Search
Search results
Neo Travel Your Mind
Health & Fitness
App
This app takes you on a personal, poetic, and immersive voyage to approach this ancient practice of...
I AM That I AM ~ Affirmation Recorder & Meditation
Lifestyle and Health & Fitness
App
World's Best Affirmation Recorder For Positive Thinking. Get Inspired and Motivated to Make Awesome...
Get Resilient! Resilienz-Training mit Hypnose
Health & Fitness and Medical
App
"Get Resilient! Building Resilience by Hypnosis • Develop greater resilience to resist stress and...
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The House Guest in Books
Jun 11, 2020
After reading and enjoying The Retreat by Mark Edwards, I came across The House Guest by the same author. The synopsis sounded intriguing, so I decided to give it a read. While it wasn't a bad read, it was lacking a certain something.
Ruth and Adam are house-sitting for Mona and Jack, a rich couple they met on a cruise. When a woman named Eden shows up claiming to be an old friend of Mona's and Jack's, they decide to let her stay. After all, Eden seems to know a lot about the rich couple, and she seems nice enough. However, when Ruth and Eden disappear after a night of drinking, Adam begins to worry if he made a mistake by inviting Eden into the house. Is Eden actually an old friend or was she actually a complete stranger?
The plot for The House Guest really caught my attention. Mark Edwards does a fantastic job of making the story seem original. While many of the plot twists were easily predictable, it was still interesting enough to hold my attention. I did find that the pacing starts off a bit slow and doesn't really pick up until about halfway through the book. All of my questions were answered by the ending of the book and although there's not a cliffhanger, the ending does leave room for a sequel. I must admit that I liked the way Edwards kind of teased that there could be a sequel. One thing I wasn't a fan of was how the narrative would switch from a third person point of view for everyone to a first person point of view when it came to Adam. I would have much rather read the whole book in third person, but perhaps that's just a personal preference. Edwards did great at setting up the world building throughout the book, and when the pacing finally caught up to the action, I was immersed in the story line to find out if my predictions were correct.
I very much enjoyed the characters in The House Guest. Ruth and Adam were a likable couple, and it was easy to understand their relationship and what each one was feeling thanks to Edwards' great description of how each character felt about the relationship. I sympathized with Adam feeling like a loser compared to Ruth and her success. However, I could also relate to Ruth and her feelings of not being good enough and other insecurities. Eden was an awesome character, and I enjoyed whenever she had a scene. Her backstory was definitely an interesting one. I never knew if she was telling the truth until towards the end. Callum was a wild card in the story, and I was surprised when his true backstory was revealed. Though all the other characters felt fleshed out, I would have liked to have read more on Gabriel. I believe that he really could have flourished a bit more had he had a bigger part in the story. Saying that, Gabriel still is a fantastic character.
Trigger warnings for The House Guest include violence, gun violence, murder, attempted murder, attempted rape (not graphic), mentions of sex (not graphic), getting drunk, mentions of drugs, brainwashing, and abuse.
All in all, The House Guest does have some faults, but it's still an interesting read. The story unfolds perfectly, and the characters really draw you into their world. I would recommend The House Guest by Mark Edwards to those aged 17+ who are after a decent psychological thriller.
Ruth and Adam are house-sitting for Mona and Jack, a rich couple they met on a cruise. When a woman named Eden shows up claiming to be an old friend of Mona's and Jack's, they decide to let her stay. After all, Eden seems to know a lot about the rich couple, and she seems nice enough. However, when Ruth and Eden disappear after a night of drinking, Adam begins to worry if he made a mistake by inviting Eden into the house. Is Eden actually an old friend or was she actually a complete stranger?
The plot for The House Guest really caught my attention. Mark Edwards does a fantastic job of making the story seem original. While many of the plot twists were easily predictable, it was still interesting enough to hold my attention. I did find that the pacing starts off a bit slow and doesn't really pick up until about halfway through the book. All of my questions were answered by the ending of the book and although there's not a cliffhanger, the ending does leave room for a sequel. I must admit that I liked the way Edwards kind of teased that there could be a sequel. One thing I wasn't a fan of was how the narrative would switch from a third person point of view for everyone to a first person point of view when it came to Adam. I would have much rather read the whole book in third person, but perhaps that's just a personal preference. Edwards did great at setting up the world building throughout the book, and when the pacing finally caught up to the action, I was immersed in the story line to find out if my predictions were correct.
I very much enjoyed the characters in The House Guest. Ruth and Adam were a likable couple, and it was easy to understand their relationship and what each one was feeling thanks to Edwards' great description of how each character felt about the relationship. I sympathized with Adam feeling like a loser compared to Ruth and her success. However, I could also relate to Ruth and her feelings of not being good enough and other insecurities. Eden was an awesome character, and I enjoyed whenever she had a scene. Her backstory was definitely an interesting one. I never knew if she was telling the truth until towards the end. Callum was a wild card in the story, and I was surprised when his true backstory was revealed. Though all the other characters felt fleshed out, I would have liked to have read more on Gabriel. I believe that he really could have flourished a bit more had he had a bigger part in the story. Saying that, Gabriel still is a fantastic character.
Trigger warnings for The House Guest include violence, gun violence, murder, attempted murder, attempted rape (not graphic), mentions of sex (not graphic), getting drunk, mentions of drugs, brainwashing, and abuse.
All in all, The House Guest does have some faults, but it's still an interesting read. The story unfolds perfectly, and the characters really draw you into their world. I would recommend The House Guest by Mark Edwards to those aged 17+ who are after a decent psychological thriller.
Savage (Songs From A Broken World) by Gary Numan
5.5
Rate It
Album Watch
Coming almost four years after his album ‘Splinter (Songs From A Broken Mind)’ earned the best...
dance pop
The Art of Losing by The Anchoress
Album
AWARD-WINNING WELSH MULTI-INSTRUMENTALIST THE ANCHORESS RETURNS WITH HER CRITICALLY ACCLAIMED SECOND...
RockMyRun
Health & Fitness
App Watch
Get more motivation from your workout music. RockMyRun works with the world’s best DJs to craft...
health and fitness
Little Panda: Habits & Manners
Education and Games
App
For more videos, subscribe to BabyBus on YouTube! ►►https://goo.gl/llI2fX Keeping good...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Beatles: Eight Days A Week - The Touring Years (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
A film worth getting into your life.
Reviewing documentaries is always a bit tricky, since it is often difficult to separate the quality of the film making from your emotional attachment to the subject material. In my case, my early life was saturated with Beatlemania. Although I was only 2 year’s old in 1963 at the start of it all, I had three older siblings who ramped up the excitement so much that it permeated my young mind. I still remember being vehemently “Sssshhed” since I was making too much noise during the live and ground-breaking “All you need is Love” telecast!
Ron Howard’s film focuses on “the touring years” which as depicted were truly manic, spanning from 1963 to 1966 before then skipping forward to 1969 for their final rooftop concert. This was in a time when airline travel was not the more comfortable and smoke-free environment it is today, so these worldwide trips much have been seriously grueling, even without the adoration that reached dangerous proportions when they reached their destinations.
Howard has clearly had his research team scour the world for archive clips since – whilst sensitively skipping some of the more ‘commonly seen’ materials, like the “jewelry shaking” clip – the film shows concert action I certainly had never seen before.
The film is also nicely interlaced with celebrity cameos recalling their linkage to the Fab Four’s performances (often moving, like Whoopi Goldberg’s) and the group’s “legacy” effect on modern-day art (in Richard Curtis’s case rather less convincing). One of the most striking of these is that of Sigourney Weaver recounting her attendance as a pre-teen at the Beatle’s Rose Bowl performance in LA. There, in the newsreel footage of adoring fans, is the unmistakable face of the ‘before she was famous’ actress: at least I hope it really was her (as the clip’s timing implied) and not a lookalike, since that would be really disappointing!
Also featuring – although not enough for my liking – are Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr, recounting their feelings about the events and what happened behind the closed doors of hotel rooms or – most notably – a meat truck.
What shines through is the honesty and intelligence of Lennon and McCartney, typified by the idiotic questioning of journalists, some of who had done so little homework they didn’t even know there wasn’t a Beatle called Eric! Some of the group’s off the cuff responses were priceless: “What is the secret of your success?” asks one journo. “We don’t know” quips John. “If we knew we’d form another group and be managers.”
While the film has enormous energy in its first two thirds, it rather runs out of momentum in its final reel…. a bit like the Beatles did in fact. It also has elements of gimmickry like the smoke rising from photo cigarettes which gets a tad tiresome after the tenth occurrence.
But this is a very watchable and enjoyable rock down memory lane for 50-somethings and for any fans old and young of the Fab Four’s music. Highly Recommended. Note that the documentary itself is about 90 minutes in length, with another 30 minutes of live concert music tagged onto the end post-titles (which for travel reasons I was unfortunately unable to stay for so can’t comment on).
Ron Howard’s film focuses on “the touring years” which as depicted were truly manic, spanning from 1963 to 1966 before then skipping forward to 1969 for their final rooftop concert. This was in a time when airline travel was not the more comfortable and smoke-free environment it is today, so these worldwide trips much have been seriously grueling, even without the adoration that reached dangerous proportions when they reached their destinations.
Howard has clearly had his research team scour the world for archive clips since – whilst sensitively skipping some of the more ‘commonly seen’ materials, like the “jewelry shaking” clip – the film shows concert action I certainly had never seen before.
The film is also nicely interlaced with celebrity cameos recalling their linkage to the Fab Four’s performances (often moving, like Whoopi Goldberg’s) and the group’s “legacy” effect on modern-day art (in Richard Curtis’s case rather less convincing). One of the most striking of these is that of Sigourney Weaver recounting her attendance as a pre-teen at the Beatle’s Rose Bowl performance in LA. There, in the newsreel footage of adoring fans, is the unmistakable face of the ‘before she was famous’ actress: at least I hope it really was her (as the clip’s timing implied) and not a lookalike, since that would be really disappointing!
Also featuring – although not enough for my liking – are Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr, recounting their feelings about the events and what happened behind the closed doors of hotel rooms or – most notably – a meat truck.
What shines through is the honesty and intelligence of Lennon and McCartney, typified by the idiotic questioning of journalists, some of who had done so little homework they didn’t even know there wasn’t a Beatle called Eric! Some of the group’s off the cuff responses were priceless: “What is the secret of your success?” asks one journo. “We don’t know” quips John. “If we knew we’d form another group and be managers.”
While the film has enormous energy in its first two thirds, it rather runs out of momentum in its final reel…. a bit like the Beatles did in fact. It also has elements of gimmickry like the smoke rising from photo cigarettes which gets a tad tiresome after the tenth occurrence.
But this is a very watchable and enjoyable rock down memory lane for 50-somethings and for any fans old and young of the Fab Four’s music. Highly Recommended. Note that the documentary itself is about 90 minutes in length, with another 30 minutes of live concert music tagged onto the end post-titles (which for travel reasons I was unfortunately unable to stay for so can’t comment on).
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Power of the Dog (2021) in Movies
Dec 7, 2021
Deep and Layered
If the movie you are watching has a long shot of wheat blowing in the wind, then you are watching a character drama. If that same film also includes a 5 minute scene of someone braiding rope, then you have THE POWER OF THE DOG.
Written and Directed by Jane Campion (THE PIANO) and based on the best-selling novel by Thomas Savage, THE POWER OF THE DOG tells the tale of 2 brothers, talkative and charismatic Phil (Benedict Cumberbatch) and quiet and contemplative George (Jesse Plemons) who are tending their cattle ranch in Montana in the mid-1920’s. As horses give way to horseless carriages, George falls for a widow (Kirsten Dunst) who has an effeminate son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) and this relationship makes Phil face his own feelings - and a changing world.
In the hands of Campion, this film is a quiet, introspective look at how a hard-drinking, hard-living Cowboy deals with a changing world - and his own pent up emotions - and it works well. She weaves a fascinating story that takes its time unfurling it’s pages and the time that the audience takes in steeping themselves in the story and the characters is time well spent, indeed.
This is because the great Benedict Cumberbatch (TV’s SHERLOCK) is on-screen for 95% of the film as Phil and he commands the screen every moment that his presence is known. It is a bravura - though eerily quiet and introspective - performance by Cumberbatch. Campion and Cumberbatch create a memorable character that fills the screen not because he is wide or high or showy, but because he is deep and layered and the film spends most of its 2 hour and 6 minute running time peeling back the layers and digging deep into this character. It is an Oscar-worthy performance and is a shoo-in Oscar nominee and would not be surprising if Cumberbatch finally wins his Oscar for this role.
Plemons and Dunst (who played a couple in the first season of the TV series FARGO) are the catalyst that set the film - and the discoveries - in motion, but, though they are good, they have very little to do besides react to Cumberbatch’s characters’ moves.
Surprisingly, the character that does stand-out and the actor who does go toe-to-toe with Cumberbatch’s Phil is Peter, the son of Rose and played by Kodi Smit-McPhee (NIghtcrawler in X-MEN:APOCALYPSE) who is (at first) befriended by Phil as a joke and becomes closer and closer to him as the film progresses. It is through Peter that we dig through the layers of Phil - and it is a fascinating journey.
This is a gorgeous film to look at - Cinematographer Ari Wegner (THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE) is a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination as well - and this is good, because Phil (and the audience) spend long stretches looking out in the wilderness, contemplating the world - and change.
Not the fastest moving film you will ever encounter, but if you are in the mood for this sort of thing and can get caught up with discovering the layers of Phil, then you will be rewarded with a layered and deep experience.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Written and Directed by Jane Campion (THE PIANO) and based on the best-selling novel by Thomas Savage, THE POWER OF THE DOG tells the tale of 2 brothers, talkative and charismatic Phil (Benedict Cumberbatch) and quiet and contemplative George (Jesse Plemons) who are tending their cattle ranch in Montana in the mid-1920’s. As horses give way to horseless carriages, George falls for a widow (Kirsten Dunst) who has an effeminate son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) and this relationship makes Phil face his own feelings - and a changing world.
In the hands of Campion, this film is a quiet, introspective look at how a hard-drinking, hard-living Cowboy deals with a changing world - and his own pent up emotions - and it works well. She weaves a fascinating story that takes its time unfurling it’s pages and the time that the audience takes in steeping themselves in the story and the characters is time well spent, indeed.
This is because the great Benedict Cumberbatch (TV’s SHERLOCK) is on-screen for 95% of the film as Phil and he commands the screen every moment that his presence is known. It is a bravura - though eerily quiet and introspective - performance by Cumberbatch. Campion and Cumberbatch create a memorable character that fills the screen not because he is wide or high or showy, but because he is deep and layered and the film spends most of its 2 hour and 6 minute running time peeling back the layers and digging deep into this character. It is an Oscar-worthy performance and is a shoo-in Oscar nominee and would not be surprising if Cumberbatch finally wins his Oscar for this role.
Plemons and Dunst (who played a couple in the first season of the TV series FARGO) are the catalyst that set the film - and the discoveries - in motion, but, though they are good, they have very little to do besides react to Cumberbatch’s characters’ moves.
Surprisingly, the character that does stand-out and the actor who does go toe-to-toe with Cumberbatch’s Phil is Peter, the son of Rose and played by Kodi Smit-McPhee (NIghtcrawler in X-MEN:APOCALYPSE) who is (at first) befriended by Phil as a joke and becomes closer and closer to him as the film progresses. It is through Peter that we dig through the layers of Phil - and it is a fascinating journey.
This is a gorgeous film to look at - Cinematographer Ari Wegner (THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE) is a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination as well - and this is good, because Phil (and the audience) spend long stretches looking out in the wilderness, contemplating the world - and change.
Not the fastest moving film you will ever encounter, but if you are in the mood for this sort of thing and can get caught up with discovering the layers of Phil, then you will be rewarded with a layered and deep experience.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)