate Spokane in a helicopter and makes mentions of Missouri to Arizona as being free of any enemy influence.
The best thing I can say about the film said if you are willing to overlook the abundance of plot holes and logic gaps, as well as some at times stiff acting and dialogue, there are some enjoyable action seems to be found. The young cast works well with one another and often gave a very energetic and physical performance.
If you are a fan of the original, you may enjoy this film from a nostalgia standpoint, otherwise leave your common sense behind, sit back and enjoy the ride.
Best Islamic, Arabic and Ramadan Ringtones
Music and Entertainment
App
We have crafted the best Ringtones from the best songs about Ramadan, Islamic and Arabic traditional...
KalJ95 (25 KP) rated The Last of Us Part II in Video Games
Jun 23, 2020
You Won't Find A Better Game In Terms Of Presentation. (4 more)
Level Design Is Astounding.
Like The First Game, This Will Create A Conversation For Years To Come
Sound Design Is Incredible.
Takes Risks, And Some Do Pay Off.
A Flawed Sequel. (4 more)
Awful Pacing.
Structure Of Narrative Is Bad.
Some Terrible Dialogue.
Shoehorned Agenda.
The last of The Last of Us.
The video game industry doesn't get enough credit as a source of entertainment, in my humble opinion. Time and time again, the industry has proven that it can produce something magical, memorable, mesmerising to play, and even more so, something engaging to watch as someone not even holding the controller. Naughty Dog’s 2013 masterpiece, The Last of Us, became an overnight classic game because it was cinematic in presentation, and a rollercoaster of emotions in narrative. I sat and played the remastered version on my PlayStation 4 in 2017, and fell in love with the chemistry, love and heartbreak Joel and Ellie took with them, as they crossed a post-apocalyptic America. I was satisfied with the conclusion, and felt the story of these two characters was finished. I didn't need, or ever want a sequel. Then a few months pass, The Last of Us Part II is announced. Obviously, I was ecstatic, but also concerned. Trailers came and went, delays happened over and over, and leaks began to drip onto the internet. I was even more concerned with the leaks, and how this game was taking shape, but I remained open minded, and began playing the game.
The Last of Us Part II is a strange beast. An ambitious, exquisite experience, mired by multiple flaws in structure, pacing and plot holes. I simultaneously adored and loathed the twenty five hour experience, and I’m ready to do it all again. Ellie’s thirst for revenge deals with many issues of morality and hate, and the consequences of ones actions. To coin a phrase, “violence begets violence”, and this is very violent. A flawed piece of art, that often shoehorns a political tick list so it can cater to a certain demographic of sexuality and gender. Whatever you think about Part II, it will create a conversation for years to come, for better or worse.
Narrative:
Ellie and Joel are settled in Jackson, Wyoming, living a relatively normal existence. Ellie is nineteen, and has a job, like the rest of the fighters in Jackson, by going out into the world on routes to clear out the wondering infected. When Ellie witnesses a violent event, she takes it into her own hands to take bloody revenge on the people responsible.
A big risk was taken by Naughty Dog to decide what they did for the first two hours, even the VP of the company, Neil Druckmann, said himself the game will be “divisive”, and that is probably an understatement judging by the fan backlash. I feel it worked to support the other twenty three hours, and shows the blurry line of being good and bad in this world.
Unfortunately, the narrative slogs through awful structuring and some dreadful, downright cringe-worthy dialogue. The structure goes back and forth from the present day, to months, and sometimes years previous, and this is all to cement the events that keep the narrative flowing. The flashbacks featuring Joel and Ellie give you brief moments of happiness, followed by devastating revelations. They are the best moments of the game, you can feel the warmth the characters have for each other, and the heartbreaking actions they take. It made me wonder why they simply didn't just create a game with these ideas in mind. Other flashbacks create more problems than they solve, particularly in the latter half of the game. The first half, for all its faults, really treats you to a vicious and bloodthirsty ride through Seattle, and you completely feel the motivation and drive Ellie has to complete the mission she's set out to do. Seattle is huge, and the perfect backdrop for this game.
Sadly, the second half of the game is an absolute mess. The whole experience becomes nothing more than “go to this location, collect something, go back” over and over again. Its a lazy trope that causes so much fatigue in terms of pacing, slowing down any momentum gained by the first half. The second half serves the most important purpose too, and while I did grow to understand the intention it was presenting me, I couldn't help but feel frequently bored of doing fetch quests. To remain as spoiler free as possible, the game is split into two perspectives of Ellie, and an entirely new character. Naughty Dog wants you to understand the perspectives of both sides, but the history thats been created with the original game, you cant help but sympathise with Ellie more. The fact that its half the game away from the main protagonist, and starts you fresh with a new character, with new skill sets and weapons, really feels out of place. This could of worked much better as an episodic entry, rather than just two stories, one after the other. I can understand people who love this way of storytelling, but for me it slows the pacing down.
Gameplay:
Part II is the most beautiful game I’ve ever played. Naughty Dog continue to set the bar extremely high in terms of surroundings and facial animations, and the seamless transitions from cutscene to gameplay made my jaw drop. Each facial movement shows the hurt, the honesty, the devastation the characters carry with them. It almost feels more like a film or tv series than a video game, featuring an excellent performance from Troy Baker, and a career defining show from Ashley Johnson. Unfortunately, some of the new cast members don't have enough time on screen to give a full understanding of their personality or perspective. Some are likeable, relatable even, but some are just annoying, saying some of the strangest, out of place dialogue.
In terms of its gameplay, Part II hasn't really changed anything from its predecessor. It feels the same, whether you enjoyed it first time round or not. I personally am in the middle ground, it works for what it is. The Last of Us has always been a game about surviving by any means necessary. Part II feels like multiple ideas all in one, all conflicting themselves. Let me explain:
The game actively tries to twist the act of killing people to make you seem like its an awful thing to do. This is an interesting idea that has been done many times before in games, but it works in the oddest of ways here. I have completed the game twice now, and found it almost impossible to not kill anyone, yet cutscenes display remorse within the characters after they’ve murdered someone. This conflicts the idea of the whole game, where one moment I'm slicing a persons throat with a knife, the next I do the exact same, but this time I regret that decision. Again, its adding less weight to the story, and actively contradicting everything that happens.
Extra Notes:
The environments of Part II are some of the best in a video game. A sandbox of lush greenery and worn down buildings follows the same formula that Naughty Dog designed in Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, where you can explore a massive space to do what you find the objectives, but also see the sights and collect items. The level design of the entire game is absolutely masterful, but this level astounded me graphically and structurally.
By this point, it probably feels like I utterly hated Part II. I did, and didn’t, and thats the line I'm sticking on. The Last of Us always presented a commentary as to the nature of relationships, love, life and death. At the core was Ellie and Joel, two wayward strangers forced together on a journey across America. Everyone has a reason to love that game, for me its their chemistry and progression. Joel was hardened, standoffish, only to warm to Ellie, and love her by the end. Ellie, the immune girl who's humorous, optimistic and full of life, who ultimately becomes cold, quiet and sceptical of Joel.
Part II presents a different commentary, one of revenge and hate. I firmly believe Part II is weak in most areas, a downgrade in fact compared to its counterpart, but its so beautiful and bleak, with so many incapsulated moments of joy, heartbreak, love, shock. Its uncompromising, relentless and essential for anyone with a PS4. This will be a game I will constantly change my opinion on the more I think about it. As I said at the beginning, I never felt a sequel was necessary, and I firmly believe the story must end here.
(P.S. I must mention that Naughty Dog and Sony have only themselves to blame when it comes to the reception Part II has received during its release and promotional material. Early reviewers were told that they could only go into detail about the first ten or so hours, not mentioning the other fifteen. The other fifteen hours are incredibly important to mention, and they either make or break this game, so not letting reviewers do their job feels disingenuous, and from my point of view shows that they had no faith in their product to be criticised. The promotional material is also hugely misleading. The trailers show a completely different game, and characters are swapped for others in key scenes. That is wrong, and once again, shows your audience you had zero faith in your product based on the actual plot of your game.)
The Last of Us Part II is a strange beast. An ambitious, exquisite experience, mired by multiple flaws in structure, pacing and plot holes. I simultaneously adored and loathed the twenty five hour experience, and I’m ready to do it all again. Ellie’s thirst for revenge deals with many issues of morality and hate, and the consequences of ones actions. To coin a phrase, “violence begets violence”, and this is very violent. A flawed piece of art, that often shoehorns a political tick list so it can cater to a certain demographic of sexuality and gender. Whatever you think about Part II, it will create a conversation for years to come, for better or worse.
Narrative:
Ellie and Joel are settled in Jackson, Wyoming, living a relatively normal existence. Ellie is nineteen, and has a job, like the rest of the fighters in Jackson, by going out into the world on routes to clear out the wondering infected. When Ellie witnesses a violent event, she takes it into her own hands to take bloody revenge on the people responsible.
A big risk was taken by Naughty Dog to decide what they did for the first two hours, even the VP of the company, Neil Druckmann, said himself the game will be “divisive”, and that is probably an understatement judging by the fan backlash. I feel it worked to support the other twenty three hours, and shows the blurry line of being good and bad in this world.
Unfortunately, the narrative slogs through awful structuring and some dreadful, downright cringe-worthy dialogue. The structure goes back and forth from the present day, to months, and sometimes years previous, and this is all to cement the events that keep the narrative flowing. The flashbacks featuring Joel and Ellie give you brief moments of happiness, followed by devastating revelations. They are the best moments of the game, you can feel the warmth the characters have for each other, and the heartbreaking actions they take. It made me wonder why they simply didn't just create a game with these ideas in mind. Other flashbacks create more problems than they solve, particularly in the latter half of the game. The first half, for all its faults, really treats you to a vicious and bloodthirsty ride through Seattle, and you completely feel the motivation and drive Ellie has to complete the mission she's set out to do. Seattle is huge, and the perfect backdrop for this game.
Sadly, the second half of the game is an absolute mess. The whole experience becomes nothing more than “go to this location, collect something, go back” over and over again. Its a lazy trope that causes so much fatigue in terms of pacing, slowing down any momentum gained by the first half. The second half serves the most important purpose too, and while I did grow to understand the intention it was presenting me, I couldn't help but feel frequently bored of doing fetch quests. To remain as spoiler free as possible, the game is split into two perspectives of Ellie, and an entirely new character. Naughty Dog wants you to understand the perspectives of both sides, but the history thats been created with the original game, you cant help but sympathise with Ellie more. The fact that its half the game away from the main protagonist, and starts you fresh with a new character, with new skill sets and weapons, really feels out of place. This could of worked much better as an episodic entry, rather than just two stories, one after the other. I can understand people who love this way of storytelling, but for me it slows the pacing down.
Gameplay:
Part II is the most beautiful game I’ve ever played. Naughty Dog continue to set the bar extremely high in terms of surroundings and facial animations, and the seamless transitions from cutscene to gameplay made my jaw drop. Each facial movement shows the hurt, the honesty, the devastation the characters carry with them. It almost feels more like a film or tv series than a video game, featuring an excellent performance from Troy Baker, and a career defining show from Ashley Johnson. Unfortunately, some of the new cast members don't have enough time on screen to give a full understanding of their personality or perspective. Some are likeable, relatable even, but some are just annoying, saying some of the strangest, out of place dialogue.
In terms of its gameplay, Part II hasn't really changed anything from its predecessor. It feels the same, whether you enjoyed it first time round or not. I personally am in the middle ground, it works for what it is. The Last of Us has always been a game about surviving by any means necessary. Part II feels like multiple ideas all in one, all conflicting themselves. Let me explain:
The game actively tries to twist the act of killing people to make you seem like its an awful thing to do. This is an interesting idea that has been done many times before in games, but it works in the oddest of ways here. I have completed the game twice now, and found it almost impossible to not kill anyone, yet cutscenes display remorse within the characters after they’ve murdered someone. This conflicts the idea of the whole game, where one moment I'm slicing a persons throat with a knife, the next I do the exact same, but this time I regret that decision. Again, its adding less weight to the story, and actively contradicting everything that happens.
Extra Notes:
The environments of Part II are some of the best in a video game. A sandbox of lush greenery and worn down buildings follows the same formula that Naughty Dog designed in Uncharted: The Lost Legacy, where you can explore a massive space to do what you find the objectives, but also see the sights and collect items. The level design of the entire game is absolutely masterful, but this level astounded me graphically and structurally.
By this point, it probably feels like I utterly hated Part II. I did, and didn’t, and thats the line I'm sticking on. The Last of Us always presented a commentary as to the nature of relationships, love, life and death. At the core was Ellie and Joel, two wayward strangers forced together on a journey across America. Everyone has a reason to love that game, for me its their chemistry and progression. Joel was hardened, standoffish, only to warm to Ellie, and love her by the end. Ellie, the immune girl who's humorous, optimistic and full of life, who ultimately becomes cold, quiet and sceptical of Joel.
Part II presents a different commentary, one of revenge and hate. I firmly believe Part II is weak in most areas, a downgrade in fact compared to its counterpart, but its so beautiful and bleak, with so many incapsulated moments of joy, heartbreak, love, shock. Its uncompromising, relentless and essential for anyone with a PS4. This will be a game I will constantly change my opinion on the more I think about it. As I said at the beginning, I never felt a sequel was necessary, and I firmly believe the story must end here.
(P.S. I must mention that Naughty Dog and Sony have only themselves to blame when it comes to the reception Part II has received during its release and promotional material. Early reviewers were told that they could only go into detail about the first ten or so hours, not mentioning the other fifteen. The other fifteen hours are incredibly important to mention, and they either make or break this game, so not letting reviewers do their job feels disingenuous, and from my point of view shows that they had no faith in their product to be criticised. The promotional material is also hugely misleading. The trailers show a completely different game, and characters are swapped for others in key scenes. That is wrong, and once again, shows your audience you had zero faith in your product based on the actual plot of your game.)
Molly J (Cover To Cover Cafe) (106 KP) rated Mother's Love in Books
Feb 25, 2019
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-12694" src="http://cafinatedreads.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Scavenger_17.jpg"; alt="" width="500" height="200" />
<span style="color: #993300;"><b><i>EXCERPT</i></b></span>
<span style="color: #993300;">“I want three chickie legs and a big ole bunch of taters,” Gracie announced as she pointed to the food in the steam table. “Lotsa gravy, too—right, Matthias? Do you like lotsa gravy on your taters?”</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">“That looks like awesome gravy.” Matthias smiled at the women who were filling his plate. “If I could have some on my chicken as well as my taters,” he said, winking at Gracie, “that would be wonderful. Denki, ladies. This is a fabulous meal.”</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">As Rose gazed around the crowded greenhouse, looking for three empty chairs, she was very aware that folks were watching her—whispering about the man who followed her between the tables, carrying Gracie as though she were his. Rose wanted to announce, loud and clear, that Matthias Wagler was only here for the food.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">But they’ll know that’s not true. Just like you do.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">Rose’s cheeks tingled with heat. She hurried toward the last unoccupied table in the back corner of the big glassed-in room, not meeting anyone’s gaze. Settling into a folding chair, Rose sighed heavily as she gazed at the plate she’d filled. Why had she taken so much food when she had no appetite? Why had her attention wandered as she’d listened to Matthias’s voice and watched him hold Gracie against his hip as though he’d done that dozens of times? She smiled weakly at him as he gently set Gracie in the chair beside hers. Because she couldn’t think of a thing to say, Rose took Gracie’s hand and bowed her head in prayer. She heard Matthias sit in the chair on the other side of her daughter.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">What have I gotten myself into, Lord? I’ve just buried my mother yet I’m allowing this man I’ve met only once to sit with me and to entertain my little girl. This feels so improper—and everyone else is thinking I’ve wandered off the straight and narrow, too.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">Rose’s eyes fluttered open. Was God displeased with her behavior? Had she really lost her way? Now that she’d given in to Gracie’s fascination with Matthias, how could she tell him she wanted nothing more to do with him? She glanced at him and nipped her lip.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">He’s still in prayer before his meal. Gracie has put her tiny hand on top of his big strong one. How can that be so wrong when it looks so right? So sweet.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><strong><span style="color: #008080;">My Thoughts:</span></strong></em>
<span style="color: #008080;">I absolutely loved this book! It really and truly hit home with me. As somone who lost their own mother, reading Rose's story was close to my heart. This story wasn't just about Rose losing her mother, though. It's so much more than that. </span>
<span style="color: #008080;">Among the pages of this book you'll find hope, warmth, secrets, love and laughter. Rose's daughter will quickly steal your heart! Each page turn made me feel a part of Rose's story as if I was there, among the Amish. I love that! And Matthias' character. Lordy. I loved his character. He was a strong widower and wonderful for the part he played in Rose's journey. </span>
<span style="color: #008080;">If you are looking for a book that is about second chances, and love, faith and hope, then this book is for you. The Amish are considered Plain, but in <em><strong>A Mother's Love</strong></em> they are anything but. Ms. Hubbard has once again created a 4 star read that is worthy of recommendations and keeping on the shelf forever. Well done, Ms. Hubbard! </span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><strong>Giveaway
</strong></em><a id="rcwidget_js5c33y7" class="rcptr" href="http://www.rafflecopter.com/rafl/display/28e4345f2196/"; rel="nofollow" data-template="" data-theme="classic" data-raflid="28e4345f2196">a Rafflecopter giveaway</a>
<script src="https://widget-prime.rafflecopter.com/launch.js"></script><a href="http://cafinatedreads.com/goddess-fish-promotions-vbb-review-scavenger-hunt-a-mothers-love-by-charlotte-hubbard/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Cafinated Reads</a>
<span style="color: #993300;"><b><i>EXCERPT</i></b></span>
<span style="color: #993300;">“I want three chickie legs and a big ole bunch of taters,” Gracie announced as she pointed to the food in the steam table. “Lotsa gravy, too—right, Matthias? Do you like lotsa gravy on your taters?”</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">“That looks like awesome gravy.” Matthias smiled at the women who were filling his plate. “If I could have some on my chicken as well as my taters,” he said, winking at Gracie, “that would be wonderful. Denki, ladies. This is a fabulous meal.”</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">As Rose gazed around the crowded greenhouse, looking for three empty chairs, she was very aware that folks were watching her—whispering about the man who followed her between the tables, carrying Gracie as though she were his. Rose wanted to announce, loud and clear, that Matthias Wagler was only here for the food.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">But they’ll know that’s not true. Just like you do.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">Rose’s cheeks tingled with heat. She hurried toward the last unoccupied table in the back corner of the big glassed-in room, not meeting anyone’s gaze. Settling into a folding chair, Rose sighed heavily as she gazed at the plate she’d filled. Why had she taken so much food when she had no appetite? Why had her attention wandered as she’d listened to Matthias’s voice and watched him hold Gracie against his hip as though he’d done that dozens of times? She smiled weakly at him as he gently set Gracie in the chair beside hers. Because she couldn’t think of a thing to say, Rose took Gracie’s hand and bowed her head in prayer. She heard Matthias sit in the chair on the other side of her daughter.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">What have I gotten myself into, Lord? I’ve just buried my mother yet I’m allowing this man I’ve met only once to sit with me and to entertain my little girl. This feels so improper—and everyone else is thinking I’ve wandered off the straight and narrow, too.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">Rose’s eyes fluttered open. Was God displeased with her behavior? Had she really lost her way? Now that she’d given in to Gracie’s fascination with Matthias, how could she tell him she wanted nothing more to do with him? She glanced at him and nipped her lip.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #993300;">He’s still in prayer before his meal. Gracie has put her tiny hand on top of his big strong one. How can that be so wrong when it looks so right? So sweet.</span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><strong><span style="color: #008080;">My Thoughts:</span></strong></em>
<span style="color: #008080;">I absolutely loved this book! It really and truly hit home with me. As somone who lost their own mother, reading Rose's story was close to my heart. This story wasn't just about Rose losing her mother, though. It's so much more than that. </span>
<span style="color: #008080;">Among the pages of this book you'll find hope, warmth, secrets, love and laughter. Rose's daughter will quickly steal your heart! Each page turn made me feel a part of Rose's story as if I was there, among the Amish. I love that! And Matthias' character. Lordy. I loved his character. He was a strong widower and wonderful for the part he played in Rose's journey. </span>
<span style="color: #008080;">If you are looking for a book that is about second chances, and love, faith and hope, then this book is for you. The Amish are considered Plain, but in <em><strong>A Mother's Love</strong></em> they are anything but. Ms. Hubbard has once again created a 4 star read that is worthy of recommendations and keeping on the shelf forever. Well done, Ms. Hubbard! </span>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><strong>Giveaway
</strong></em><a id="rcwidget_js5c33y7" class="rcptr" href="http://www.rafflecopter.com/rafl/display/28e4345f2196/"; rel="nofollow" data-template="" data-theme="classic" data-raflid="28e4345f2196">a Rafflecopter giveaway</a>
<script src="https://widget-prime.rafflecopter.com/launch.js"></script><a href="http://cafinatedreads.com/goddess-fish-promotions-vbb-review-scavenger-hunt-a-mothers-love-by-charlotte-hubbard/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Cafinated Reads</a>
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Breaking Glass in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review will be up on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a> in September).
If you've been following my blog/reviews, you will know that I love anything to do with beyond the grave! Ghosts are a sure fire way to make me pick up a book and read it instantly! Luckily, this book was a really interesting read and helped me keep my faith in those type of books.
The title is definitely an interesting one. It made me thing of a type of mystery book, which this is somewhat. Also, after reading the blurb, I thought maybe this would be about the main character having a break down.
I'm on the fence about the cover. On the one hand, I love the different images on the cover. They give me a sort of creepy feel. On the other hand, I wish the cover would've been an image from the book or gave us more insight to the book.
I love how the author draws you into Jeremy's world quite easily. I felt as if everything that was happening to Jeremy was happening to me. I could visualize the world quite easily. The only thing that kind of made me have a "hmm" moment was when The Book of the Dead disappears from Jeremy's room, but it just kind of turns up again in another chapter without any explanation. That's a totally minor thing, and all the other loose ends of the story are all tied up by the ending. The world building is just amazing!
Before I picked up this book, I felt as if it would start out slow at first and then pick up speed. How wrong I was! From the very first sentence, the pacing is spot on. Not once did I become bored with this book. I couldn't wait to find out what was going to happen next. I was hanging on every word, even at the ending! (And don't worry, there isn't any sort of cliff hanger ending. I just didn't want it to end).
I very much enjoyed the plot. I felt this was more of a whodunnit type plot. Jeremy is convinced someone murdered Susannah, so he's trying to solve the mystery as soon as possible all while feeling like he is being haunted by Susannah's ghost. There is some romantic elements, but it's not the main focus. Oh, and I loved the twists involving Susannah! There's even one about Ryan that I figured out with all the context clues before his secret was revealed.
The characters were written superbly! Jeremy Glass feels like an average angry teenager. Now when I say angry, I don't mean angsty or emo or immature. He's been through a lot including watching his mother die and dealing with his injury. Now he's convinced his best friend is missing. Jeremy's got a lot on his plate, and if I were him, I'd be angry too. I loved his sarcasm and wit even if it was to mask how he was feeling most of the time. We don't really get to see much of Susannah's character except when Jeremy believes he is seeing her ghost and what he finds out about her personality. The girl obviously had problems, but for a character whose presence is more ethereal, the author does a fantastic job of making her come alive (no pun intended). I would've loved to know more about Marisa especially her back story such as where she came from and why she moved to the United States. The book says she's an immigrant, but I would've just liked to know a bit more. I liked the character of Ryan. At first, I thought he was a bit of an idiot and really selfish, but as the story progresses, I came to see that Ryan had his reasons for acting the way he did. I really enjoyed Trudy's back story!
There is a lot of swearing in this book, but I don't believe it's over the top. Teenagers swear, and it's a part of life. The swearing in this book makes it more believable. I understand why a lot of young adult writers don't include swearing, but for this book, the swearing worked. Overall, the dialogue is easy to understand and very believable. There were some times where I felt that Jeremy was older then 17, but after all that he'd been through, I figured it was down to all he'd been through.
Overall, Breaking Glass is one of the most intriguing books that I've read. It's one of those books that makes you ponder whether or not the main character is going crazy or is he actually experiencing everything around him.
I'd recommend this book to those aged 16+ (due to language and themes) who like trying to solve mysteries and are looking for a book to wake up their brain.
I'd give Breaking Glass by Lisa Amowitz a 4.75 out of 5.
If you've been following my blog/reviews, you will know that I love anything to do with beyond the grave! Ghosts are a sure fire way to make me pick up a book and read it instantly! Luckily, this book was a really interesting read and helped me keep my faith in those type of books.
The title is definitely an interesting one. It made me thing of a type of mystery book, which this is somewhat. Also, after reading the blurb, I thought maybe this would be about the main character having a break down.
I'm on the fence about the cover. On the one hand, I love the different images on the cover. They give me a sort of creepy feel. On the other hand, I wish the cover would've been an image from the book or gave us more insight to the book.
I love how the author draws you into Jeremy's world quite easily. I felt as if everything that was happening to Jeremy was happening to me. I could visualize the world quite easily. The only thing that kind of made me have a "hmm" moment was when The Book of the Dead disappears from Jeremy's room, but it just kind of turns up again in another chapter without any explanation. That's a totally minor thing, and all the other loose ends of the story are all tied up by the ending. The world building is just amazing!
Before I picked up this book, I felt as if it would start out slow at first and then pick up speed. How wrong I was! From the very first sentence, the pacing is spot on. Not once did I become bored with this book. I couldn't wait to find out what was going to happen next. I was hanging on every word, even at the ending! (And don't worry, there isn't any sort of cliff hanger ending. I just didn't want it to end).
I very much enjoyed the plot. I felt this was more of a whodunnit type plot. Jeremy is convinced someone murdered Susannah, so he's trying to solve the mystery as soon as possible all while feeling like he is being haunted by Susannah's ghost. There is some romantic elements, but it's not the main focus. Oh, and I loved the twists involving Susannah! There's even one about Ryan that I figured out with all the context clues before his secret was revealed.
The characters were written superbly! Jeremy Glass feels like an average angry teenager. Now when I say angry, I don't mean angsty or emo or immature. He's been through a lot including watching his mother die and dealing with his injury. Now he's convinced his best friend is missing. Jeremy's got a lot on his plate, and if I were him, I'd be angry too. I loved his sarcasm and wit even if it was to mask how he was feeling most of the time. We don't really get to see much of Susannah's character except when Jeremy believes he is seeing her ghost and what he finds out about her personality. The girl obviously had problems, but for a character whose presence is more ethereal, the author does a fantastic job of making her come alive (no pun intended). I would've loved to know more about Marisa especially her back story such as where she came from and why she moved to the United States. The book says she's an immigrant, but I would've just liked to know a bit more. I liked the character of Ryan. At first, I thought he was a bit of an idiot and really selfish, but as the story progresses, I came to see that Ryan had his reasons for acting the way he did. I really enjoyed Trudy's back story!
There is a lot of swearing in this book, but I don't believe it's over the top. Teenagers swear, and it's a part of life. The swearing in this book makes it more believable. I understand why a lot of young adult writers don't include swearing, but for this book, the swearing worked. Overall, the dialogue is easy to understand and very believable. There were some times where I felt that Jeremy was older then 17, but after all that he'd been through, I figured it was down to all he'd been through.
Overall, Breaking Glass is one of the most intriguing books that I've read. It's one of those books that makes you ponder whether or not the main character is going crazy or is he actually experiencing everything around him.
I'd recommend this book to those aged 16+ (due to language and themes) who like trying to solve mysteries and are looking for a book to wake up their brain.
I'd give Breaking Glass by Lisa Amowitz a 4.75 out of 5.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Clerks II (2006) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In 1994, Writer/Director/Producer Kevin Smith emerged as a talented filmmaker to watch with his independent film Clerks The film was a no holds barred look at the lives of two desk clerks, who toil away behind the counters of a video and convince store.
The film was made on a tight budget with a cast of unknowns who discussed all manner of issues from life, love, and beyond in very graphic and outlandish terms as they go through a very long day and evening on the job.
The film went on to be a darling at Sundance and paved the way from Kevin Smith to do a series of films which featured lovable yet realistic characters trying to understand life, and get by in a world where they do not always seem to fit. Of course the films always had Smith’s trademark ability to discuss topics in new and unique ways that blended raunchy moments with inspired dialogue and genuine emotions.
A few years back I interviewed Kevin Smith in support of his film Jersey Girl and it seemed that he was on the fast track to do films such as The Green Hornet and Fletch Lives. Despite the series of frustrations due to reported studio conflicts over his Superman Lives script, it seemed that Kevin was moving towards larger budget studio films.
Fate can be a funny thing, especially in Hollywood, and while preparing the 10th anniversary DVD edition of Clerks as well as the work on the short-lived Clerks animated series, Smith reportedly became inspired as to what the characters from his breakout film had become ten years further on.
Despite some delays caused by the departure of the Weinstein brothers from Miramax and the reluctance of one of the principal cast members, who was concerned that they would not be able to recapture the magic of the first film, “Clerks II” has arrived and is easily one of the funniest films I have ever seen.
The stars of the first film Dante (Brian O’Halloran), and Randal (Jeff Anderson), now find themselves working at a fast food store called Moobys, and as usual, Randal never finds a shortage of bizarre and outrageous topics to impart his wisdom and theories to a usual shocked Dante. It is learned that Dante is about to work his last shift, as in the morning he is moving to Florida from his New Jersey home, in order to get married and start a new career as a manager at a business owned by his future father in law.
Dante also must contend with his friendship with his manager Becky (Rosario Dawson), who wants to make sure that he is moving and getting married for the right reasons and not because it is expected of him.
Of course there are no shortage of characters in the film who add to the merriment, from the customers, to an employee named Elias (Trevor Fehrman), whose mild mannered ways and bizarre obsession with Lord of the Rings makes him a constant foil for the ever irascible Randal, who never loses interest in finding new ways to give Elias a hard time.
Then there are series favorites Jay and Silent Bob, (Jason: Mewes), and (Kevin Smith). The two slackers and drug dealers have now cleaned up their act. They still sell drugs; they just no longer use them. Jay is also prone to spouting his theories on religion to his customers, as he attempts to pass the faith while passing pot.
The duo feature throughout the film and offer some of the funniest moments in the film including a hilarious parody of The Silence of the Lambs.
As the day and evening plays out, one manner of hilarious and outrageous event after another occurs, which forces Dante and Randal to evaluate their lives, as well as what truly being happy and successful means.
While some may say this film is just a collection of crude humor that would be underscoring the true triumph of the film. Smith once again shows that he can portray flawed but realistic characters with surprising realism and charm. The characters know who they are, and make no apologies for being what society would call rough around the edges or failures they are being true to themselves and it is their frank and blunt ways of communicating that make them real and endear them to the audience.
They face the same issues that most of us have to face in life when we examine the paths we take, as well as the decisions we make and the resulting consequences which underscores the ultimate fact that one must be true to themselves.
A true classic and easily the best film Kevin Smith has ever done do not miss this film.
The film was made on a tight budget with a cast of unknowns who discussed all manner of issues from life, love, and beyond in very graphic and outlandish terms as they go through a very long day and evening on the job.
The film went on to be a darling at Sundance and paved the way from Kevin Smith to do a series of films which featured lovable yet realistic characters trying to understand life, and get by in a world where they do not always seem to fit. Of course the films always had Smith’s trademark ability to discuss topics in new and unique ways that blended raunchy moments with inspired dialogue and genuine emotions.
A few years back I interviewed Kevin Smith in support of his film Jersey Girl and it seemed that he was on the fast track to do films such as The Green Hornet and Fletch Lives. Despite the series of frustrations due to reported studio conflicts over his Superman Lives script, it seemed that Kevin was moving towards larger budget studio films.
Fate can be a funny thing, especially in Hollywood, and while preparing the 10th anniversary DVD edition of Clerks as well as the work on the short-lived Clerks animated series, Smith reportedly became inspired as to what the characters from his breakout film had become ten years further on.
Despite some delays caused by the departure of the Weinstein brothers from Miramax and the reluctance of one of the principal cast members, who was concerned that they would not be able to recapture the magic of the first film, “Clerks II” has arrived and is easily one of the funniest films I have ever seen.
The stars of the first film Dante (Brian O’Halloran), and Randal (Jeff Anderson), now find themselves working at a fast food store called Moobys, and as usual, Randal never finds a shortage of bizarre and outrageous topics to impart his wisdom and theories to a usual shocked Dante. It is learned that Dante is about to work his last shift, as in the morning he is moving to Florida from his New Jersey home, in order to get married and start a new career as a manager at a business owned by his future father in law.
Dante also must contend with his friendship with his manager Becky (Rosario Dawson), who wants to make sure that he is moving and getting married for the right reasons and not because it is expected of him.
Of course there are no shortage of characters in the film who add to the merriment, from the customers, to an employee named Elias (Trevor Fehrman), whose mild mannered ways and bizarre obsession with Lord of the Rings makes him a constant foil for the ever irascible Randal, who never loses interest in finding new ways to give Elias a hard time.
Then there are series favorites Jay and Silent Bob, (Jason: Mewes), and (Kevin Smith). The two slackers and drug dealers have now cleaned up their act. They still sell drugs; they just no longer use them. Jay is also prone to spouting his theories on religion to his customers, as he attempts to pass the faith while passing pot.
The duo feature throughout the film and offer some of the funniest moments in the film including a hilarious parody of The Silence of the Lambs.
As the day and evening plays out, one manner of hilarious and outrageous event after another occurs, which forces Dante and Randal to evaluate their lives, as well as what truly being happy and successful means.
While some may say this film is just a collection of crude humor that would be underscoring the true triumph of the film. Smith once again shows that he can portray flawed but realistic characters with surprising realism and charm. The characters know who they are, and make no apologies for being what society would call rough around the edges or failures they are being true to themselves and it is their frank and blunt ways of communicating that make them real and endear them to the audience.
They face the same issues that most of us have to face in life when we examine the paths we take, as well as the decisions we make and the resulting consequences which underscores the ultimate fact that one must be true to themselves.
A true classic and easily the best film Kevin Smith has ever done do not miss this film.
The Bandersnatch (199 KP) rated A Little Princess in Books
Nov 7, 2019
A little Princess was published in full by Charles Scribner's sons in September of 1905 after being a serialisation in St. Nicholas Magazine in 1887 and being a novella in 1888. The book was named one of the Teachers top books for children in 2007 and in 2012 was ranked 56th in the School Library Journal survey. The story follows Sara Crewe a wealthy heiress being sent off to boarding school in England. Despite being wealthy Sara isn't snobbish and rude but polite, clever and generous befriending several other students and the scullery maid Becky. Sara goes from privilege to a pauper after her fathers scheme with is friend over a diamond mine supposedly fails. After spending a few years working hard at the school she once attended Sara is found by her fathers friend and returned to privilege after finding out the diamond mines actually worked.
There are six film adaptions having been released in 1917, 1939, two in 1995 (One version being Filipino) with the most recent being a Russian film released in 1997. the most well known being the 1995 version being directed by Alfonso Cuaron. There have been seven TV shows based on A Little Princess with the 1973 and 1986 (Maureen Lipton was Miss Minchin) versions being particularly faithful to the books, the 1985, 2006 and 2009 versions were various Japanese anime and another Filipino remake happened in 2007. an episode of Veggietales in 2012 was another version of A little Princess. From 2002 to 2014 there have been several musical adaptions of a little princess as well.
Francis Eliza Hodgson Burnett was born in England on the 24th November 1849 in Cheetham, Manchester, England. When her father died in 1852 her family fell on hard times and Francis was looked after by her grandmother who fuelled her love of reading whilst her mother dealt with the family finances. The family eventually emigrated to the states in 1865 but remained somewhat poor thanks to the end of the American Civil war. Francis started writing in fever trying to help her family get out of the financial hole they were in and did so with her first story being published in the Godey's Lady's book in 1868 eventually being published regularly in its pages alongside Scribner's Monthly, Peterson's Magazine and Harper's Bazaar.
In 1872 Francis agreed to and married family friend Swan Burnett. She continued to write which supported them as they moved to Paris to allow Swan to train as an eye and ear doctor. Francis economised by making clothes for both their sons and for herself. The family returned to the US a few years later where swan managed to set up a doctoring business despite being in debt. For several years afterwards Francis wrote several short stories which were continuously published, Francis eventually turned to children's novels after a meeting with Mary Mapes Dodge the editor of children's magazine St Nicholas. In 1884 Francis set to work on Little Lord Fauntleroy which was serialised in 1885 and published in book form in 1886.
In 1887 Francis returned to England for Queen Victoria's golden jubilee which triggered yearly transatlantic trips between the US and England with her sons. She had fallen ill during this time and had spent time confined to bed, she did however managed to write both The Fortunes of Phillipa Fairfax (only published in the UK) and Sara Crewe or what happened at Miss Minchin's which was rewritten as A Little Princess. In December 1890 Francis and Swans eldest son Lionel died of consumption which spurred his mother into a depression and turn away form the Protestant faith and embrace spiritualism.
In 1898 After their youngest son Vivian finished school, Francis and Swan had divorced (though they had begun to drift apart and were living separate lives several years earlier) and two years later Francis had moved back to England and lived at Great Maytham Hall and married Stephan Townsend, which proved to be a terrible marriage and it ended in 1902. In 1907 Francis returned to the states and spent the next seventeen years in Plandome manor writing several more stories and editing for the Children's Magazine upon the insistence of her Son Vivian. Francis died on October 29th 1924 at the age of 72, she's buried in Roslyn Cemetery and her son Vivian is burred nearby having died in 1937.
I knew of the book as a child but didn't read it until I was a teenager, by then I did know of and had seen the 1995 movie directed by Alfonso Cuaron. The books theme of rising above and succeeding in the face of terrible times is a good thing to reed about. I definitely recommend the book to children and teenagers alike and I give it 9/10.
There are six film adaptions having been released in 1917, 1939, two in 1995 (One version being Filipino) with the most recent being a Russian film released in 1997. the most well known being the 1995 version being directed by Alfonso Cuaron. There have been seven TV shows based on A Little Princess with the 1973 and 1986 (Maureen Lipton was Miss Minchin) versions being particularly faithful to the books, the 1985, 2006 and 2009 versions were various Japanese anime and another Filipino remake happened in 2007. an episode of Veggietales in 2012 was another version of A little Princess. From 2002 to 2014 there have been several musical adaptions of a little princess as well.
Francis Eliza Hodgson Burnett was born in England on the 24th November 1849 in Cheetham, Manchester, England. When her father died in 1852 her family fell on hard times and Francis was looked after by her grandmother who fuelled her love of reading whilst her mother dealt with the family finances. The family eventually emigrated to the states in 1865 but remained somewhat poor thanks to the end of the American Civil war. Francis started writing in fever trying to help her family get out of the financial hole they were in and did so with her first story being published in the Godey's Lady's book in 1868 eventually being published regularly in its pages alongside Scribner's Monthly, Peterson's Magazine and Harper's Bazaar.
In 1872 Francis agreed to and married family friend Swan Burnett. She continued to write which supported them as they moved to Paris to allow Swan to train as an eye and ear doctor. Francis economised by making clothes for both their sons and for herself. The family returned to the US a few years later where swan managed to set up a doctoring business despite being in debt. For several years afterwards Francis wrote several short stories which were continuously published, Francis eventually turned to children's novels after a meeting with Mary Mapes Dodge the editor of children's magazine St Nicholas. In 1884 Francis set to work on Little Lord Fauntleroy which was serialised in 1885 and published in book form in 1886.
In 1887 Francis returned to England for Queen Victoria's golden jubilee which triggered yearly transatlantic trips between the US and England with her sons. She had fallen ill during this time and had spent time confined to bed, she did however managed to write both The Fortunes of Phillipa Fairfax (only published in the UK) and Sara Crewe or what happened at Miss Minchin's which was rewritten as A Little Princess. In December 1890 Francis and Swans eldest son Lionel died of consumption which spurred his mother into a depression and turn away form the Protestant faith and embrace spiritualism.
In 1898 After their youngest son Vivian finished school, Francis and Swan had divorced (though they had begun to drift apart and were living separate lives several years earlier) and two years later Francis had moved back to England and lived at Great Maytham Hall and married Stephan Townsend, which proved to be a terrible marriage and it ended in 1902. In 1907 Francis returned to the states and spent the next seventeen years in Plandome manor writing several more stories and editing for the Children's Magazine upon the insistence of her Son Vivian. Francis died on October 29th 1924 at the age of 72, she's buried in Roslyn Cemetery and her son Vivian is burred nearby having died in 1937.
I knew of the book as a child but didn't read it until I was a teenager, by then I did know of and had seen the 1995 movie directed by Alfonso Cuaron. The books theme of rising above and succeeding in the face of terrible times is a good thing to reed about. I definitely recommend the book to children and teenagers alike and I give it 9/10.