Search
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Watching Edie in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also find my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/watching-edie-by-camilla-way
NOW AVAILABLE IN THE UK!
<b>TRIGGER WARNING: <spoiler>Rape</spoiler></b>
Firstly Id like to thank Netgalley and HarperCollins UK, HarperFiction for the opportunity to read this book in an exchange for a review.
<b><i>"... they do remain a part of us, those people who have hurt us very deeply, or who we have hurt, never letting us go, not entirely."</b></i>
This is the tale of a fractured friendship between two young ladies from broken families. Edie is popular and beautiful, Heather is awkward and shy. To begin with they seem to be the best of friends, but one night, something terrible happens that tears them apart. Fast forward 17 or so years and Edie is alone, working as a waitress and struggling to cope with new motherhood. Luckily, Heather steps out of Edies past and into her present, just at the right time to keep Edie afloat. But, somethings not right, theres a darkness in their past that cant be overlooked in the future.
From the get go, I thought this wasnt going to be my sort of book, Im not really into thrillers where the past and present are skipped between and an intense love story is the main focus. I tend to find them samey and cringey - the love of an 18 year old still haunting lives at the age of 33 just seems to only happen in novels. But, this one intrigued me a little more than the others have done. At 50% I started getting a little more excited at what was going to happen next. In the end, I actually got quite into the book, reading it in 24 hours.
Our two main characters of the novel, Edie and Heather, have really terrible stories attached to them and we can sympathise with them both, but its difficult to pick a side . Lets just say that what youre thinking throughout the book may be completely turned on its head once the twist has come out.
There were aspects of this book that were very predictable and for a while the only reason I wanted to continue reading was because I wanted to know the full details of what happened that night at the quarry, so it had me more interested than <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1474373840">In a Dark, Dark Wood.</a> But then <b>BAM</b> were smacked with the truth of that awful night and we have to take the book and its characters in a whole new light. The twist in the novel is so far from what I was expecting it to be, its absolutely brutal in comparison to other novels with the same kind of plot.
I ended up really enjoying this after being so skeptical to begin with and I think its an excellent fast paced, twisty-turny read but I know it wont be for everybody, it features too many dark subjects for all psychological thriller lovers to enjoy.
NOW AVAILABLE IN THE UK!
<b>TRIGGER WARNING: <spoiler>Rape</spoiler></b>
Firstly Id like to thank Netgalley and HarperCollins UK, HarperFiction for the opportunity to read this book in an exchange for a review.
<b><i>"... they do remain a part of us, those people who have hurt us very deeply, or who we have hurt, never letting us go, not entirely."</b></i>
This is the tale of a fractured friendship between two young ladies from broken families. Edie is popular and beautiful, Heather is awkward and shy. To begin with they seem to be the best of friends, but one night, something terrible happens that tears them apart. Fast forward 17 or so years and Edie is alone, working as a waitress and struggling to cope with new motherhood. Luckily, Heather steps out of Edies past and into her present, just at the right time to keep Edie afloat. But, somethings not right, theres a darkness in their past that cant be overlooked in the future.
From the get go, I thought this wasnt going to be my sort of book, Im not really into thrillers where the past and present are skipped between and an intense love story is the main focus. I tend to find them samey and cringey - the love of an 18 year old still haunting lives at the age of 33 just seems to only happen in novels. But, this one intrigued me a little more than the others have done. At 50% I started getting a little more excited at what was going to happen next. In the end, I actually got quite into the book, reading it in 24 hours.
Our two main characters of the novel, Edie and Heather, have really terrible stories attached to them and we can sympathise with them both, but its difficult to pick a side . Lets just say that what youre thinking throughout the book may be completely turned on its head once the twist has come out.
There were aspects of this book that were very predictable and for a while the only reason I wanted to continue reading was because I wanted to know the full details of what happened that night at the quarry, so it had me more interested than <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1474373840">In a Dark, Dark Wood.</a> But then <b>BAM</b> were smacked with the truth of that awful night and we have to take the book and its characters in a whole new light. The twist in the novel is so far from what I was expecting it to be, its absolutely brutal in comparison to other novels with the same kind of plot.
I ended up really enjoying this after being so skeptical to begin with and I think its an excellent fast paced, twisty-turny read but I know it wont be for everybody, it features too many dark subjects for all psychological thriller lovers to enjoy.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Blueprints in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Caroline MacAfee is a divorced carpenter; one who has kept her last name because she is still part of the well-known MacAfee family, which owns MacAfee Homes, a popular business in their town. Caroline is also host of the popular TV show "Gut It" (think something on DIY or HGTV) - that is until she's told she's too old to host the show the day after her 56th birthday. The network wants a new host: Caroline's 29-year-old daughter, Jamie MacAfee, an architect with the family company. Pushing for the change is Caroline's ex-husband, Roy, and her ex-father-in-law, Theo. The news rattles Caroline and upsets the foundation of her happy mother/daughter relationship with Jamie.
But everyone's life is further upended when Roy and his new wife die suddenly on a stormy night, leaving MacAfee Homes without its charismatic marketing lead and Jamie to deal with sudden guardianship of her toddler half-brother, Tad. Quickly, she must navigate life as a new mom; deal with the impact of motherhood on her relationship with her fiance; juggle the impact on her work, especially with her father no longer with the company; and try to heal her fractured relationship with Caroline.
If it sounds like there is a lot going on in this novel, there is. Yet, it seemed like it got off to a slow start. I almost put the book aside for some others on my "to-read" list until I got to the accident and things picked up. After that, even if parts of the plot and the characters' actions irked me, the book itself breezed by, and I found myself wanting to finish it quickly.
One of my biggest pet peeves with this novel was all of the talk of sex. I am no prude and have no issues with sex being in a novel, when appropriate. In this book, it seemed like it was inserted just because. Delinsky made several veiled references to "50 Shades of Grey" (the characters were reading it, for instance) and it almost seemed as if, because of that, it felt necessary to insert dialogue about sex, sex scenes, and more. Caroline and Jamie's discussions of sex, Caroline's discussions of sex with her friend, Annie - they were all painful and came across as extremely stilted. In fact, several times, it seemed like the characters were having various conversations to make sure we really, really knew how they felt about certain things, when, truly, if Delinksy would have just let the plot unfold naturally, it would have all come out on its own. It was a little unnatural and forced.
Speaking of said plot, it is a Delinsky novel, so be prepared that it will all seem a little fantastical at times. I would have liked to have been reading this novel on the beach - it's the perfect beach read where you can just suspend real life for a little while and get caught up in a slightly unrealistic plot.
That being said, Caroline and Jamie are fairly likable characters. They grow on you. I found myself empathizing with Jamie and her struggles with working motherhood, for instance. If you go in expecting a fun, silly book, you won't be disappointed.
(Note: I received an ARC of this book via the Goodreads First Reads program in return for an unbiased review.)
But everyone's life is further upended when Roy and his new wife die suddenly on a stormy night, leaving MacAfee Homes without its charismatic marketing lead and Jamie to deal with sudden guardianship of her toddler half-brother, Tad. Quickly, she must navigate life as a new mom; deal with the impact of motherhood on her relationship with her fiance; juggle the impact on her work, especially with her father no longer with the company; and try to heal her fractured relationship with Caroline.
If it sounds like there is a lot going on in this novel, there is. Yet, it seemed like it got off to a slow start. I almost put the book aside for some others on my "to-read" list until I got to the accident and things picked up. After that, even if parts of the plot and the characters' actions irked me, the book itself breezed by, and I found myself wanting to finish it quickly.
One of my biggest pet peeves with this novel was all of the talk of sex. I am no prude and have no issues with sex being in a novel, when appropriate. In this book, it seemed like it was inserted just because. Delinsky made several veiled references to "50 Shades of Grey" (the characters were reading it, for instance) and it almost seemed as if, because of that, it felt necessary to insert dialogue about sex, sex scenes, and more. Caroline and Jamie's discussions of sex, Caroline's discussions of sex with her friend, Annie - they were all painful and came across as extremely stilted. In fact, several times, it seemed like the characters were having various conversations to make sure we really, really knew how they felt about certain things, when, truly, if Delinksy would have just let the plot unfold naturally, it would have all come out on its own. It was a little unnatural and forced.
Speaking of said plot, it is a Delinsky novel, so be prepared that it will all seem a little fantastical at times. I would have liked to have been reading this novel on the beach - it's the perfect beach read where you can just suspend real life for a little while and get caught up in a slightly unrealistic plot.
That being said, Caroline and Jamie are fairly likable characters. They grow on you. I found myself empathizing with Jamie and her struggles with working motherhood, for instance. If you go in expecting a fun, silly book, you won't be disappointed.
(Note: I received an ARC of this book via the Goodreads First Reads program in return for an unbiased review.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Avengers: Infinity War (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Summer movies often hype themselves as spectacular events not to be missed and their ad campaigns use words like “epic”, “spectacle”, and “smash” as ways to build the hype to increase advanced box office sales.
The summer 2018 film season kicks off in a big way with “Avengers: Infinity War” and it is the rare summer film that exceeds is lofty expectations and delivers a crowning achievement for the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
When Thanos (Josh Brolin), embarks on a deadly campaign to find and possess the Infinity Stones, he leaves a path of death and destruction in his path. When his pursuit leading him to Earth, Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), and Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), who enlist a reluctant Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), to the cause just as the minions of Thanos arrive.
With The Avengers fractured and scattered following the events of “Captain America: Civil War” the teams find themselves dealing with the threat in various groups as fate steps in to divide many key members of the team. This allows for a great entry by the Guardians of the Galaxy and allows the film to take a very enjoyable path. Essentially the movie weaves separate storylines into one cohesive and very satisfying epic. You have a story with the Guardians as well as one with many of the key Avengers, as well as others with characters old and new. As such it is like a Guardians, Avengers, and Marvel film all rolled into one and each one supports the other very well yet has the charm and identity you would expect. While the tone is very dark as you would expect with literally half of the known universe facing destruction, there is also some solid humor in the film that never once undermines the story or pacing.
Naturally the effects are stunning as you would expect as Marvel has put a significant amount of money into the film and it shows in every eye-popping action sequence.
What really impressed me the most was that the Russo Brothers never let the FX of the film overshadow the characters and with a very large cast, it was nice to see everyone got their moment and you did not see members of the cast trying to one up each other.
There are some real surprise moments along the way and the action is easily the best of any Marvel film to date. Many fans had expressed disappointment with “Avengers: Age of Ultron” for me this film is significantly better than the prior film and is everything that a Marvel fan would want in a film.
I was also surprised by how well Thanos was portrayed as while you hopefully will not agree with his deductions and methods; you could actually understand his motivations and it help him transcend from the usual megalomaniacs which are so common in films of his type. I am really looking forward to seeing what comes next and make sure you stay through the credits for a bonus scene.
Believe the hype, “Avengers: Infinity War” is an epic not to be missed and is an example of what a summer event film should be.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/24/avengers-infinity-war/
The summer 2018 film season kicks off in a big way with “Avengers: Infinity War” and it is the rare summer film that exceeds is lofty expectations and delivers a crowning achievement for the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
When Thanos (Josh Brolin), embarks on a deadly campaign to find and possess the Infinity Stones, he leaves a path of death and destruction in his path. When his pursuit leading him to Earth, Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), and Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), who enlist a reluctant Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), to the cause just as the minions of Thanos arrive.
With The Avengers fractured and scattered following the events of “Captain America: Civil War” the teams find themselves dealing with the threat in various groups as fate steps in to divide many key members of the team. This allows for a great entry by the Guardians of the Galaxy and allows the film to take a very enjoyable path. Essentially the movie weaves separate storylines into one cohesive and very satisfying epic. You have a story with the Guardians as well as one with many of the key Avengers, as well as others with characters old and new. As such it is like a Guardians, Avengers, and Marvel film all rolled into one and each one supports the other very well yet has the charm and identity you would expect. While the tone is very dark as you would expect with literally half of the known universe facing destruction, there is also some solid humor in the film that never once undermines the story or pacing.
Naturally the effects are stunning as you would expect as Marvel has put a significant amount of money into the film and it shows in every eye-popping action sequence.
What really impressed me the most was that the Russo Brothers never let the FX of the film overshadow the characters and with a very large cast, it was nice to see everyone got their moment and you did not see members of the cast trying to one up each other.
There are some real surprise moments along the way and the action is easily the best of any Marvel film to date. Many fans had expressed disappointment with “Avengers: Age of Ultron” for me this film is significantly better than the prior film and is everything that a Marvel fan would want in a film.
I was also surprised by how well Thanos was portrayed as while you hopefully will not agree with his deductions and methods; you could actually understand his motivations and it help him transcend from the usual megalomaniacs which are so common in films of his type. I am really looking forward to seeing what comes next and make sure you stay through the credits for a bonus scene.
Believe the hype, “Avengers: Infinity War” is an epic not to be missed and is an example of what a summer event film should be.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/24/avengers-infinity-war/
After the death of her husband, Jocelyn "Jo" must return home with her ten-year-old daughter, Ruby. His death has left her in financial trouble, and she has no choice but to head back to Lake Hall, the aristocratic home she shared with her parents when growing up. It's a far cry from California where she lived with Chris and Ruby, escaping a stifling childhood with her mother. Jo's happiest childhood memories involve her nanny, Hannah, but Hannah disappeared suddenly one summer when Jo was seven. Her mother blamed Jo, and the two never repaired their relationship. Back now, thirty years later, Jo must deal with her mother and their fractured relationship. And when she and Ruby find a skull in the lake behind the house, she begins to wonder exactly what happened to Hannah. Jo isn't sure of anything anymore, or who she can trust, even her own memories.
"I'll never be able to change this place, but if we stay here long enough, I'm afraid it will change my daughter and me."
I've loved Gilly Macmillan and her books since I won one of them in a Librarything giveaway a few years ago. She's an excellent writer, and I quite enjoy how different each book is from the next. This one was very different and quite unexpected. It's told from a variety of alternating viewpoints--the primary ones being Jocelyn and her mother, Virginia, but we even get a local policeman and a mysterious woman dating back to the 1970s. I liked the way Macmillan wove all of of these perspectives together. At first, it seemed really easy to trust everyone, and then quickly, you realize that you can't be sure if you can believe either Jo or her mother.
I don't want to go too far or reveal too much, because it's probably better to let most of the plot reveal itself organically, but it's definitely easy to say that much of the book is a little befuddling (in a good way). I found myself drawn to Ruby, the young girl, and oddly, Virginia, despite her history as a pretty terrible parent. Jo frustrated me, with her somewhat naive nature. She would trust some things at face value, yet not others, and I wanted to shake her at points.
There are definitely some convoluted plot points in this one--there's quite a saga with the Holt legacy. I didn't really question it while I was reading, but after, I find myself wondering if it was all necessary. Still, I loved reading about the slightly faded grandeur of Lake Hall--it's just not something you get in America, and it's fun to picture when you read these type of novels. Macmillan does an excellent job of portraying her characters and the setting.
I definitely was caught up in the plot. I thought I had it figured out for a while, then I realized I didn't, and then the ending was a little crazy. I'm still not a 100% sure about it, but I appreciate Macmillan for embracing it. Overall, I enjoyed the varying viewpoints and the slightly fusty, aristocratic setting. I was interested in the characters and wondering what happened with Hannah. A few things seemed a little far-fetched, hence my 3.5-star rating, but still a good read.
"I'll never be able to change this place, but if we stay here long enough, I'm afraid it will change my daughter and me."
I've loved Gilly Macmillan and her books since I won one of them in a Librarything giveaway a few years ago. She's an excellent writer, and I quite enjoy how different each book is from the next. This one was very different and quite unexpected. It's told from a variety of alternating viewpoints--the primary ones being Jocelyn and her mother, Virginia, but we even get a local policeman and a mysterious woman dating back to the 1970s. I liked the way Macmillan wove all of of these perspectives together. At first, it seemed really easy to trust everyone, and then quickly, you realize that you can't be sure if you can believe either Jo or her mother.
I don't want to go too far or reveal too much, because it's probably better to let most of the plot reveal itself organically, but it's definitely easy to say that much of the book is a little befuddling (in a good way). I found myself drawn to Ruby, the young girl, and oddly, Virginia, despite her history as a pretty terrible parent. Jo frustrated me, with her somewhat naive nature. She would trust some things at face value, yet not others, and I wanted to shake her at points.
There are definitely some convoluted plot points in this one--there's quite a saga with the Holt legacy. I didn't really question it while I was reading, but after, I find myself wondering if it was all necessary. Still, I loved reading about the slightly faded grandeur of Lake Hall--it's just not something you get in America, and it's fun to picture when you read these type of novels. Macmillan does an excellent job of portraying her characters and the setting.
I definitely was caught up in the plot. I thought I had it figured out for a while, then I realized I didn't, and then the ending was a little crazy. I'm still not a 100% sure about it, but I appreciate Macmillan for embracing it. Overall, I enjoyed the varying viewpoints and the slightly fusty, aristocratic setting. I was interested in the characters and wondering what happened with Hannah. A few things seemed a little far-fetched, hence my 3.5-star rating, but still a good read.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Top Gun: Maverick (2022) in Movies
May 19, 2022
Back in 1987, Tom Cruise and Paramount released “Top Gun” and in doing so created a cultural phenomenon that launched Cruise into Superstardom and became an enduring classic.
Now after decades away and delays due to the pandemic, Cruise has returned to the franchise with “Top Gun: Maverick” and has crafted the rare feat, of a sequel that is not only better than the original but also gives audiences an edge of the seat summer event film when it is needed the most.
Cruise stars as Captain Pete Mitchell who after thirty years is not only haunted by his past but unable to shed his insubordinate and impulsive ways which have kept him from reaching the rank of Admiral and have moved him from one assignment to another.
After his latest action confirms his incredible aviation skills but infuriates the upper brass in the process, Mitchell is out of options as he is unwilling to retire, unable to be promoted, and out of posting options. He is tasked by an old friend with enough clout to watch out for him to return to the Top Gun program as an instructor. Mitchell is hesitant as his last attempt as an instructor did not last long and he believes he is better suited to fly versus teaching.
It is learned that an enemy faction is about to open a Uranium enrichment facility in violation of established law that would threaten the region, and Mitchell is tasked with training a team of Top Gun graduates in three weeks who can make what appears to be a near-impossible assault on the facility to destroy it before it becomes a threat.
While the assembled pilots represent a brash and talented group, Mitchell must contend with the ghosts of his past as one of the members Bradley ‘Rooster’ Bradshaw (Miles Teller), is the son of his deceased friend Goose and has a very fractured relationship with Bradshaw over their shared past.
With pressure on him from Admiral Simpson (Jon Hamm), Mitchell must somehow find a way to train the group in a small amount of time for what is considered by many to be an impossible mission due to the terrain, defenses, and location of their target.
The film is an edge-of-the-seat adrenaline rush that grabs ahold of you from the start and never lets up. From the opening music to the intense aerial sequences, the audience was hooked as gasps and cheers erupted frequently as the characters and action clearly connected with the audience.
While the visual sequences are nothing short of spectacular, the film is a character-based story and there is a depth to Mitchell and many of the cast that goes much deeper than one would normally see in a summer action film.
Jennifer Connelly offers a great counter-point to Mitchell as a person from his past that has known him through several key moments of his career and helps him endure the turbulent emotions that he has.
From the solid characters and story to the rousing final segments of the movie, “Top Gun: Maverick” returns the Summer Event film in grand style and exceeded my expectations and the original in every way.
Now after decades away and delays due to the pandemic, Cruise has returned to the franchise with “Top Gun: Maverick” and has crafted the rare feat, of a sequel that is not only better than the original but also gives audiences an edge of the seat summer event film when it is needed the most.
Cruise stars as Captain Pete Mitchell who after thirty years is not only haunted by his past but unable to shed his insubordinate and impulsive ways which have kept him from reaching the rank of Admiral and have moved him from one assignment to another.
After his latest action confirms his incredible aviation skills but infuriates the upper brass in the process, Mitchell is out of options as he is unwilling to retire, unable to be promoted, and out of posting options. He is tasked by an old friend with enough clout to watch out for him to return to the Top Gun program as an instructor. Mitchell is hesitant as his last attempt as an instructor did not last long and he believes he is better suited to fly versus teaching.
It is learned that an enemy faction is about to open a Uranium enrichment facility in violation of established law that would threaten the region, and Mitchell is tasked with training a team of Top Gun graduates in three weeks who can make what appears to be a near-impossible assault on the facility to destroy it before it becomes a threat.
While the assembled pilots represent a brash and talented group, Mitchell must contend with the ghosts of his past as one of the members Bradley ‘Rooster’ Bradshaw (Miles Teller), is the son of his deceased friend Goose and has a very fractured relationship with Bradshaw over their shared past.
With pressure on him from Admiral Simpson (Jon Hamm), Mitchell must somehow find a way to train the group in a small amount of time for what is considered by many to be an impossible mission due to the terrain, defenses, and location of their target.
The film is an edge-of-the-seat adrenaline rush that grabs ahold of you from the start and never lets up. From the opening music to the intense aerial sequences, the audience was hooked as gasps and cheers erupted frequently as the characters and action clearly connected with the audience.
While the visual sequences are nothing short of spectacular, the film is a character-based story and there is a depth to Mitchell and many of the cast that goes much deeper than one would normally see in a summer action film.
Jennifer Connelly offers a great counter-point to Mitchell as a person from his past that has known him through several key moments of his career and helps him endure the turbulent emotions that he has.
From the solid characters and story to the rousing final segments of the movie, “Top Gun: Maverick” returns the Summer Event film in grand style and exceeded my expectations and the original in every way.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated 1922 (2017) in Movies
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Solid Performances (1 more)
Believable Set Design
Sometimes Your Own Demons Are The Hardest To Escape
1922 is the second Stephen King story adapted for Netflix in the last two months and it is very different to the adaption of Gerald's Game we saw back in September. The movie is set up nicely, showing an older, shaken man writing out his confession in hopes of appeasing the guilt that has plagued him since he murdered his wife Arlette. We then see a younger version of the man, Wilfred and we learn that he is very protective of the three things that he feels, 'belong,' to him; his son, his wife and his land.
Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that he outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette's father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wlifred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land off of her in installments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder.
From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who haven’t yet seen the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss.
The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths, in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well.
My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalizes on it. A Stephen King ghost story released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into and instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed, which is an interesting idea, it’s just not what I wanted out of this movie.
Overall this is a well made movie and for what it is it’s great, it just didn’t meet the expectations that I had for it and maybe that’s my own fault more than the movie’s. As with any Stephen King story, it makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do; I just wish that it had scared me a bit more.
Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that he outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette's father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wlifred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land off of her in installments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder.
From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who haven’t yet seen the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss.
The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths, in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well.
My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalizes on it. A Stephen King ghost story released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into and instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed, which is an interesting idea, it’s just not what I wanted out of this movie.
Overall this is a well made movie and for what it is it’s great, it just didn’t meet the expectations that I had for it and maybe that’s my own fault more than the movie’s. As with any Stephen King story, it makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do; I just wish that it had scared me a bit more.
Brick Body Kids Still Daydream by Open Mike Eagle
Album Watch
With the first song of his 2014 masterpiece, Dark Comedy, Open Mike Eagle reintroduced himself by...
rap
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The length of time it’s taken me to catch this one at the cinema belies my lukewarm interest in the material: I’m not a ‘fan boy’ for either Marvel or DC properties. As it turns out, writer/director David “Fury” Ayer’s Suicide Squad is just plain frustrating in cinematic terms.
The story concerns the efforts of Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) to assemble – for reasons that make almost zero sense! – the ‘worse of the worst’ out of US prisons to form a fighting force to combat the perceived threat of an “anti-Superman” villain that *might* appear in the future.
SUICIDE SQUAD
Viola Davis wondering Why? Just Why?
Among these super-villains are Deadshot (Will Smith) and Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie). Harley is the girlfriend of The Joker (Jared Leto) and they would be a great match on Match.com since both are several sandwiches short of a picnic.
Waller assembles her motley crew. Unfortunately, another of the super-villains is June Moon aka “The Enchantress” (Cara Delevingne, her of the scary eyebrows) – an ancient God-like being that has possessed June and who has her/its own agenda that threatens the whole world.
So why is this movie so frustrating? Because for all its inane silliness the film does have its fair share of scenes that stick in the mind. I’ve seen comment that Jared Leto’s much-vaunted Joker is peripheral: a cameo only on screen for a few minutes. But I didn’t find that… or at least his scenes were sufficiently memorable to seem much more substantial. The madness portrayed here is truly quite disturbing and threatening. Many of Leto’s scenes – such as the one with The Joker lying on the floor surrounded by weapons – are artfully done.
Margot Robbie’s Quinn although extremely sexualized – which will not be to the liking of some, but appeal to many male viewers – adds enormous charisma to her role. Will Smith also does his best with the material he has to inject some emotional heft into the father/daughter sub-plot.
Unfortunately this is all done against a fractured and frankly nonsensical story with inconsistencies and loose ends too numerous to list. (Oh, OK, I’ll do a few):
A super-being dispatches armies and nukes from hundred of miles away, yet can’t swat a couple of inconvenient humans at 10 paces?
A large early part of the film is filled with backstories (which I don’t necessarily object to for context) but here they are done in an extremely patchy manner: a number of the characters are sketched out so lightly that they might as well be wearing the red Star Trek shirts!
Waller’s motivations (and certainly her sociopathic actions at some points in the plot) are nebulous and don’t bear scrutiny. Why exactly does she thing a ‘bloke who can shoot well’ can do diddly-squat against a super-being spewing gravity defying electrical displays on the other side of the city?
Is this really a ‘Dirty Dozen’? Many of the super-villains seem to be not so bad after all… you know… with consciences and everything…. (I’m sure you could find ten times worse down behind Southampton docks on a Friday night).
And while some of the cinematography (Roman Vasyanov, “Fury”) and lighting is memorable, there are some cinema basics (like dark subtitles on a dark background) that seem just plain careless.
With a huge BvS quotient of 0.7 this should really have been much better. To put it another way, you could have made ten of last week’s 4-Fad film “The Shallows” for the cost of this (and stuck a better ending on it with the change).
Memorable visuals, but not a memorable film.
The story concerns the efforts of Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) to assemble – for reasons that make almost zero sense! – the ‘worse of the worst’ out of US prisons to form a fighting force to combat the perceived threat of an “anti-Superman” villain that *might* appear in the future.
SUICIDE SQUAD
Viola Davis wondering Why? Just Why?
Among these super-villains are Deadshot (Will Smith) and Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie). Harley is the girlfriend of The Joker (Jared Leto) and they would be a great match on Match.com since both are several sandwiches short of a picnic.
Waller assembles her motley crew. Unfortunately, another of the super-villains is June Moon aka “The Enchantress” (Cara Delevingne, her of the scary eyebrows) – an ancient God-like being that has possessed June and who has her/its own agenda that threatens the whole world.
So why is this movie so frustrating? Because for all its inane silliness the film does have its fair share of scenes that stick in the mind. I’ve seen comment that Jared Leto’s much-vaunted Joker is peripheral: a cameo only on screen for a few minutes. But I didn’t find that… or at least his scenes were sufficiently memorable to seem much more substantial. The madness portrayed here is truly quite disturbing and threatening. Many of Leto’s scenes – such as the one with The Joker lying on the floor surrounded by weapons – are artfully done.
Margot Robbie’s Quinn although extremely sexualized – which will not be to the liking of some, but appeal to many male viewers – adds enormous charisma to her role. Will Smith also does his best with the material he has to inject some emotional heft into the father/daughter sub-plot.
Unfortunately this is all done against a fractured and frankly nonsensical story with inconsistencies and loose ends too numerous to list. (Oh, OK, I’ll do a few):
A super-being dispatches armies and nukes from hundred of miles away, yet can’t swat a couple of inconvenient humans at 10 paces?
A large early part of the film is filled with backstories (which I don’t necessarily object to for context) but here they are done in an extremely patchy manner: a number of the characters are sketched out so lightly that they might as well be wearing the red Star Trek shirts!
Waller’s motivations (and certainly her sociopathic actions at some points in the plot) are nebulous and don’t bear scrutiny. Why exactly does she thing a ‘bloke who can shoot well’ can do diddly-squat against a super-being spewing gravity defying electrical displays on the other side of the city?
Is this really a ‘Dirty Dozen’? Many of the super-villains seem to be not so bad after all… you know… with consciences and everything…. (I’m sure you could find ten times worse down behind Southampton docks on a Friday night).
And while some of the cinematography (Roman Vasyanov, “Fury”) and lighting is memorable, there are some cinema basics (like dark subtitles on a dark background) that seem just plain careless.
With a huge BvS quotient of 0.7 this should really have been much better. To put it another way, you could have made ten of last week’s 4-Fad film “The Shallows” for the cost of this (and stuck a better ending on it with the change).
Memorable visuals, but not a memorable film.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Fractured in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/fractured-by-catherine-mckenzie
AVAILABLE NOW IN THE UK!
<b><i>They say that if a butterfly flaps its wings in the Amazonian rainforest, it can change the weather half a world away. Chaos theory...
All I know is today is that you can think that what you’ve done is only the flap of a butterfly wing, when it’s really a thunderclap.
And both can result in a hurricane.</b></i>
Julie’s life has gotten hard, she’s become a famous author and managed to bag herself a crazed stalker, so she decides to move her family across the country in hope of a new, stalkerless, beginning. And when she meet neighbour John, they hit it off immediately, the future seems brighter. But before long, things start to go wrong again. Who knew moving into a beautiful picturesque new neighbourhood could be so deadly?
I was really worried about reading this because Netgalley classed it as women's fiction and I have serious beef with that genre… but also, I was expecting a suspense thriller, not some family-lovey-dovey bullshit, but after seeing the rave reviews on Goodreads I had a little more hope that this would be bearable for me. And boy was it bearable, more than that in fact, it was exciting and thrilling to read!
As Stephen King says <i><b>“Good books don't give up all their secrets at once.”</i></b> and this book certainly didn’t! I thought it was excellent at keeping you on your toes, feeding you chunks of mystery and suspense a little at a time.
<b>Minor spoilers in this paragraph.</b> I really liked the main characters in this book… separately. Julie was a good mum and loving wife who was dealing with all her issues in a non-annoying way and John was a good dad, and, for the most part, a good husband. But put the two of them together and they got annoying. How could a grown man and woman not realise the friendship they had managed to create out of one conversation the day Julie moved in was inappropriate for so long? Julie especially, as her relationship with Daniel seemed close to perfect! The childishness of their situation had me really irritated and uncomfortable throughout the novel. I never used to have a problem with these kind of relationships in books until me and Matt had been together for a while, not that I <i>ever</i> condoned cheating on a partner before I got into a relationship, just the thought of being cheated on by your other half sets off all kinds of emotions and feelings inside of me that I can’t even begin to describe. <spoiler>So when they kissed each other outside Julie’s house, my stomach dropped, I felt instantly panicky and sick and contemplated putting the novel down as unfinished. I hate, <b>hate</b> reading about affairs.</spoiler>
My favourite character was Daniel though, what a lovely, gentle and understanding man… if not a little naive. Though I didn’t like Hanna, but she had every right to be angry and suspicious with John.
It’s pretty clear from a few chapters in who our criminal is, but McKenzie does well to keep what specifically the “accident” is and who our victim is secret until just the right moment. When we found out what happened and who it happened to I was shocked! It’s been a long time since a book has surprised me in the same way. What a crazy end to this rollercoaster ride of a book!
Overall, this is a fantastic suspense novel, with just the right amount of “women’s fiction” merged with thriller. I seriously recommend this for all thriller/suspense readers out there, I’m sure this won’t disappoint!
<i>(I don’t mean to create any kind of drama with this comment but this whole novel is <i>so American!</i> Wanting to sue someone over small things? Having “block parties” and neighbourhood newsletters and stuff with an immature queen bee in charge of it all? This shit would never go down in the UK.)</i>
I’d like to thank Netgalley and Lake Union Publishing for the opportunity to read this in an exchange for an honest review.
AVAILABLE NOW IN THE UK!
<b><i>They say that if a butterfly flaps its wings in the Amazonian rainforest, it can change the weather half a world away. Chaos theory...
All I know is today is that you can think that what you’ve done is only the flap of a butterfly wing, when it’s really a thunderclap.
And both can result in a hurricane.</b></i>
Julie’s life has gotten hard, she’s become a famous author and managed to bag herself a crazed stalker, so she decides to move her family across the country in hope of a new, stalkerless, beginning. And when she meet neighbour John, they hit it off immediately, the future seems brighter. But before long, things start to go wrong again. Who knew moving into a beautiful picturesque new neighbourhood could be so deadly?
I was really worried about reading this because Netgalley classed it as women's fiction and I have serious beef with that genre… but also, I was expecting a suspense thriller, not some family-lovey-dovey bullshit, but after seeing the rave reviews on Goodreads I had a little more hope that this would be bearable for me. And boy was it bearable, more than that in fact, it was exciting and thrilling to read!
As Stephen King says <i><b>“Good books don't give up all their secrets at once.”</i></b> and this book certainly didn’t! I thought it was excellent at keeping you on your toes, feeding you chunks of mystery and suspense a little at a time.
<b>Minor spoilers in this paragraph.</b> I really liked the main characters in this book… separately. Julie was a good mum and loving wife who was dealing with all her issues in a non-annoying way and John was a good dad, and, for the most part, a good husband. But put the two of them together and they got annoying. How could a grown man and woman not realise the friendship they had managed to create out of one conversation the day Julie moved in was inappropriate for so long? Julie especially, as her relationship with Daniel seemed close to perfect! The childishness of their situation had me really irritated and uncomfortable throughout the novel. I never used to have a problem with these kind of relationships in books until me and Matt had been together for a while, not that I <i>ever</i> condoned cheating on a partner before I got into a relationship, just the thought of being cheated on by your other half sets off all kinds of emotions and feelings inside of me that I can’t even begin to describe. <spoiler>So when they kissed each other outside Julie’s house, my stomach dropped, I felt instantly panicky and sick and contemplated putting the novel down as unfinished. I hate, <b>hate</b> reading about affairs.</spoiler>
My favourite character was Daniel though, what a lovely, gentle and understanding man… if not a little naive. Though I didn’t like Hanna, but she had every right to be angry and suspicious with John.
It’s pretty clear from a few chapters in who our criminal is, but McKenzie does well to keep what specifically the “accident” is and who our victim is secret until just the right moment. When we found out what happened and who it happened to I was shocked! It’s been a long time since a book has surprised me in the same way. What a crazy end to this rollercoaster ride of a book!
Overall, this is a fantastic suspense novel, with just the right amount of “women’s fiction” merged with thriller. I seriously recommend this for all thriller/suspense readers out there, I’m sure this won’t disappoint!
<i>(I don’t mean to create any kind of drama with this comment but this whole novel is <i>so American!</i> Wanting to sue someone over small things? Having “block parties” and neighbourhood newsletters and stuff with an immature queen bee in charge of it all? This shit would never go down in the UK.)</i>
I’d like to thank Netgalley and Lake Union Publishing for the opportunity to read this in an exchange for an honest review.
Lucy Buglass (45 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Disappointingly Average
I love The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo series. The Swedish films are excellent and David Fincher’s US adaptation was a decent watch too. Lisbeth Salander is such an iconic and well-written character, so her return to the big screen was met with much anticipation. With a new cast and new story I was looking forward to seeing it, catching a Limitless preview screening a few days before its general UK release. Unfortunately, it didn’t live up to my relatively high expectations.
The biggest insult to this film is its trailer. It gives away EVERYTHING so if you’ve seen the trailer, you’ve basically seen the entire film condensed down into a few minutes. All the best scenes and key moments have been awkwardly crammed into its promotion, to the point where I was able to predict exactly what was going to happen. I felt very let down by this and it seriously ruined my ability to enjoy the film properly. It deserved a much more ambiguous trailer, letting the mystery be revealed throughout the full narrative instead.
The film is redeemed somewhat by the performances. Claire Foy is a fantastic Lisbeth Salander, putting her all into this performance and fully embodying the badass, bisexual cyber-hacker that we all know and love. She is slick, smart and sexually charged, and is a worthy successor to both Noomi Rapace and Rooney Mara. If anything, Foy deserved a better film because this story really didn’t do her much justice and that’s not her fault.
It was also interesting to see British comedian Stephen Merchant in a much more serious role, proving that he is able to step out of his comfort zone. His character, Frans Balder, is a complex one despite his lack of screen time, and I was convinced by his take on the character. Despite his relatively small role, I found him more interesting than some of the main characters.
Security expert Edwin Needham is utterly forgettable, and his character wasn’t strong enough to get much interest from me. In a similar vein, Millenium journalist Mikael Blomkvist barely even made an appearance and considering he’s been a key character in the novels and in Lisbeth’s life, this was disappointing for me. I haven’t read the novel yet so I’m unsure if this is true to the original story, but it was a shame he didn’t feature more.
Because this film focuses primarily on Salander and twin sister, Camilla, I was relieved that I at least enjoyed scenes featuring the two of them. Sylvia Hoeks is a terrifying and powerful on-screen presence, from her mannerisms to her costume design. The fractured relationship between the two sisters is fascinating and runs deep, but seems to be glossed over at times. Foy and Hoeks did their best with the script they had, but I still found the narrative jumbled and rushed in places, favouring drawn-out action over scenes with any real substance.
Sure, the action sequences are well-shot and full of adrenaline but when they replace actual narrative coherence, we have a problem. There’s too much going on, there’s plot holes, and filler scenes that really didn’t need to be there. I know two hours isn’t really a lot of screen time to play with, but it could’ve been so much better than this.
The Girl In The Spider’s Web is nothing like the complex thriller I was expecting it to be, cramming far too much into its runtime and leaving me feeling dissatisfied. It’s entertaining in its own way and if you’re mainly looking looking for chase sequences, fast cars and action, then you’ll probably have a good time. There are some great scenes and lines of dialogue, but not enough to fully redeem itself. I don’t necessarily regret watching it, but I won’t be watching again. It’s a forgettable action film.
If you want to see Lisbeth Salander and co. at their best, catch the Swedish films instead.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/11/28/disappointingly-average-a-review-of-the-girl-in-the-spiders-web/
The biggest insult to this film is its trailer. It gives away EVERYTHING so if you’ve seen the trailer, you’ve basically seen the entire film condensed down into a few minutes. All the best scenes and key moments have been awkwardly crammed into its promotion, to the point where I was able to predict exactly what was going to happen. I felt very let down by this and it seriously ruined my ability to enjoy the film properly. It deserved a much more ambiguous trailer, letting the mystery be revealed throughout the full narrative instead.
The film is redeemed somewhat by the performances. Claire Foy is a fantastic Lisbeth Salander, putting her all into this performance and fully embodying the badass, bisexual cyber-hacker that we all know and love. She is slick, smart and sexually charged, and is a worthy successor to both Noomi Rapace and Rooney Mara. If anything, Foy deserved a better film because this story really didn’t do her much justice and that’s not her fault.
It was also interesting to see British comedian Stephen Merchant in a much more serious role, proving that he is able to step out of his comfort zone. His character, Frans Balder, is a complex one despite his lack of screen time, and I was convinced by his take on the character. Despite his relatively small role, I found him more interesting than some of the main characters.
Security expert Edwin Needham is utterly forgettable, and his character wasn’t strong enough to get much interest from me. In a similar vein, Millenium journalist Mikael Blomkvist barely even made an appearance and considering he’s been a key character in the novels and in Lisbeth’s life, this was disappointing for me. I haven’t read the novel yet so I’m unsure if this is true to the original story, but it was a shame he didn’t feature more.
Because this film focuses primarily on Salander and twin sister, Camilla, I was relieved that I at least enjoyed scenes featuring the two of them. Sylvia Hoeks is a terrifying and powerful on-screen presence, from her mannerisms to her costume design. The fractured relationship between the two sisters is fascinating and runs deep, but seems to be glossed over at times. Foy and Hoeks did their best with the script they had, but I still found the narrative jumbled and rushed in places, favouring drawn-out action over scenes with any real substance.
Sure, the action sequences are well-shot and full of adrenaline but when they replace actual narrative coherence, we have a problem. There’s too much going on, there’s plot holes, and filler scenes that really didn’t need to be there. I know two hours isn’t really a lot of screen time to play with, but it could’ve been so much better than this.
The Girl In The Spider’s Web is nothing like the complex thriller I was expecting it to be, cramming far too much into its runtime and leaving me feeling dissatisfied. It’s entertaining in its own way and if you’re mainly looking looking for chase sequences, fast cars and action, then you’ll probably have a good time. There are some great scenes and lines of dialogue, but not enough to fully redeem itself. I don’t necessarily regret watching it, but I won’t be watching again. It’s a forgettable action film.
If you want to see Lisbeth Salander and co. at their best, catch the Swedish films instead.
https://lucygoestohollywood.com/2018/11/28/disappointingly-average-a-review-of-the-girl-in-the-spiders-web/