Search
Search results
ClareR (6037 KP) rated The Flower Girls in Books
Jan 17, 2019
A chilling psychological thriller
A child goes missing on New Years Eve from a hotel, and when the police are called in, it is discovered that one of the guests is one of the notorious Flower Girls. The Flower Girls were involved in the murder and mutilation of a toddler in 1997, when they themselves were only 10 and 6 years old. The 10 year old, Laurel, remains in prison nearly 20 years later. Rosie was found not to have participated in the murder and couldn't remember anything that happened at that time, such was her trauma. She and her remaining family were given new identities and relocated. Her rediscovery provokes a media frenzy. The missing child (Georgie) is found alive and hypothermic, but Rosie's new identity as Hazel is now known to everyone.
We see what happened 20 years ago in short flashbacks, which can have some disturbing moments (not gory, not of the original murder - at least not at the start), and we meet the aunt of Kirstie Swann (the toddler who was murdered), who has campaigned tirelessly to keep Laurel behind bars. We are also kept in the loop of the police investigation of Georgie's disappearance. There are a lot of characters to contend with in this book, but I think it was done well, and I didn't have any problem remembering who they were. I really enjoyed this, despite the rather macabre subject matter. The pace was just right, there was a good amount of skin-crawling moments, and an unresolved ending which really suited the rest of the story - and an unresolved ending? Well, that has to be one of my favourite things!
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for the chance to read this book, and to Alice Clark-Platts for reading along and commenting on the story with the readers! If you haven't tried The Pigeonhole, it's well worth a go. I've found some really good books on this platform.
We see what happened 20 years ago in short flashbacks, which can have some disturbing moments (not gory, not of the original murder - at least not at the start), and we meet the aunt of Kirstie Swann (the toddler who was murdered), who has campaigned tirelessly to keep Laurel behind bars. We are also kept in the loop of the police investigation of Georgie's disappearance. There are a lot of characters to contend with in this book, but I think it was done well, and I didn't have any problem remembering who they were. I really enjoyed this, despite the rather macabre subject matter. The pace was just right, there was a good amount of skin-crawling moments, and an unresolved ending which really suited the rest of the story - and an unresolved ending? Well, that has to be one of my favourite things!
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for the chance to read this book, and to Alice Clark-Platts for reading along and commenting on the story with the readers! If you haven't tried The Pigeonhole, it's well worth a go. I've found some really good books on this platform.
Deborah (162 KP) rated The Madwoman Upstairs in Books
Dec 21, 2018
I thought this sounded a really interesting idea, modern day woman, descended from the Bronte family uncovers secrets from the history of her family. While I didn't dislike it, I didn't really love it either. For about the first half of the book I found it a bit of a struggle as I found the protagonist, Samantha Whipple, rather hard to like. I'm not even sure I liked her that much by the end of the book to be honest.
Samantha has had rather an odd upbringing, which would account for some of her strangeness. We see her early on arriving at a fictional Oxford college to study English Literature although she seems to hate practically all writers and seems incapable of constructing a reasonable critical argument! She is rather like a spoilt child, and as such I found her hard to like. I'm also pretty good at suspending my disbelief but it takes some stretch of the imagination to accept that someone like Samantha would have been able to gain a place on an English Literature course at an Oxford college! Or that she would be housed on the fifth floor of a tower with no windows in her room and apparently there is only a bathroom on the ground floor. Must have been a bit of an issue when she sprained her ankle, but this is glossed over.
Samantha's tutor is a young, handsome (naturally!) Englishman with the unlikely name of Dr James Timothy Orville III. For most of the book he is referred to simply as 'Orville'. If you are of my generation you might understand why this seemed a bit off-putting and why I've had 'I Wish I Could Fly....' in my head for the past few days!
In conclusion, it wasn't a bad book, the writing was OK (a few Americanisms slipping into the mouths of supposedly British characters....) but it just didn't work for me - there were too many things that were rather improbable and the protagonist was, at times, idiotic.
Samantha has had rather an odd upbringing, which would account for some of her strangeness. We see her early on arriving at a fictional Oxford college to study English Literature although she seems to hate practically all writers and seems incapable of constructing a reasonable critical argument! She is rather like a spoilt child, and as such I found her hard to like. I'm also pretty good at suspending my disbelief but it takes some stretch of the imagination to accept that someone like Samantha would have been able to gain a place on an English Literature course at an Oxford college! Or that she would be housed on the fifth floor of a tower with no windows in her room and apparently there is only a bathroom on the ground floor. Must have been a bit of an issue when she sprained her ankle, but this is glossed over.
Samantha's tutor is a young, handsome (naturally!) Englishman with the unlikely name of Dr James Timothy Orville III. For most of the book he is referred to simply as 'Orville'. If you are of my generation you might understand why this seemed a bit off-putting and why I've had 'I Wish I Could Fly....' in my head for the past few days!
In conclusion, it wasn't a bad book, the writing was OK (a few Americanisms slipping into the mouths of supposedly British characters....) but it just didn't work for me - there were too many things that were rather improbable and the protagonist was, at times, idiotic.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated The Invisible Man (2020) in Movies
Mar 18, 2020
Terrifying
Don't you just love it when you go and see a film you know little to nothing about, and end up being pleasantly surprised at how good it is? Yesterday was my last chance to catch a film due to closure because of the coronavirus, and I'm very glad I chose to watch The Invisible Man.
Right from the opening scene, the first half of this film i found absolutely terrifying. The score really helps to build up a lot of tension and I found myself on the edge of my seat. I'm known for being quite hardened when it comes to scary films, but there was something about this film that had me wanting to hide my head in my hands. It may just be the idea of an invisible enemy or jump scares that you obviously can't see coming, but I havent been this creeped out in a long time.
The second half of the film is a little less scary and ends up being more like a thriller, which was probably a good thing as I dont think I could've handled that level of terror for the entire film! The acting is great, especially from Elizabeth Moss and really had me questioning her character's sanity. She carries the entire film and she puts in a brilliant performance. The technology and science behind this is maybe a little lacking and questionable at times, but as they dont focus too much on the detail of this and the backstory of Adrian it's rather easy to ignore some of the slightly dodgy science and just enjoy the ride. There are a lot of twists and turns in this film that I hadn't been expecting, and I found the ending to be especially satisfying.
Overall this is a unexpected yet hugely enjoyable thriller that had me cowering in my seat for a good hour. Not many films can do that.
Right from the opening scene, the first half of this film i found absolutely terrifying. The score really helps to build up a lot of tension and I found myself on the edge of my seat. I'm known for being quite hardened when it comes to scary films, but there was something about this film that had me wanting to hide my head in my hands. It may just be the idea of an invisible enemy or jump scares that you obviously can't see coming, but I havent been this creeped out in a long time.
The second half of the film is a little less scary and ends up being more like a thriller, which was probably a good thing as I dont think I could've handled that level of terror for the entire film! The acting is great, especially from Elizabeth Moss and really had me questioning her character's sanity. She carries the entire film and she puts in a brilliant performance. The technology and science behind this is maybe a little lacking and questionable at times, but as they dont focus too much on the detail of this and the backstory of Adrian it's rather easy to ignore some of the slightly dodgy science and just enjoy the ride. There are a lot of twists and turns in this film that I hadn't been expecting, and I found the ending to be especially satisfying.
Overall this is a unexpected yet hugely enjoyable thriller that had me cowering in my seat for a good hour. Not many films can do that.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Dolittle (2020) in Movies
Feb 26, 2020 (Updated Feb 26, 2020)
Perfect... for kids
The trailer for this didn't fill me with much confidence, and I was even more concerned after hearing about the troubles even getting it to the screen, and I'm afraid to say it lived up to my rather low expectations.
Right from the opening scene, its obvious this film has been made solely for children. The plot is basic and predictable and a lot of the action and gags are very childish and puerile. Even Emma Thompson's narration made me feel like I was watching a kids educational show. I appreciate it's difficult to make a film suitable for kids and adults alike, but Disney and Pixar have proved it's possible without being infantile - sadly Dolittle doesn't. There are a few moments that I did have a small giggle at, but most of the gags I found either too obvious or childish to be funny. Weirdly enough I found Kevin the squirrel and his logs hilarious.
The cast themselves I found underused, or rather odd choices - some of the voice actors of the animals to me seemed a little out of place. That probably wasn't helped by how distractingly odd the animals looked when they were talking, and with the CGI ranging from pretty good to decidedly dodgy. Antonio Banderas was wasted as King Rassouli and Michael Sheen was hamming it up to the extremes, but it's Robert Downey Jnr that deserves a notable mention... for how terrible his accent is. I love RDJ, but his Welsh accent ranges from ok to downright horrendous. I couldn't even tell from the trailer what sort of accent he was doing it was that bad. And the problem with this is the accent took away all of the fun and charisma you'd expect from his performance.
The one benefit of this film is that it's fairly short, so it doesnt drag too much. Your kids will love it, but as an adult I wouldn't expect much.
Right from the opening scene, its obvious this film has been made solely for children. The plot is basic and predictable and a lot of the action and gags are very childish and puerile. Even Emma Thompson's narration made me feel like I was watching a kids educational show. I appreciate it's difficult to make a film suitable for kids and adults alike, but Disney and Pixar have proved it's possible without being infantile - sadly Dolittle doesn't. There are a few moments that I did have a small giggle at, but most of the gags I found either too obvious or childish to be funny. Weirdly enough I found Kevin the squirrel and his logs hilarious.
The cast themselves I found underused, or rather odd choices - some of the voice actors of the animals to me seemed a little out of place. That probably wasn't helped by how distractingly odd the animals looked when they were talking, and with the CGI ranging from pretty good to decidedly dodgy. Antonio Banderas was wasted as King Rassouli and Michael Sheen was hamming it up to the extremes, but it's Robert Downey Jnr that deserves a notable mention... for how terrible his accent is. I love RDJ, but his Welsh accent ranges from ok to downright horrendous. I couldn't even tell from the trailer what sort of accent he was doing it was that bad. And the problem with this is the accent took away all of the fun and charisma you'd expect from his performance.
The one benefit of this film is that it's fairly short, so it doesnt drag too much. Your kids will love it, but as an adult I wouldn't expect much.
The Keeper Of Lost Things
7.8
Rate It
Book
A charming, clever, and quietly moving debut novel of of endless possibilities and joyful...
The Guide to Modern Cupping Therapy: A Step-by-Step Source for Vacuum Therapy
10.0
Rate It
Book
An ancient technique has found its place in the modern world of healing. In recent years, you've...
ClareR (6037 KP) rated The Devil You Know: Stories of Human Cruelty and Compassion in Books
Jun 22, 2021
The Devil You Know is a series of case studies of some of the patients that Dr Gwen Adshead has worked with in her role as a forensic psychiatrist. I don’t know quite what I expected from this: perhaps a dry, academic-type book. It was nothing at all like that. It’s a book full of compassion for the terrible mistakes, acts and choices that these people have made. And this is what’s made clear in this book: we (or rather, I) have always been led to believe that people who murder, stalk or destroy others lives are sub-human, have no empathy, no guilt or reasons for their actions. But there are those who have made terrible, unforgivable, life-changing decisions and must now live with those choices. Some are wracked with guilt, others aren’t.
It’s really interesting to read about this diverse group of people - they were in Broadmoor, secure prisons or units, and some had been released back into society and were experiencing the world again after serving their sentences.
If you’ve always wondered what motivates people to commit violent crimes, then this is, in part, the book for you. I found it quite reassuring to know that there are people like Dr Adshead out there who listen to perpetrators of crime, who want to learn what it is that causes them to make that fatal decision. I found the part about early childhood neglect and abuse and its impact on brain development particularly interesting (I work in Early Years), and the fact that it is potentially within society’s power to prevent crime before it has even been thought about was sobering.
I could go on, but I won’t. Just to say that I found this whole book fascinating - it’s such a well-written, accessible and interesting read.
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this, and to Gwen Adshead and Eileen Horne for reading along with the Pigeons!
It’s really interesting to read about this diverse group of people - they were in Broadmoor, secure prisons or units, and some had been released back into society and were experiencing the world again after serving their sentences.
If you’ve always wondered what motivates people to commit violent crimes, then this is, in part, the book for you. I found it quite reassuring to know that there are people like Dr Adshead out there who listen to perpetrators of crime, who want to learn what it is that causes them to make that fatal decision. I found the part about early childhood neglect and abuse and its impact on brain development particularly interesting (I work in Early Years), and the fact that it is potentially within society’s power to prevent crime before it has even been thought about was sobering.
I could go on, but I won’t. Just to say that I found this whole book fascinating - it’s such a well-written, accessible and interesting read.
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this, and to Gwen Adshead and Eileen Horne for reading along with the Pigeons!
BookInspector (124 KP) rated Love Me to Death in Books
Sep 24, 2020 (Updated Jan 26, 2021)
There are two main characters in this book, and the book is told from their perspectives. Mr Anderson is a loner, living in a house that everyone is calling a “freak house”, all he wants is his own family, and he is ready to kill for it. Jacob is a teenager, that has lost his mother and is bullied by his stepmother. Jacob has only one friend- Maggie, but after her cousin sister is murdered, he is about to lose her as well. The characters in this book were not my favourite ones, and I found it difficult to connect with them. I liked Mr Anderson’s parts in this novel, I found his thoughts very amusing and very disturbed. The man has a very damaged personality, that is pretty dark and scary. Jacob’s parts in this book were very repetitive and dull, and I found myself skimming the text on many occasions.
The narrative of this book didn’t really have to offer anything. Yes, it discusses important topics, such as bullying, mental illness, loneliness, child abuse etc. But the way it was incorporated just didn’t work for me. The plot kind of plodded along, without any interesting twists or turns, and I didn’t feel any suspense whatsoever. I kept reading in hope of something major to happen, but it never did. 😦
The writing style wasn’t to my liking as well, I feel the book was expanded with the repetitive thoughts about Maggie. The setting of the book felt dark and gloomy, as well as the characters. The chapters have a medium length but Jacob’s parts really dragged to me. The book has some gory details regarding murders, and creepy thoughts of a killer as well. I liked the ending of the book, it did leave me satisfied with the outcome.
So, to conclude, this book was not my cup of tea. I loved the killer, his strangeness and his thoughts, but other than that the characters and the plot felt bleak and boring.
The narrative of this book didn’t really have to offer anything. Yes, it discusses important topics, such as bullying, mental illness, loneliness, child abuse etc. But the way it was incorporated just didn’t work for me. The plot kind of plodded along, without any interesting twists or turns, and I didn’t feel any suspense whatsoever. I kept reading in hope of something major to happen, but it never did. 😦
The writing style wasn’t to my liking as well, I feel the book was expanded with the repetitive thoughts about Maggie. The setting of the book felt dark and gloomy, as well as the characters. The chapters have a medium length but Jacob’s parts really dragged to me. The book has some gory details regarding murders, and creepy thoughts of a killer as well. I liked the ending of the book, it did leave me satisfied with the outcome.
So, to conclude, this book was not my cup of tea. I loved the killer, his strangeness and his thoughts, but other than that the characters and the plot felt bleak and boring.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Cloverfield (2008) in Movies
Oct 5, 2020
Cloverfield is, at heart a found footage Kaiju movie with the twist that you don't see much of the main monster until the end of the film. Unlike Kaiju films like Godzilla or even Pacific rim, Cloverfield does not concentrate on the monster but on the people affected by it's rampage and the found footage aspect of the film helps bring us in close with a small group of survivors as they try to work out what is happening and try to find their friends.
I knew some one who absolutely hated this film for the very fact that the monster is rarely seen, although he clamed that you never actually saw the monster, which isn't true so I don't think he watched all the way to the end. He had a point though, if you want to watch a film where monsters fight it out amongst themselves then this probably won't be for you.
The monster is really nothing more than a plot device and the fact that it is only revealed in parts and not fully seen until the end helps to keep the film centred on the people and helps add a touch of reality to the film, after all if you lived in Japan during a Kaiju attack you would be more interested in saving your own life than weather you were about to be eaten by Godzilla or Ghidorah.
Being a found footage film, Cloverfield suffers slightly from the usual shaky camera work and occasional low sound but these are kept to a minimum. The film also manages to avoid relying on night vision or infra red so the footage is, for the most part, much clearer than other films of this style and doesn't keep switching formats which make the film less distracting than others.
Over all Cloverfield is a good monster/survival film which leaves some questions to be answered in the sequels (or not )
I knew some one who absolutely hated this film for the very fact that the monster is rarely seen, although he clamed that you never actually saw the monster, which isn't true so I don't think he watched all the way to the end. He had a point though, if you want to watch a film where monsters fight it out amongst themselves then this probably won't be for you.
The monster is really nothing more than a plot device and the fact that it is only revealed in parts and not fully seen until the end helps to keep the film centred on the people and helps add a touch of reality to the film, after all if you lived in Japan during a Kaiju attack you would be more interested in saving your own life than weather you were about to be eaten by Godzilla or Ghidorah.
Being a found footage film, Cloverfield suffers slightly from the usual shaky camera work and occasional low sound but these are kept to a minimum. The film also manages to avoid relying on night vision or infra red so the footage is, for the most part, much clearer than other films of this style and doesn't keep switching formats which make the film less distracting than others.
Over all Cloverfield is a good monster/survival film which leaves some questions to be answered in the sequels (or not )
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Dig (2021) in Movies
Jan 31, 2021
Acting from Fiennes and Mulligan - top notch (1 more)
Cinematography is gorgeous
Why make it so "man heavy" when history was otherwise? (1 more)
Found the asynchronous editing irritating
Archaeology with no fedora required
It’s 1939, and as World War 2 approaches, widower Edith Pretty (Carey Mulligan) hires rough and ready excavator Basil Brown (Ralph Fiennes) to dig into one of the ancient earth mounds on her property at the site that will become famous as Sutton Hoo in Suffolk. Requesting the help of her cousin Rory Lomax (Johnny Flynn) to photograph the effort, the site slowly gives up its Anglo-Saxon treasures attracting the attention of first the Ipswich museum and then the pompous Charles Phillips (Ken Stott) of the British Museum. A battle is on for both the control of the site and the resting place for the treasures found.
Against this backdrop there is a critical illness emerging, a son (Archie Barnes) and his attachment to the father figure of Brown and a potential romance between Rory and archaeologist Peggy Piggott, trapped in a loveless marriage.
Talent:
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Ralph Fiennes, Johnny Flynn, Lily James, Archie Barnes, Ken Stott, Monica Donlan.
Directed by: Simon Stone.
Written by: Moira Buffini (from the novel by John Preston).
Bullet points of my thoughts:
+ Superb acting by Mulligan and Fiennes – Oscar noms for both?
+ Young Archie Barnes impresses as the son Robert
+ Cinematography by Mike Eley shows the open Suffolk skies at their best
+ Based on fact, a fascinating historical record of the real excitement of uncovering the past
o The script deftly melds the archeology with the love story subplot: but was the latter really necessary?
– Curious “man heavy” script, replacing some of the historical female characters with men and making Peggy Piggott (Lily James) a bit of a klutz
– Asynchronous editing decision I found to be distracting and unnecessary.
For my full review, please see the video at https://youtu.be/m8Ad8B8dkSY .
Against this backdrop there is a critical illness emerging, a son (Archie Barnes) and his attachment to the father figure of Brown and a potential romance between Rory and archaeologist Peggy Piggott, trapped in a loveless marriage.
Talent:
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Ralph Fiennes, Johnny Flynn, Lily James, Archie Barnes, Ken Stott, Monica Donlan.
Directed by: Simon Stone.
Written by: Moira Buffini (from the novel by John Preston).
Bullet points of my thoughts:
+ Superb acting by Mulligan and Fiennes – Oscar noms for both?
+ Young Archie Barnes impresses as the son Robert
+ Cinematography by Mike Eley shows the open Suffolk skies at their best
+ Based on fact, a fascinating historical record of the real excitement of uncovering the past
o The script deftly melds the archeology with the love story subplot: but was the latter really necessary?
– Curious “man heavy” script, replacing some of the historical female characters with men and making Peggy Piggott (Lily James) a bit of a klutz
– Asynchronous editing decision I found to be distracting and unnecessary.
For my full review, please see the video at https://youtu.be/m8Ad8B8dkSY .
