Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Isle of Dogs (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
When an outbreak of “dog-flu” and other dog diseases ravish Japan. Mayor Kobayashi (Kunichi Nomura voice) signs an order to banish all dogs to Trash Island, aka the Isle of Dogs. The island is now home to thousands of dogs who are all scavenging for food. Groups of dogs’ band together to fight for scraps of trash and survive. Then all one day a plane crashes on the island. A boy, Atari (Koyu Rankin voice), has come to the island to find his dog best friend Spots (Liev Schreiber voice). Five dogs find Atari injured buy the crash. The lone stray in the group, Chief (Bryan Cranston voice), has no use for masters and wants to leave the boy. But the rest of the group, Rex (Edward Norton voice), King (Bob Balaban voice), Duke (Jeff Goldblum voice) and Boss (Bill Murray voice) all want help the boy find his best friend. Out voted by the domesticated dogs in the group Chief agrees and they set out on a journey to find Atari’s lost dog on an island full of dogs.
This stop-motion animated film is the latest written and directed film by Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, and The Royal Tenenbaums). Anderson’s unique film style and dialog are very present in this Japanese based tale. The stop motion animation is very well done and highlighted throughout the film. From the dogs’ hair moving with the animals to flower petals floating through the air the small details are not missed and expertly done. The dialog was also very much staying with Andersons unique style. It is fast paced and full of subtle comedy. The story is original and fun but also full of meaning and heart. The star studded cast does well in providing their voices to the animated film. The sound track really fits the film well.
The film was not without its struggles. At the beginning of the film it was pointed out that the humans would speak their native language, in most cases Japanese, and the dogs barks had been translated to English. This provides some fun moments throughout the film as there are translators to press conferences and the dog interpreting what the humans say to other dogs. But at times it seemed to me that the humans could understand what the dogs were saying, barking. So it was a little inconsistent. Also one character put into the movie presumably to aid in translation in the film as an American exchange student, Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig voice). Other than translating parts of the film I don’t know why this character had to be American and could not have been Japanese. It definitely helped the overall theme of the movie to have her there to describe what was happening, given the fact there were no subtitles, but did seem a little forced.
I am definitely a fan of Wes Anderson’s film making and one of a kind style. That comes with certain expectations, which in this case were met. But I also understand that as someone reviewing the film it may make me a little bias. As noted above there a few minor issues I had with the film in general but overall I enjoyed the film and thing fans of Anderson will not be disappointed and neither will those who are just looking for a fun movie. I think overall this is a beautifully made and fun film.
This stop-motion animated film is the latest written and directed film by Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, and The Royal Tenenbaums). Anderson’s unique film style and dialog are very present in this Japanese based tale. The stop motion animation is very well done and highlighted throughout the film. From the dogs’ hair moving with the animals to flower petals floating through the air the small details are not missed and expertly done. The dialog was also very much staying with Andersons unique style. It is fast paced and full of subtle comedy. The story is original and fun but also full of meaning and heart. The star studded cast does well in providing their voices to the animated film. The sound track really fits the film well.
The film was not without its struggles. At the beginning of the film it was pointed out that the humans would speak their native language, in most cases Japanese, and the dogs barks had been translated to English. This provides some fun moments throughout the film as there are translators to press conferences and the dog interpreting what the humans say to other dogs. But at times it seemed to me that the humans could understand what the dogs were saying, barking. So it was a little inconsistent. Also one character put into the movie presumably to aid in translation in the film as an American exchange student, Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig voice). Other than translating parts of the film I don’t know why this character had to be American and could not have been Japanese. It definitely helped the overall theme of the movie to have her there to describe what was happening, given the fact there were no subtitles, but did seem a little forced.
I am definitely a fan of Wes Anderson’s film making and one of a kind style. That comes with certain expectations, which in this case were met. But I also understand that as someone reviewing the film it may make me a little bias. As noted above there a few minor issues I had with the film in general but overall I enjoyed the film and thing fans of Anderson will not be disappointed and neither will those who are just looking for a fun movie. I think overall this is a beautifully made and fun film.
Debbiereadsbook (1449 KP) rated Smith's Corner: Delilah & Dallas (The Heartwood Series #1) in Books
Jun 25, 2021
thoroughly enjoyable!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is the first book in the Heartwood series. It's also this author's first step into the world of male/female pairings. She usually writes male/male.
And I have to say, I really rather enjoyed it!
Delilah is young, only 20, but she has a wise head on her shoulders. She knows Dallas is a player, he makes no bones about that, but he also makes no bones about wanting Delilah. And NOT just for a quick tumble. When strange things start happening in Delilah's bakery, Dallas and his brothers step up and the two become close. When Delilah's life is threatened, Dallas loses his head and goes all Alpha male, protect what's mine.
Like I said, first step in this genre for this author, and she kinda nails it! I AM left with questions about Delilah and her mum and sister, but I know what those questions are, and surprisingly, I can voice them! Which for me, makes a change. But I'll come back to those.
Dallas is the youngest Smith brother, and this series revolves around them. They own a bar, and Delilah and her mother own a bakery in the space next door. He lusts after Delilah, and not just in a one-night stand way. When she finally relents and goes on a date with him, Dallas is smitten, and tumbles, head over heels in love. It takes Delilah a little longer, but she falls just as hard!
I could see who the bad guy was, right from when they popped up in the bakery, and that went down much as I expected it to, even if Delilah couldn't see the danger right in front of her.
I loved ALL the brothers, I really did. They all have their quirks, and their personalities, and they all have a story to tell. I mean, Stone and Delilah's best friend, Storm? Their story, well . . .I HOPE their story is going to be explosive, given what goes on here. Levi is already making goo-goo eyes at Layla. Their story is next. Ash, ohhhh Ash has a BIG story to tell, and his book is number 3, and that blurb has set all sorts of questions in my head and I have no idea where that is going! And then there is Fox. I have no clue what's going on there. While he doesn't SAY anything, I feel that his story might be a difficult read!
Back to my questions, which I'm reliably told, may well be answered in book 2, given as that's Layla's book and she holds all the cards. There is much HINTED at, about how and why the girls came to Smith's Corner. But that's all it is, HINTED at! And you know, when you get clues, and you put them together, and you make a picture of your own? I have done that, and I'm not saying what kind of picture I made, but I'm fairly certain, it's going to be worse, MUCH worse.
So hurry, Ms Paton, and release book 2, I need those answers!
A thoroughly enjoyable step out of this author's comfort zone, and a thoroughly enjoyable read.
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is the first book in the Heartwood series. It's also this author's first step into the world of male/female pairings. She usually writes male/male.
And I have to say, I really rather enjoyed it!
Delilah is young, only 20, but she has a wise head on her shoulders. She knows Dallas is a player, he makes no bones about that, but he also makes no bones about wanting Delilah. And NOT just for a quick tumble. When strange things start happening in Delilah's bakery, Dallas and his brothers step up and the two become close. When Delilah's life is threatened, Dallas loses his head and goes all Alpha male, protect what's mine.
Like I said, first step in this genre for this author, and she kinda nails it! I AM left with questions about Delilah and her mum and sister, but I know what those questions are, and surprisingly, I can voice them! Which for me, makes a change. But I'll come back to those.
Dallas is the youngest Smith brother, and this series revolves around them. They own a bar, and Delilah and her mother own a bakery in the space next door. He lusts after Delilah, and not just in a one-night stand way. When she finally relents and goes on a date with him, Dallas is smitten, and tumbles, head over heels in love. It takes Delilah a little longer, but she falls just as hard!
I could see who the bad guy was, right from when they popped up in the bakery, and that went down much as I expected it to, even if Delilah couldn't see the danger right in front of her.
I loved ALL the brothers, I really did. They all have their quirks, and their personalities, and they all have a story to tell. I mean, Stone and Delilah's best friend, Storm? Their story, well . . .I HOPE their story is going to be explosive, given what goes on here. Levi is already making goo-goo eyes at Layla. Their story is next. Ash, ohhhh Ash has a BIG story to tell, and his book is number 3, and that blurb has set all sorts of questions in my head and I have no idea where that is going! And then there is Fox. I have no clue what's going on there. While he doesn't SAY anything, I feel that his story might be a difficult read!
Back to my questions, which I'm reliably told, may well be answered in book 2, given as that's Layla's book and she holds all the cards. There is much HINTED at, about how and why the girls came to Smith's Corner. But that's all it is, HINTED at! And you know, when you get clues, and you put them together, and you make a picture of your own? I have done that, and I'm not saying what kind of picture I made, but I'm fairly certain, it's going to be worse, MUCH worse.
So hurry, Ms Paton, and release book 2, I need those answers!
A thoroughly enjoyable step out of this author's comfort zone, and a thoroughly enjoyable read.
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Free Guy (2021) in Movies
Sep 5, 2021
Wonderful - and Family Friendly!
Like most of us, when I first saw the trailer for the Ryan Reynolds comedy, FREE GUY (well over a year ago), I thought this looked like a bad “money grab” that will quickly come and go.
But after it premiered earlier this summer, buzz started to grow - and a few people that I trust recommended it to me, so I decided to check it out.
And…I’m glad I did for FREE GUY is a fun, family-friendly romp with a charismatic Ryan Reynolds anchoring a strong cast in a surprisingly heart-felt film.
Directed by Shawn Levy (NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM), Free Guy tells the story of an NPC (Non-Playable Character in a video game) that becomes sentient.
In the capable hands of Director Levy and actor Reynolds, Guy (his character) is charming, earnest and likeable - a trio of qualities that is hard to pull off, but Levy and Reynolds walk this fine line very well, making Guy a character to root for. They wisely steer away from this character becoming cloying and annoying and just keep him charming and sincere.
This is do-able because Levy and screenwriters Matt Lieberman and Zak Penn wisely choose to not make Guy the emotional center of this film, but rather, Guy is the catalyst who moves the plot (and the other characters) towards their final destinations - all the while keeping Guy (basically) the same. A very smart move that has been used in other, successful films (most notably Michael J. Fox in the BACK TO THE FUTURE FILMS).
Jodie Comer (Killing Eve) and Joe Keery (Stranger Things) are a the heart of this film as 2 video game designers that are trying to find proof that their code was stolen by a heartless Video Game mogul (broadly, comically played by Taika Waititi). Both Comer and Keery are pleasant in their roles and they play off of Waititi (and his chief henchman, played with specific focus - this is a compliment - by Utkarsh Ambudkar). Comer and Keery make it easy for the audience to root for them and Waititi and Ambdukar make it easy for the audience to root against them.
Credit for all of this goes to Director Levy. This film has the same feel as NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM. It doesn’t try to do too much, makes the motivations of the good guys and the bad guys very simple to understand and then drops in the variable (Guy) to mix things up - all done with wit, simplicity and charm - a pretty easy combination, that often gets lost in the machinations, but Levy avoids this trap very, very well.
Finally, I have to point out the performance of Lil Rel Howery as Guy’s buddy…named…Buddy. He is the perfect “Best Friend”. Again, Directed to a simple and direct performance by Levy, not trying to be more than he is, but ends up being a character you care about and root for.
A winning combination of Director, Actors and material, FREE GUY isn’t going to win any Oscars, but it is going to do something that very few films these days do - provide entertainment for the entire family.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
But after it premiered earlier this summer, buzz started to grow - and a few people that I trust recommended it to me, so I decided to check it out.
And…I’m glad I did for FREE GUY is a fun, family-friendly romp with a charismatic Ryan Reynolds anchoring a strong cast in a surprisingly heart-felt film.
Directed by Shawn Levy (NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM), Free Guy tells the story of an NPC (Non-Playable Character in a video game) that becomes sentient.
In the capable hands of Director Levy and actor Reynolds, Guy (his character) is charming, earnest and likeable - a trio of qualities that is hard to pull off, but Levy and Reynolds walk this fine line very well, making Guy a character to root for. They wisely steer away from this character becoming cloying and annoying and just keep him charming and sincere.
This is do-able because Levy and screenwriters Matt Lieberman and Zak Penn wisely choose to not make Guy the emotional center of this film, but rather, Guy is the catalyst who moves the plot (and the other characters) towards their final destinations - all the while keeping Guy (basically) the same. A very smart move that has been used in other, successful films (most notably Michael J. Fox in the BACK TO THE FUTURE FILMS).
Jodie Comer (Killing Eve) and Joe Keery (Stranger Things) are a the heart of this film as 2 video game designers that are trying to find proof that their code was stolen by a heartless Video Game mogul (broadly, comically played by Taika Waititi). Both Comer and Keery are pleasant in their roles and they play off of Waititi (and his chief henchman, played with specific focus - this is a compliment - by Utkarsh Ambudkar). Comer and Keery make it easy for the audience to root for them and Waititi and Ambdukar make it easy for the audience to root against them.
Credit for all of this goes to Director Levy. This film has the same feel as NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM. It doesn’t try to do too much, makes the motivations of the good guys and the bad guys very simple to understand and then drops in the variable (Guy) to mix things up - all done with wit, simplicity and charm - a pretty easy combination, that often gets lost in the machinations, but Levy avoids this trap very, very well.
Finally, I have to point out the performance of Lil Rel Howery as Guy’s buddy…named…Buddy. He is the perfect “Best Friend”. Again, Directed to a simple and direct performance by Levy, not trying to be more than he is, but ends up being a character you care about and root for.
A winning combination of Director, Actors and material, FREE GUY isn’t going to win any Oscars, but it is going to do something that very few films these days do - provide entertainment for the entire family.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Janeeny (200 KP) rated Vesper Flights in Books
Sep 7, 2021
I received an ARC of this book in exchange for an honest review.
Vesper Flights is Helen Macdonald’s latest book chronicling her relationship with nature. This is slightly different from her previous books in the respect it’s not a linear narrative but a collection of essays that also explores “The human relationship with nature”.
We are given more of an insight into Macdonald’s upbringing as she regales us with anecdotes of emotional journeys to her childhood home and dark episodes on a falcon breeding farm in Wales. Her passion for nature and the natural world comes across strongly, without sermonising. In one chapter she mentions Fox hunting and how she’s morally opposed to it, without admonishing those that do partake in it. A common thread throughout the essays is how we can be so involved with the conservation of nature yet still be so detached from it. Admittedly it’s something that I’ve never even thought about before, so I’ll be paying more attention to the way I interact with the world around me from now on.
.
One thing that seems to draw me in with Mcdonald’s writing is that there always seems to be an underlying sadness in the way she writes. Even when she’s partaking in a stunning bird-watching event, she never quite gives herself over to the joy and excitement of that moment. At one point after reading how she once covered herself in mud and twigs and stalked a herd of cows I just wanted to put my arms around her and ask if she’s ok. (Oddly enough in the same chapter there is a very dark incident with a dying Ostrich, but it was the incident with the cows that worried me most)
I’d be interested to read something Macdonald wrote before her father passed away. It is obvious that the death of her father did have a profound effect on her, and it would be curious to see if that is also what has influenced this mournful quality in her writing.
Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t a critique in any way I like the way she can convey the melancholy of a murmuration. As a perpetually positive person, I do need to be prodded with the emotion stick every now and again.
There is a line in one of the essays “I shouldn’t do it also because pulling at your heart on purpose is a compulsion as particular and disconcerting as pressing on a healing bruise” so maybe she gets some cathartic pleasure from heartache. I’m envious; I lost both my parents within a few years of each other and I find it very hard to engage in any strong emotions regarding this. I miss them, but I think my innate ability to detach myself from unpleasant situations has worked a little too well here and I can’t articulate exactly how that makes me feel.
Woah, so that was a major digression, let’s put that brick back and summarise the review, shall we?
After reading Vesper Flights, even if you don’t like the whole book, I defy you not to have a favourite chapter. It’s close but I think I liked ‘Goats’ the best, as not only is it a funny story, but you can practically hear the little smile as Macdonald reminisces about her dad
Vesper Flights is Helen Macdonald’s latest book chronicling her relationship with nature. This is slightly different from her previous books in the respect it’s not a linear narrative but a collection of essays that also explores “The human relationship with nature”.
We are given more of an insight into Macdonald’s upbringing as she regales us with anecdotes of emotional journeys to her childhood home and dark episodes on a falcon breeding farm in Wales. Her passion for nature and the natural world comes across strongly, without sermonising. In one chapter she mentions Fox hunting and how she’s morally opposed to it, without admonishing those that do partake in it. A common thread throughout the essays is how we can be so involved with the conservation of nature yet still be so detached from it. Admittedly it’s something that I’ve never even thought about before, so I’ll be paying more attention to the way I interact with the world around me from now on.
.
One thing that seems to draw me in with Mcdonald’s writing is that there always seems to be an underlying sadness in the way she writes. Even when she’s partaking in a stunning bird-watching event, she never quite gives herself over to the joy and excitement of that moment. At one point after reading how she once covered herself in mud and twigs and stalked a herd of cows I just wanted to put my arms around her and ask if she’s ok. (Oddly enough in the same chapter there is a very dark incident with a dying Ostrich, but it was the incident with the cows that worried me most)
I’d be interested to read something Macdonald wrote before her father passed away. It is obvious that the death of her father did have a profound effect on her, and it would be curious to see if that is also what has influenced this mournful quality in her writing.
Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t a critique in any way I like the way she can convey the melancholy of a murmuration. As a perpetually positive person, I do need to be prodded with the emotion stick every now and again.
There is a line in one of the essays “I shouldn’t do it also because pulling at your heart on purpose is a compulsion as particular and disconcerting as pressing on a healing bruise” so maybe she gets some cathartic pleasure from heartache. I’m envious; I lost both my parents within a few years of each other and I find it very hard to engage in any strong emotions regarding this. I miss them, but I think my innate ability to detach myself from unpleasant situations has worked a little too well here and I can’t articulate exactly how that makes me feel.
Woah, so that was a major digression, let’s put that brick back and summarise the review, shall we?
After reading Vesper Flights, even if you don’t like the whole book, I defy you not to have a favourite chapter. It’s close but I think I liked ‘Goats’ the best, as not only is it a funny story, but you can practically hear the little smile as Macdonald reminisces about her dad
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Johnny English Strikes Again (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Spy spoof caper that’s only passably amusing.
It’s a HILARIOUS concept. It’s Bond but not as we know it: a suave, sophisticated, well-dressed hero but someone who’s a complete klutz when it comes to the spy business. Rowan Atkinson is perfect in the role: because when he plays his face ”straight” he IS strangely good-looking and certainly pulls off the air of confidence, intelligence and sophistication well.
So it was that 2003’s Johnny English was a refreshing novelty. Roll forwards 15 years (via 2011’s “Johnny English Reborn”) and the concoction needs… you know… actual JOKES.
For “Johnny English Strikes Again” is unfortunately a pretty lame affair.
The Plot
Johnny English (Atkinson) is retired from MI7 and living life as a Geography teacher at a public school. Aside from teaching them about sheep farming in Australia and magma, English delights in teaching his young pupils the tricks of the spy trade: “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight”, with a twinkle and a vodka martini in hand. “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight” repeats the class.
But the quiet life of English is about to end, since a cyber-attack has exposed all of MI7’s current agents and the Prime Minister (Emma Thompson) needs to re-hire a retired agent who is currently ‘off the grid’. But noone – friend or foe – is safe when the bumbling English and his faithful helper Bough (Ben Miller) go back into the field.
The Turns
As UK comedy professionals, Atkinson and Miller deliver their English/Bough schtick serviceably enough. The brilliant Emma Thompson though is woefully underused as a straight-woman, being asked to do little more than an exasperated Theresa May impersonation.
If you need a sexy and sophisticated femme fatale for a Bond spoof, what better than a real ex-Bond girl? So the extremely sexy and sophisticated Olga Kurylenko (Camille from “Quantum of Solace”) plays Ophelia Bhuletova, which sounds much funnier when pronounced by Atkinson. And a very good job she does too.
The Review
To emphasise the positive for a moment, the film is suitably glossy, which are table stakes for a spy caper like this or Austin Powers.
But the script by William Davies (who did the previous Johnny Englishes, but nothing much since “Reborn”) doesn’t deliver any real laugh-out-loud moments. My hopes were raised when the “pensioner interviews” happened and Charles Dance, Edward Fox and Michael Gambon turned up. Great, I thought… having the old timers play off Atkinson will be fun. But unfortunately they were nothing but cameos and (although one of the film’s comedy highlights) they came and went in the blink of an eye.
Elsewhere the film relied too much on a few running jokes: ostensibly the need for health and safety in MI7, where guns are rather frowned upon, given their potential to caused injury or worse. A ‘virtual reality’ training mission also delivers smiles but outstays its welcome.
The film is a first-time feature for TV-comedy director David Kerr.
Final thoughts
There are films which are wildly offensive. There are films that are just plain bad. This is neither: it is as Douglas Adams might have described it as “Mostly Harmless”. But to get any more than the rating I have given it, a comedy film has to make me laugh and this one failed miserably. It’s a watchable TV film for a rainy afternoon, but not worth heading out to the cinema to watch.
So it was that 2003’s Johnny English was a refreshing novelty. Roll forwards 15 years (via 2011’s “Johnny English Reborn”) and the concoction needs… you know… actual JOKES.
For “Johnny English Strikes Again” is unfortunately a pretty lame affair.
The Plot
Johnny English (Atkinson) is retired from MI7 and living life as a Geography teacher at a public school. Aside from teaching them about sheep farming in Australia and magma, English delights in teaching his young pupils the tricks of the spy trade: “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight”, with a twinkle and a vodka martini in hand. “You’re looking particularly beautiful tonight” repeats the class.
But the quiet life of English is about to end, since a cyber-attack has exposed all of MI7’s current agents and the Prime Minister (Emma Thompson) needs to re-hire a retired agent who is currently ‘off the grid’. But noone – friend or foe – is safe when the bumbling English and his faithful helper Bough (Ben Miller) go back into the field.
The Turns
As UK comedy professionals, Atkinson and Miller deliver their English/Bough schtick serviceably enough. The brilliant Emma Thompson though is woefully underused as a straight-woman, being asked to do little more than an exasperated Theresa May impersonation.
If you need a sexy and sophisticated femme fatale for a Bond spoof, what better than a real ex-Bond girl? So the extremely sexy and sophisticated Olga Kurylenko (Camille from “Quantum of Solace”) plays Ophelia Bhuletova, which sounds much funnier when pronounced by Atkinson. And a very good job she does too.
The Review
To emphasise the positive for a moment, the film is suitably glossy, which are table stakes for a spy caper like this or Austin Powers.
But the script by William Davies (who did the previous Johnny Englishes, but nothing much since “Reborn”) doesn’t deliver any real laugh-out-loud moments. My hopes were raised when the “pensioner interviews” happened and Charles Dance, Edward Fox and Michael Gambon turned up. Great, I thought… having the old timers play off Atkinson will be fun. But unfortunately they were nothing but cameos and (although one of the film’s comedy highlights) they came and went in the blink of an eye.
Elsewhere the film relied too much on a few running jokes: ostensibly the need for health and safety in MI7, where guns are rather frowned upon, given their potential to caused injury or worse. A ‘virtual reality’ training mission also delivers smiles but outstays its welcome.
The film is a first-time feature for TV-comedy director David Kerr.
Final thoughts
There are films which are wildly offensive. There are films that are just plain bad. This is neither: it is as Douglas Adams might have described it as “Mostly Harmless”. But to get any more than the rating I have given it, a comedy film has to make me laugh and this one failed miserably. It’s a watchable TV film for a rainy afternoon, but not worth heading out to the cinema to watch.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tennis and sex, but without the grunting.
Here’s a good test of someone’s age…. ask the question “Billie-Jean?”. Millennials will probably come back with “Huh?”; those in their 30’s or 40’s might come back with “Michael Jackson!”; those older than that will probably reply “King!”.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
Debbiereadsbook (1449 KP) rated Smith's Corner: Hunter and Holden (The Heartwood Series #6) in Books
May 13, 2022
Long time coming, but these boys do not disappoint, no ma'am they do not!
Independent Reviewer for Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Book 6 in the Heartwood series, and Lord has it been a wait for these two!
Hunter is best friends to Faith (book 4, Faith and Fox) but he's been a constant in this group since the beginning. As has Holden. Hunter knows Holden is straight, but his heart wants Holden and his heart will wait Holden out. Because Holden starts to feel something for the annoying bigger man who laid claim to him, even if he doesn't want to. And then all of a sudden, Holden questions everything he ever knew about himself.
Long time coming, but these boys do not disappoint, no ma'am they do not!
We knew Hunter had a thing for Holden, waaaaaay back in book one, and there is some overlap here with the later books. So I'd suggest you read all the other books before this one, to get the full picture of these two and how everyone else can see what's going on, even if Holden can't quite get it. They are, however M/F books, and might not be your thing, but they are so good! Most of the other pairings are crash condensed in this one, though.
There is anger here, with Holden fighting how he feels, how Hunter makes him feels. The thing is though, Holden does not ever say NO to Hunter. He pushes him away, sure, and he fights himself so freaking hard, but not once, does he utter the words NO to Hunter.
There is so much love too. Hunter does love Holden, even if Holden rejects him at first and Hunter cannot be with anyone else. Coco, Holden's daughter, can see how Hunter makes Holden feel, once they actually decide to do this thing between them, and she is a real delight here, loving that Hunter knows he can't just take Holden, he gotta take Coco too.
There is smexy times: so much with the smexy times, even if we do have to wait for the main event! But I loved being made to wait, I really did, and the epilogue? Oh! I loved the epilogue, I really did. It shows just how much Hunter loved Holden, and how he would wait for Holden to be ready to fully consummate their relationship.
There is pain here, too. Mostly on Hunter's part. A part he hides from a lot of people, but Holden sees it in Hunter, when he least expects to, and Holden does not do tears!
I think what I especially liked here, is that all the angst comes BEFORE they get together, you know? Once they decide to be a couple, they are all in and I loved that.
Loved watching the other pairings from both Holden and Hunter's point of view.
Who is next? No idea since all the brothers are now spoken for. Dakota (from the clothes store) needs a story, and Monty (the chef in the bar) oh I wanna know why Monty is so angry with the world (for most of the time, but he does come good here for Holden!) But I don't really care who comes next, I will read it!
5 full and shiny stars! I honestly think the best was saved for last!
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Book 6 in the Heartwood series, and Lord has it been a wait for these two!
Hunter is best friends to Faith (book 4, Faith and Fox) but he's been a constant in this group since the beginning. As has Holden. Hunter knows Holden is straight, but his heart wants Holden and his heart will wait Holden out. Because Holden starts to feel something for the annoying bigger man who laid claim to him, even if he doesn't want to. And then all of a sudden, Holden questions everything he ever knew about himself.
Long time coming, but these boys do not disappoint, no ma'am they do not!
We knew Hunter had a thing for Holden, waaaaaay back in book one, and there is some overlap here with the later books. So I'd suggest you read all the other books before this one, to get the full picture of these two and how everyone else can see what's going on, even if Holden can't quite get it. They are, however M/F books, and might not be your thing, but they are so good! Most of the other pairings are crash condensed in this one, though.
There is anger here, with Holden fighting how he feels, how Hunter makes him feels. The thing is though, Holden does not ever say NO to Hunter. He pushes him away, sure, and he fights himself so freaking hard, but not once, does he utter the words NO to Hunter.
There is so much love too. Hunter does love Holden, even if Holden rejects him at first and Hunter cannot be with anyone else. Coco, Holden's daughter, can see how Hunter makes Holden feel, once they actually decide to do this thing between them, and she is a real delight here, loving that Hunter knows he can't just take Holden, he gotta take Coco too.
There is smexy times: so much with the smexy times, even if we do have to wait for the main event! But I loved being made to wait, I really did, and the epilogue? Oh! I loved the epilogue, I really did. It shows just how much Hunter loved Holden, and how he would wait for Holden to be ready to fully consummate their relationship.
There is pain here, too. Mostly on Hunter's part. A part he hides from a lot of people, but Holden sees it in Hunter, when he least expects to, and Holden does not do tears!
I think what I especially liked here, is that all the angst comes BEFORE they get together, you know? Once they decide to be a couple, they are all in and I loved that.
Loved watching the other pairings from both Holden and Hunter's point of view.
Who is next? No idea since all the brothers are now spoken for. Dakota (from the clothes store) needs a story, and Monty (the chef in the bar) oh I wanna know why Monty is so angry with the world (for most of the time, but he does come good here for Holden!) But I don't really care who comes next, I will read it!
5 full and shiny stars! I honestly think the best was saved for last!
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Bird (1704 KP) rated Prison Break in TV
Nov 29, 2024
A Riveting Ride with a Few Bumps:
Prison Break is a show that deserves its reputation as one of the most exciting and original dramas of its time. While not without its flaws, the series delivers a thrilling mix of suspense, clever plotting, and character-driven storytelling that keeps you invested throughout its run. With an intriguing premise and a solid cast, it’s easy to see why Prison Break has garnered such a devoted fanbase.
The standout feature of Prison Break is undoubtedly its core premise. The idea of a structural engineer, Michael Scofield (played by Wentworth Miller), intentionally landing himself in prison to break out his falsely accused brother, Lincoln Burrows (Dominic Purcell), is fascinating. The execution of Michael’s plan, complete with hidden clues in his tattooed body map, is both ingenious and fun to watch unfold. The first season, in particular, excels at building tension as Michael carefully navigates the treacherous world of Fox River Penitentiary, laying the groundwork for the escape. It’s a slow burn at times, but the payoff is worth it.
The cast is another highlight. Wentworth Miller’s calm and calculated performance as Michael is captivating, and Dominic Purcell brings a solid, if sometimes overly stoic, presence to Lincoln. Robert Knepper steals the show as Theodore "T-Bag" Bagwell, delivering a performance that’s equal parts chilling and oddly charismatic. Supporting characters like Sucre (Amaury Nolasco) and Sara Tancredi (Sarah Wayne Callies) add warmth and heart to balance the often dark and gritty tone of the series.
However, the show isn’t without its flaws. While the first season is nearly airtight in its storytelling, later seasons can feel uneven. The second season’s shift to a manhunt format is exhilarating but occasionally stretches believability, with some plot twists feeling more like conveniences than organic developments. As the series progresses, the introduction of larger conspiracies and shadowy organisations adds scale but also detracts from the grounded tension that made the first season so compelling. By the time you reach the third and fourth seasons, the narrative occasionally veers into melodrama and over-the-top scenarios, which may pull some viewers out of the experience.
The pacing can also be hit or miss. While some episodes are packed with heart-pounding tension, others feel like filler, particularly in the later seasons. The show sometimes leans too heavily on cliffhangers, which can feel manipulative rather than earned. Additionally, while the cast is strong overall, some characters, like Lincoln, can come across as one-dimensional at times, and a few storylines feel underdeveloped or rushed.
That said, Prison Break is undeniably entertaining. Its gritty atmosphere, clever plotting, and high-stakes drama make it a standout among action-thrillers. The relationships between characters, particularly Michael and Lincoln’s unshakable brotherly bond, give the series emotional weight. Even with its flaws, the show’s twists and turns keep you engaged, and there’s a palpable sense of satisfaction when long-brewing plans come to fruition.
In summary, Prison Break is a fantastic watch, especially for fans of crime dramas and action-packed thrillers, though it occasionally falters under the weight of its ambition. It’s an 8/10 for me—hugely enjoyable, if not always perfect. While it may not stick the landing as well as it starts, the journey is more than worth taking.
The standout feature of Prison Break is undoubtedly its core premise. The idea of a structural engineer, Michael Scofield (played by Wentworth Miller), intentionally landing himself in prison to break out his falsely accused brother, Lincoln Burrows (Dominic Purcell), is fascinating. The execution of Michael’s plan, complete with hidden clues in his tattooed body map, is both ingenious and fun to watch unfold. The first season, in particular, excels at building tension as Michael carefully navigates the treacherous world of Fox River Penitentiary, laying the groundwork for the escape. It’s a slow burn at times, but the payoff is worth it.
The cast is another highlight. Wentworth Miller’s calm and calculated performance as Michael is captivating, and Dominic Purcell brings a solid, if sometimes overly stoic, presence to Lincoln. Robert Knepper steals the show as Theodore "T-Bag" Bagwell, delivering a performance that’s equal parts chilling and oddly charismatic. Supporting characters like Sucre (Amaury Nolasco) and Sara Tancredi (Sarah Wayne Callies) add warmth and heart to balance the often dark and gritty tone of the series.
However, the show isn’t without its flaws. While the first season is nearly airtight in its storytelling, later seasons can feel uneven. The second season’s shift to a manhunt format is exhilarating but occasionally stretches believability, with some plot twists feeling more like conveniences than organic developments. As the series progresses, the introduction of larger conspiracies and shadowy organisations adds scale but also detracts from the grounded tension that made the first season so compelling. By the time you reach the third and fourth seasons, the narrative occasionally veers into melodrama and over-the-top scenarios, which may pull some viewers out of the experience.
The pacing can also be hit or miss. While some episodes are packed with heart-pounding tension, others feel like filler, particularly in the later seasons. The show sometimes leans too heavily on cliffhangers, which can feel manipulative rather than earned. Additionally, while the cast is strong overall, some characters, like Lincoln, can come across as one-dimensional at times, and a few storylines feel underdeveloped or rushed.
That said, Prison Break is undeniably entertaining. Its gritty atmosphere, clever plotting, and high-stakes drama make it a standout among action-thrillers. The relationships between characters, particularly Michael and Lincoln’s unshakable brotherly bond, give the series emotional weight. Even with its flaws, the show’s twists and turns keep you engaged, and there’s a palpable sense of satisfaction when long-brewing plans come to fruition.
In summary, Prison Break is a fantastic watch, especially for fans of crime dramas and action-packed thrillers, though it occasionally falters under the weight of its ambition. It’s an 8/10 for me—hugely enjoyable, if not always perfect. While it may not stick the landing as well as it starts, the journey is more than worth taking.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated My Unfair Lady in Books
Apr 27, 2018
My Unfair Lady by Kathryne Kennedy
Genre: Historical fiction, Historical Romance
Rating: 4/5
Summary (from the back of the book):
HE CREATED THE PERFECT WOMAN… the impoverished Duke of Monchester despises the rich Americans who flock to London, seeking to buy their way into the ranks of the British peerage. So when railroad heiress Summer Wine Lee offers him a king’s ransom if he’ll teach her to become a proper lady, he’s prepared to rebuff her. But when he meets the petite beauty with the knife in her boot, it’s not her fortune he finds impossible to resist…
…FOR THE ARMS OF ANOTHER MAN. Frontier-bred Summer Wine Lee has no interest in winning over London society—it’s the New York bluebloods and her future mother-in-law she’s determined to impress. She knows the cost of smoothing her rough-and-tumble frontier edges will be high. But she never imagined it might cost her her heart…
Review: This book is so cute! The dialogue is lively, the characters are likeable (or in the case of the “bad ones”, hate-able), and the images and descriptions are clear and visible. I loved it by the end of the first chapter.
Summer was my kind of girl. She grinned when things were funny instead of trying to remain indifferent, she wasn’t afraid to show how she felt—but she could also throw a knife, shoot an arrow better than the woman champion of their day, and mount and ride a horse bareback (which I think is so cool!). She has a love for animals—and odd ones at that. She owns a three-legged dog, a dog with four legs but the size of a small horse, a monkey, a pocket-sized puppy, a fox, and a cat with no back legs (it sits in a cart and rolls around the room). She was raised by an Indian (one of those childhood dreams that I never quite left behind…) and he was the one who had taught her all that great stuff. Watching her try to settle into society was hilarious.
MY UNFAIR LADY has a lot of tension in it—both inner turmoil from poor Summer, and also sexual tension between the characters. However, it wasn’t overpowering because was so funny. I found that I laughed just as often as tension was built, so there was a constant, even balance. The end was very exciting, and I found it impossible to put down. Overall, reading this book was a hilarious and wonderful experience, and an unforgettable escape from reality.
Plot: My Fair Lady (the movie) shows a girl who is transformed to a lady, then the man falls in love with her. I love the change that has taken place in MY UNFAIR LADY—The man doesn’t want to change her, because he loves her the way she is. I like this plot better than the first!
Writing: The writing was decent, acceptable, and more readable than a lot of newly published romances. Though it wasn’t Dante, it wasn’t hard to read either.
Content: Refreshingly, there was no language in this book. Summer has her own set of expletives, but they weren’t offensive (“Tarnation!”). As far as sex, let’s just say there were several scenes (pages) in this book that I skipped completely, and just started reading again where the dialogue picked up. I didn’t miss anything important.
Recommendation: Ages 18+ to lovers of Historical fiction, Romance in general, or anyone who loves a girl who can shoot a gun, wield a knife, or use a bow and arrow better than a man!
**Thanks to Danielle at Sourcebooks for supplying my review copy!**
Genre: Historical fiction, Historical Romance
Rating: 4/5
Summary (from the back of the book):
HE CREATED THE PERFECT WOMAN… the impoverished Duke of Monchester despises the rich Americans who flock to London, seeking to buy their way into the ranks of the British peerage. So when railroad heiress Summer Wine Lee offers him a king’s ransom if he’ll teach her to become a proper lady, he’s prepared to rebuff her. But when he meets the petite beauty with the knife in her boot, it’s not her fortune he finds impossible to resist…
…FOR THE ARMS OF ANOTHER MAN. Frontier-bred Summer Wine Lee has no interest in winning over London society—it’s the New York bluebloods and her future mother-in-law she’s determined to impress. She knows the cost of smoothing her rough-and-tumble frontier edges will be high. But she never imagined it might cost her her heart…
Review: This book is so cute! The dialogue is lively, the characters are likeable (or in the case of the “bad ones”, hate-able), and the images and descriptions are clear and visible. I loved it by the end of the first chapter.
Summer was my kind of girl. She grinned when things were funny instead of trying to remain indifferent, she wasn’t afraid to show how she felt—but she could also throw a knife, shoot an arrow better than the woman champion of their day, and mount and ride a horse bareback (which I think is so cool!). She has a love for animals—and odd ones at that. She owns a three-legged dog, a dog with four legs but the size of a small horse, a monkey, a pocket-sized puppy, a fox, and a cat with no back legs (it sits in a cart and rolls around the room). She was raised by an Indian (one of those childhood dreams that I never quite left behind…) and he was the one who had taught her all that great stuff. Watching her try to settle into society was hilarious.
MY UNFAIR LADY has a lot of tension in it—both inner turmoil from poor Summer, and also sexual tension between the characters. However, it wasn’t overpowering because was so funny. I found that I laughed just as often as tension was built, so there was a constant, even balance. The end was very exciting, and I found it impossible to put down. Overall, reading this book was a hilarious and wonderful experience, and an unforgettable escape from reality.
Plot: My Fair Lady (the movie) shows a girl who is transformed to a lady, then the man falls in love with her. I love the change that has taken place in MY UNFAIR LADY—The man doesn’t want to change her, because he loves her the way she is. I like this plot better than the first!
Writing: The writing was decent, acceptable, and more readable than a lot of newly published romances. Though it wasn’t Dante, it wasn’t hard to read either.
Content: Refreshingly, there was no language in this book. Summer has her own set of expletives, but they weren’t offensive (“Tarnation!”). As far as sex, let’s just say there were several scenes (pages) in this book that I skipped completely, and just started reading again where the dialogue picked up. I didn’t miss anything important.
Recommendation: Ages 18+ to lovers of Historical fiction, Romance in general, or anyone who loves a girl who can shoot a gun, wield a knife, or use a bow and arrow better than a man!
**Thanks to Danielle at Sourcebooks for supplying my review copy!**
Debbiereadsbook (1449 KP) rated Honey From the Lion (Love Across Time #2) in Books
May 7, 2019
beautifully written love story
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is the second book in the Love Across Time series, but you don't need to have read book one, Heroes For Ghosts, for this one to make sense. They are only related in that they both are time travel stories.
Laurie books himself a week on a dude ranch and on the first night there is caught in a snow storm along with a meteor shower. Waking up freezing, he manages to find himself in John's cabin, in 1891. John just wants to be left alone, to get on with his solitary life after the horrors of the war. Finding a freezing young man on his doorstep kind of throws him for a loop but the pair grow close. When Laurie gets caught in a storm again, and comes back to his time, he knows where he wants to be: with John. But how to get there?
I liked this, I liked this A LOT. Just one teeny weeny thing stopped it getting 5 stars, but I will come back to that.
Laurie is burnt out from work, and decides a dude ranch week is just the thing. First night there, he hears the legend of Old Joe and his little fox he found. Waking up in 1891, finding John and subsequently meeting the people in this legend, don't bother Laurie so much, as when he returns to his time. He KNOWS he needs to be with John, and when the lady on the ranch explains the legend PROPERLY, and what The Iron Mountain, the snow storms AND the meteor showers are said to do, Laurie knows, he KNOWS where he needs to be, and how to get there.
I loved that Laurie was almost totally UNphased by everything! He's like: Okay then! I went to sleep in 2018 and I woke up in 1891! Let's get on and live here! There wasn't really any panicking on his part, except when they went to town and Laurie was attacked, and I liked that he was all calm about everything.
I must admit, I thought he might have put the clues together about the legend before he did, but Laurie was enjoying his time with John. Teaching John all the pleasures he has missed up to now, even if it might get them killed. Coming back to his time, though, he sees it then.
It's not overly explicit, but it carries passion and love a plenty. Full of words and phrases of the time though. It takes time for Laurie and John to properly come together, and I liked being made to wait for it. It isn't a quick thing, them falling in love, it creeps up on them both and I loved that it did.
The only niggle I have is this: only Laurie has a say. I desperately wanted to hear from John, I really did. There were some important points that I needed to hear what he was thinking about, feeling, experiencing with Laurie, and he doesn't tell me. And if John had had a say, this would have been a 5 star read, I'm sure.
It's a beautifully written love story, this, don't mistake what I'm saying! It's just, I needed John, and I don't get him.
But even though only Laurie has a say, his voice is strong and clear and he grabbed me and did not let go. One sitting, 300 pages, two and a half hours, not a muscle moved off the sofa! Job done.
4 meteor stars, shooting across the sky.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is the second book in the Love Across Time series, but you don't need to have read book one, Heroes For Ghosts, for this one to make sense. They are only related in that they both are time travel stories.
Laurie books himself a week on a dude ranch and on the first night there is caught in a snow storm along with a meteor shower. Waking up freezing, he manages to find himself in John's cabin, in 1891. John just wants to be left alone, to get on with his solitary life after the horrors of the war. Finding a freezing young man on his doorstep kind of throws him for a loop but the pair grow close. When Laurie gets caught in a storm again, and comes back to his time, he knows where he wants to be: with John. But how to get there?
I liked this, I liked this A LOT. Just one teeny weeny thing stopped it getting 5 stars, but I will come back to that.
Laurie is burnt out from work, and decides a dude ranch week is just the thing. First night there, he hears the legend of Old Joe and his little fox he found. Waking up in 1891, finding John and subsequently meeting the people in this legend, don't bother Laurie so much, as when he returns to his time. He KNOWS he needs to be with John, and when the lady on the ranch explains the legend PROPERLY, and what The Iron Mountain, the snow storms AND the meteor showers are said to do, Laurie knows, he KNOWS where he needs to be, and how to get there.
I loved that Laurie was almost totally UNphased by everything! He's like: Okay then! I went to sleep in 2018 and I woke up in 1891! Let's get on and live here! There wasn't really any panicking on his part, except when they went to town and Laurie was attacked, and I liked that he was all calm about everything.
I must admit, I thought he might have put the clues together about the legend before he did, but Laurie was enjoying his time with John. Teaching John all the pleasures he has missed up to now, even if it might get them killed. Coming back to his time, though, he sees it then.
It's not overly explicit, but it carries passion and love a plenty. Full of words and phrases of the time though. It takes time for Laurie and John to properly come together, and I liked being made to wait for it. It isn't a quick thing, them falling in love, it creeps up on them both and I loved that it did.
The only niggle I have is this: only Laurie has a say. I desperately wanted to hear from John, I really did. There were some important points that I needed to hear what he was thinking about, feeling, experiencing with Laurie, and he doesn't tell me. And if John had had a say, this would have been a 5 star read, I'm sure.
It's a beautifully written love story, this, don't mistake what I'm saying! It's just, I needed John, and I don't get him.
But even though only Laurie has a say, his voice is strong and clear and he grabbed me and did not let go. One sitting, 300 pages, two and a half hours, not a muscle moved off the sofa! Job done.
4 meteor stars, shooting across the sky.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**