Search
Search results
The Blender Girl Smoothies - Easy, Healthy Smoothie Recipes
Food & Drink and Health & Fitness
App
The Blender Girl and her healthy, blender-centric recipes have taken the world by storm—in this...
Housewife of Horror (12 KP) rated The Canal (2014) in Movies
Aug 25, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Canal (2014)
Platform: Shudder
Genre: Horror
Country: Ireland (IFB)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Written and Directed by: Ivan Kavanagh
Release Date: April 18th 2014 (Tribeca Film Festival)
Cast: Rupert Evans; Steve Oram; Antonia Campbell-Hughes; Hannah Hoekstra
After found footage, psychological horror films are a favorite of mine. I love how they pull you into the story, how up is down, left is right, I love to be enveloped by the plot. That tingly feeling I get on the back of my neck, the hairs standing up, I know then it has me in it’s clutches. I had that feeling with The Canal.
David (Rupert Evans) works as a film archivist, he is given a reel of footage from the police archives to watch and subsequently archive by his work colleague and close friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes), which turns out to be old crime scene footage of he and his wife’s current home. It was the scene of a shocking crime in 1902, the brutal murder of a cheating wife, their children and the nanny by the enraged father.
David suspects his wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) of having an affair, so he decides to follow her one night, only to unfortunately confirm his suspicions. He watches Alice while she is with her lover, and then picking up a hammer, he appears to mull over the idea of using it, only to quickly come to his senses. Walking away, he throws the hammer in to the canal on the way back to their marital home, where he has left their young son asleep in bed, alone in the house.
David, feeling sick from what he witnessed, as well as what he had considered doing about it, runs into the (quite dirty) canal-side public toilets. He hears something or someone coming in after him, and then see’s them, their feet, under the stall door, followed by fingers appearing to creep over the top of the door. He then proceeds to suffer from quite nightmarish visions that include the man, the husband, from the 1902 crime scene footage. He seems to be taunting David, whispering things to him. David, in a state of distress, manages to crawl outside, where he then witnesses what appears to be his wife being thrown into the canal; he just can’t see it very clearly or coherently. He later comes round on the floor of the bathroom, unnerved and disheveled, and makes his way home. The next morning, when he realises that Alice has not come home that night, David goes to the local police station to report her missing. Obviously, the police suspect David, “It’s always the husband” says the (inept) detective on the case.
The plot twists and turns, is it David? Is it the entity? Some great revelations about the grim history of the house come up throughout. It’s an interesting watch that comes to a disturbing conclusion.
A great little scene, that made me believe David was the killer, was during one of his viewings of the old footage. He stood up, in front of the projector, silhouetting him in front of the screen, making him appear to be a dark shadow. To me, this was the directors’ nod to David’s darkness within.
The Canal is a great psychological horror; it does very well to dig itself under your skin as you watch, and drag you in to this nightmare that David’s life has turned into. I was really impressed with the performance of Rupert Evans, tormented and devastated, he made David’s pain almost tangible. Watching him seemingly fall further into madness as the story progressed was quite frightening. I really felt for the nanny, she is a totally innocent girl who just wants to protect David and Alice’s son Billy, and can’t leave even when she knows she should. She gets dragged deeper and deeper in to the madness; everyone close to David is brought into this waking nightmare.
The ending is well, quite creepy and rather disturbing as I have said earlier. The story feels to me to have come full circle, and you can envision that it is a tormenting nightmare that will repeat itself over and over with future residents of the house for years to come.
4/5 – It’s rather worth a look if you like a good psychological horror
Lesley-Ann (Housewife of Horror)
Platform: Shudder
Genre: Horror
Country: Ireland (IFB)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Written and Directed by: Ivan Kavanagh
Release Date: April 18th 2014 (Tribeca Film Festival)
Cast: Rupert Evans; Steve Oram; Antonia Campbell-Hughes; Hannah Hoekstra
After found footage, psychological horror films are a favorite of mine. I love how they pull you into the story, how up is down, left is right, I love to be enveloped by the plot. That tingly feeling I get on the back of my neck, the hairs standing up, I know then it has me in it’s clutches. I had that feeling with The Canal.
David (Rupert Evans) works as a film archivist, he is given a reel of footage from the police archives to watch and subsequently archive by his work colleague and close friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes), which turns out to be old crime scene footage of he and his wife’s current home. It was the scene of a shocking crime in 1902, the brutal murder of a cheating wife, their children and the nanny by the enraged father.
David suspects his wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) of having an affair, so he decides to follow her one night, only to unfortunately confirm his suspicions. He watches Alice while she is with her lover, and then picking up a hammer, he appears to mull over the idea of using it, only to quickly come to his senses. Walking away, he throws the hammer in to the canal on the way back to their marital home, where he has left their young son asleep in bed, alone in the house.
David, feeling sick from what he witnessed, as well as what he had considered doing about it, runs into the (quite dirty) canal-side public toilets. He hears something or someone coming in after him, and then see’s them, their feet, under the stall door, followed by fingers appearing to creep over the top of the door. He then proceeds to suffer from quite nightmarish visions that include the man, the husband, from the 1902 crime scene footage. He seems to be taunting David, whispering things to him. David, in a state of distress, manages to crawl outside, where he then witnesses what appears to be his wife being thrown into the canal; he just can’t see it very clearly or coherently. He later comes round on the floor of the bathroom, unnerved and disheveled, and makes his way home. The next morning, when he realises that Alice has not come home that night, David goes to the local police station to report her missing. Obviously, the police suspect David, “It’s always the husband” says the (inept) detective on the case.
The plot twists and turns, is it David? Is it the entity? Some great revelations about the grim history of the house come up throughout. It’s an interesting watch that comes to a disturbing conclusion.
A great little scene, that made me believe David was the killer, was during one of his viewings of the old footage. He stood up, in front of the projector, silhouetting him in front of the screen, making him appear to be a dark shadow. To me, this was the directors’ nod to David’s darkness within.
The Canal is a great psychological horror; it does very well to dig itself under your skin as you watch, and drag you in to this nightmare that David’s life has turned into. I was really impressed with the performance of Rupert Evans, tormented and devastated, he made David’s pain almost tangible. Watching him seemingly fall further into madness as the story progressed was quite frightening. I really felt for the nanny, she is a totally innocent girl who just wants to protect David and Alice’s son Billy, and can’t leave even when she knows she should. She gets dragged deeper and deeper in to the madness; everyone close to David is brought into this waking nightmare.
The ending is well, quite creepy and rather disturbing as I have said earlier. The story feels to me to have come full circle, and you can envision that it is a tormenting nightmare that will repeat itself over and over with future residents of the house for years to come.
4/5 – It’s rather worth a look if you like a good psychological horror
Lesley-Ann (Housewife of Horror)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Dune (2021) in Movies
Oct 28, 2021
“He’s Not The Messiah – He’s a Very Naughty Boy!”
Certain works of fiction have been labelled with the tag of “unfilmable”, and Frank Herbert’s 1965 novel “Dune” is one of those. It’s full of exposition done as internal monologues – which screams “movie voiceover”. And regular readers will know my hatred of those!
Amazingly, Denis Villeneuve manages to pull off the impossible with his version of Dune (part 1), which I saw last night as part of a Cineworld Unlimited preview event. It’s close to being a movie masterpiece.
Plot Summary:
The desert planet of Arrakis is home to the Freman tribe but is a political battleground since it is the only known source of ‘Spice’: a substance that enables interplanetary travel.
Paul (Timothée Chalamet) is the heir to the throne of the House of Atreides, headed by his father Duke Leto Atreides (Oscar Isaac). His mother (Rebecca Ferguson) is Leto’s concubine and possessed with hereditary gifts: mystical powers that make her part of a sect of galactic ‘witches’ with mystical powers. But the House of Atreides is gaining in power, and the Emperor throws a political spanner into the works by evicting the vicious House of Harkonnen from Arrakis and giving it to Atreides. This puts both Houses on the path of war.
Certification:
US: PG-13. UK: 12A.
Talent:
Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Rebecca Ferguson, Oscar Isaac, Zendaya, Jason Momoa, Stellan Skarsgård, Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem, Dave Bautista, Charlotte Rampling.
Directed by: Denis Villeneuve.
Written by: Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve and Eric Roth. (Based on the novel by Frank Herbert).
“Dune” Review: Positives:
My 5*’s for this one goes for the overall vision, which is grandiose with scenes that stick in the brain. As he demonstrated in “Arrival“, Villeneuve likes to go for huge spacecraft that hang “in the sky in much the same way that bricks don’t”*. And the ships in this vision are just HUGE.
The ensemble cast does a great job, with Chalamet, Isaac and Ferguson being particularly impressive. Stellan Skarsgård (looking like he is about to tell “a very amusing story about a goat”, if you get that movie reference!) looks to have the most gruelling acting job, having to emerge from, and descend into, a bath of black goo!
Much like Villeneuve’s “Blade Runner 2049“, this movie has cinematography that is worthy of framing and sticking on your wall. (Greig Fraser is the man behind the camera here).
Hans Zimmer‘s music is phenomenal. I’m not sure it’s a good ‘sit down and listen to’ sort of soundtrack, but it fits the movie beautifully.
* I used this Douglas Adams quote for my “Arrival” review, and then Mark Kermode used the same quote: I like to think he read my review!
Negatives:
It wasn’t a problem for me, but I expect some will consider the movie to be too much mood and not enough action. I’ve seen some comment that the film was “emotionally empty”: but I really didn’t feel that, and am well-invested in the story ready for “Part 2”.
This is probably faithful to the books, but given all of the advanced spacecraft technology on show, and laser/blaster technology, it seems bonkers that when we get to hand-to-hand combat between the armies that we get into “swords and sandals” territory.
Observation:
There’s nothing new under the Tatooine suns. And so much of this film has you linking the concepts back to “Star Wars”:
“The Force” is now “The Way”
The Jedi are the ‘Ben and Jerry Set’. (Well, that’s what it sounded like to me… and I don’t even like Ice Cream!)
Both films centre on a Messiah-like “chosen one”, foretold by legend
“Spice” also features in “Star Wars” with “spice runners” (as in the Millenium Falcon doing the ‘Kessel Run’)
There’s even a ‘pit of sarlaac’ moment in “Dune”.
Of course, since Frank Herbert wrote “Dune” in 1965, there’s a significant question as to who is plagiarising who here!
Summary Thoughts on “Dune”
At 2 hours 35 minutes, it’s YET ANOTHER long movie: cementing October 2021 as the month of long movies. (I just did a quick tally, and of the six films I’ve seen this month they average 139 minutes in length: and that’s with “Venom: Let There Be Carnage” dragging the average down!)
But this is a movie that MUST be seen on the big screen. It’s a memorable movie experience and highly recommended.
I can’t wait for Villeneuve’s “Part 2”, currently in pre-production.
Amazingly, Denis Villeneuve manages to pull off the impossible with his version of Dune (part 1), which I saw last night as part of a Cineworld Unlimited preview event. It’s close to being a movie masterpiece.
Plot Summary:
The desert planet of Arrakis is home to the Freman tribe but is a political battleground since it is the only known source of ‘Spice’: a substance that enables interplanetary travel.
Paul (Timothée Chalamet) is the heir to the throne of the House of Atreides, headed by his father Duke Leto Atreides (Oscar Isaac). His mother (Rebecca Ferguson) is Leto’s concubine and possessed with hereditary gifts: mystical powers that make her part of a sect of galactic ‘witches’ with mystical powers. But the House of Atreides is gaining in power, and the Emperor throws a political spanner into the works by evicting the vicious House of Harkonnen from Arrakis and giving it to Atreides. This puts both Houses on the path of war.
Certification:
US: PG-13. UK: 12A.
Talent:
Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Rebecca Ferguson, Oscar Isaac, Zendaya, Jason Momoa, Stellan Skarsgård, Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem, Dave Bautista, Charlotte Rampling.
Directed by: Denis Villeneuve.
Written by: Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve and Eric Roth. (Based on the novel by Frank Herbert).
“Dune” Review: Positives:
My 5*’s for this one goes for the overall vision, which is grandiose with scenes that stick in the brain. As he demonstrated in “Arrival“, Villeneuve likes to go for huge spacecraft that hang “in the sky in much the same way that bricks don’t”*. And the ships in this vision are just HUGE.
The ensemble cast does a great job, with Chalamet, Isaac and Ferguson being particularly impressive. Stellan Skarsgård (looking like he is about to tell “a very amusing story about a goat”, if you get that movie reference!) looks to have the most gruelling acting job, having to emerge from, and descend into, a bath of black goo!
Much like Villeneuve’s “Blade Runner 2049“, this movie has cinematography that is worthy of framing and sticking on your wall. (Greig Fraser is the man behind the camera here).
Hans Zimmer‘s music is phenomenal. I’m not sure it’s a good ‘sit down and listen to’ sort of soundtrack, but it fits the movie beautifully.
* I used this Douglas Adams quote for my “Arrival” review, and then Mark Kermode used the same quote: I like to think he read my review!
Negatives:
It wasn’t a problem for me, but I expect some will consider the movie to be too much mood and not enough action. I’ve seen some comment that the film was “emotionally empty”: but I really didn’t feel that, and am well-invested in the story ready for “Part 2”.
This is probably faithful to the books, but given all of the advanced spacecraft technology on show, and laser/blaster technology, it seems bonkers that when we get to hand-to-hand combat between the armies that we get into “swords and sandals” territory.
Observation:
There’s nothing new under the Tatooine suns. And so much of this film has you linking the concepts back to “Star Wars”:
“The Force” is now “The Way”
The Jedi are the ‘Ben and Jerry Set’. (Well, that’s what it sounded like to me… and I don’t even like Ice Cream!)
Both films centre on a Messiah-like “chosen one”, foretold by legend
“Spice” also features in “Star Wars” with “spice runners” (as in the Millenium Falcon doing the ‘Kessel Run’)
There’s even a ‘pit of sarlaac’ moment in “Dune”.
Of course, since Frank Herbert wrote “Dune” in 1965, there’s a significant question as to who is plagiarising who here!
Summary Thoughts on “Dune”
At 2 hours 35 minutes, it’s YET ANOTHER long movie: cementing October 2021 as the month of long movies. (I just did a quick tally, and of the six films I’ve seen this month they average 139 minutes in length: and that’s with “Venom: Let There Be Carnage” dragging the average down!)
But this is a movie that MUST be seen on the big screen. It’s a memorable movie experience and highly recommended.
I can’t wait for Villeneuve’s “Part 2”, currently in pre-production.
NIV Bible: British Text New International Version
Book and Reference
App
The official UK NIV Bible reading app with British Text from Hodder & Stoughton, publishers of the...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Downton Abbey (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2019
Firstly, and slightly off topic, I wanted to mention the actual event of this being released. The sheer volume of screenings was amazing and I would be really interested in knowing how many people attended at my cinema. The other thing that amused me was what I would consider to be really stereotypical advertising. Most of the audience when I went were younger than me so I'm not sure that Cunnard and health related advertising was really their sort of thing (I did appreciate the back pain tip though.)
Despite having never seen a full episode of Downton I still enjoyed the film, they did (what felt like) an incredibly good job of filling in the blanks in the backstory. I'm sure there were still bits missing but I was certainly handed enough to understand everything that what going on.
The other thing that was a great benefit to the film was the fact that everyone had been acting these parts, and with each other, for years. The interactions were great and the ensemble made for a brilliant production. I'm not going to go into the individual main actors, it seems a little redundant considering how well established the Downton world is. All the actors brought a great feeling of history to their roles and I can't argue with their success.
All this praise can't go on forever though, I did have some issues with the storyline. The main arc seemed to work well but some of the smaller threads left me shrugging. We have Tom who is sought out by a gentleman played by Stephen Campbell Moore. This part was rather fleeting, and that perplexed me. Trying to avoid spoilers... if I told someone this part of the story out of context combined with the description of the film I would expect them to think it was a major part of the film, and not just something that goes as quickly as it arrived. Then we have Barrow (I really hope I've got that character name right), he has his own little story that plays alongside the main one as we see him put out during the tensions at Downton. I don't object to this storyline, but I don't see that it made any impact on the rest of the film, there was certainly nothing in it that couldn't have been achieved in the main setting. All it really did was give him somewhere to go that wasn't the house.
I was very aware throughout that this "film" felt like a Christmas special. There were a lot of bits to it that were left open and didn't tie together at the end... which is exactly how you'd expect a series to end to lead into another. I came out wondering if I'd missed something about a new series. I probably would have been happier having seen this as a TV special... although I obviously wouldn't have seen it had it been on TV because I don't watch the series. The whole thing has a very homely feel to it which I just don't think works in a cinema setting. That being said, I did enjoy myself and I'm sure that fans of the series would have enjoyed it more than I did.
Read the full review extras here: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/09/downton-abbey-movie-review.html
Despite having never seen a full episode of Downton I still enjoyed the film, they did (what felt like) an incredibly good job of filling in the blanks in the backstory. I'm sure there were still bits missing but I was certainly handed enough to understand everything that what going on.
The other thing that was a great benefit to the film was the fact that everyone had been acting these parts, and with each other, for years. The interactions were great and the ensemble made for a brilliant production. I'm not going to go into the individual main actors, it seems a little redundant considering how well established the Downton world is. All the actors brought a great feeling of history to their roles and I can't argue with their success.
All this praise can't go on forever though, I did have some issues with the storyline. The main arc seemed to work well but some of the smaller threads left me shrugging. We have Tom who is sought out by a gentleman played by Stephen Campbell Moore. This part was rather fleeting, and that perplexed me. Trying to avoid spoilers... if I told someone this part of the story out of context combined with the description of the film I would expect them to think it was a major part of the film, and not just something that goes as quickly as it arrived. Then we have Barrow (I really hope I've got that character name right), he has his own little story that plays alongside the main one as we see him put out during the tensions at Downton. I don't object to this storyline, but I don't see that it made any impact on the rest of the film, there was certainly nothing in it that couldn't have been achieved in the main setting. All it really did was give him somewhere to go that wasn't the house.
I was very aware throughout that this "film" felt like a Christmas special. There were a lot of bits to it that were left open and didn't tie together at the end... which is exactly how you'd expect a series to end to lead into another. I came out wondering if I'd missed something about a new series. I probably would have been happier having seen this as a TV special... although I obviously wouldn't have seen it had it been on TV because I don't watch the series. The whole thing has a very homely feel to it which I just don't think works in a cinema setting. That being said, I did enjoy myself and I'm sure that fans of the series would have enjoyed it more than I did.
Read the full review extras here: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/09/downton-abbey-movie-review.html
partypoker - Play Real Money Poker & Casino Games
Games
App
Play poker whenever and wherever you want with the partypoker app. Get a seat at the best tables in...
Debbiereadsbook (1611 KP) rated Rebuilding Year (Reconstruction #2) in Books
Jun 9, 2024
steamier than book one, but I loved it!
Independent reviewer for GRR, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 2 in the Reconstruction series, and while not strictly necessary, I would personally recommend you read book 1, Leap Year, before this. It will give you a better view of Brian's relationship with his brother, Patrick, and it will also give you Angelo and Brian's first meeting! I really enjoyed book one, and I really enjoyed this one too!
Brian has served his sentence, and is knuckling down to get back into society and do all he needs to do to come off probation. Angelo, faced with a life changing stipulation to his mentor's will, names Brian as his significant other. Funny, really, since their one and only meeting resulted in Brian punching Angelo in the face! But Angelo is injured, and Brian offers to look after him, and after that? It's only a matter of time before they give into temptation. There are secrets between though, and it won't take long for them to come to light. Can they really survive their revelation?
When I read Leap Year, I thought Angelo a fickle creature, but with a deep heart and a deep longing for something he wasn't sure what to do with. I was proven correct in that. Angelo wants what his best freind Russel has, and wants a HOME, not just somewhere he lays his head. He hasn't had a home in a long time, and seeing Russel happy with Patrick, and Frog, Patrick's son; Angelo is yearning for it. He just never expected that Brian, the man who punched him, would be that home. But I loved that, while he didn't immediately see that he was, he FELT at home in Brian's space, even if it was technically Angelo's house.
I loved how we got all of Brian's point of view for how Patrick came to be parent to Frog (again, loved Frog!) It's this issue that causes the only real tension between Angelo and Brian, and I loved that, once Angelo got over his shock, he comes back to talk to Brian and explain his hurt. He fully understands why it really isn't an issue for Brian anymore, once Brian explains: yes, Brian is Frog biological parent, but Patrick is his dad, in all the ways that matter and Brian knows he will always be Uncle Brian to Frog.
This book is on the steamier side and I loved that, while there was TALK about exhibionism, there wasn't any ACTUAL, expect that first time, when Angelo shows himself to Brian. I loved how Brian took control, with his words, but didn't venture into full Dom/sub mode. Angelo just needed to get out his head once in a while and Brian provided the words and actions to enable him to do so.
There were a couple of characters who pop up here and who I think might be next, maybe even together. I really can't wait to see if I'm right and I really hope I get to read it!
I wrote 4 stars at the top of the page, but now I'm typing up my review, I really can't find a single thing to knock that star off, so. . .
5 full and shiny stars!
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
Reading Progress
This is book 2 in the Reconstruction series, and while not strictly necessary, I would personally recommend you read book 1, Leap Year, before this. It will give you a better view of Brian's relationship with his brother, Patrick, and it will also give you Angelo and Brian's first meeting! I really enjoyed book one, and I really enjoyed this one too!
Brian has served his sentence, and is knuckling down to get back into society and do all he needs to do to come off probation. Angelo, faced with a life changing stipulation to his mentor's will, names Brian as his significant other. Funny, really, since their one and only meeting resulted in Brian punching Angelo in the face! But Angelo is injured, and Brian offers to look after him, and after that? It's only a matter of time before they give into temptation. There are secrets between though, and it won't take long for them to come to light. Can they really survive their revelation?
When I read Leap Year, I thought Angelo a fickle creature, but with a deep heart and a deep longing for something he wasn't sure what to do with. I was proven correct in that. Angelo wants what his best freind Russel has, and wants a HOME, not just somewhere he lays his head. He hasn't had a home in a long time, and seeing Russel happy with Patrick, and Frog, Patrick's son; Angelo is yearning for it. He just never expected that Brian, the man who punched him, would be that home. But I loved that, while he didn't immediately see that he was, he FELT at home in Brian's space, even if it was technically Angelo's house.
I loved how we got all of Brian's point of view for how Patrick came to be parent to Frog (again, loved Frog!) It's this issue that causes the only real tension between Angelo and Brian, and I loved that, once Angelo got over his shock, he comes back to talk to Brian and explain his hurt. He fully understands why it really isn't an issue for Brian anymore, once Brian explains: yes, Brian is Frog biological parent, but Patrick is his dad, in all the ways that matter and Brian knows he will always be Uncle Brian to Frog.
This book is on the steamier side and I loved that, while there was TALK about exhibionism, there wasn't any ACTUAL, expect that first time, when Angelo shows himself to Brian. I loved how Brian took control, with his words, but didn't venture into full Dom/sub mode. Angelo just needed to get out his head once in a while and Brian provided the words and actions to enable him to do so.
There were a couple of characters who pop up here and who I think might be next, maybe even together. I really can't wait to see if I'm right and I really hope I get to read it!
I wrote 4 stars at the top of the page, but now I'm typing up my review, I really can't find a single thing to knock that star off, so. . .
5 full and shiny stars!
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
Reading Progress
Debbiereadsbook (1611 KP) rated The Glasshouse (Lavender Shores #6) in Books
Apr 24, 2018
love love LOVE this series!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 6 in the series, but you don't need to have read there other books to follow this one. They can all be read as stand alones. But they are all 4 and 5 star reviews, from me!
I keep flipping from 4 to 5 stars and back to four again, and I have no idea why I keep crossing the numbers out at the top of the page, so gonna split the difference and call it 4.5 stars, rounded up to 5 for the blog!
A little bit more of an emotional read, this one. I felt for Harrison, I really did. I cried for him when he runs, first from Will then from Adrian. And cheered for him when he finds himself, after being someone else for everyone for so very long.
But equally, Adrian wrecks your heart too! While he fights for what he feels for Harrison in the beginning, then letting it all out and going all in, and when he was waiting for Harrison to come back to him. Oh Lord, the waiting was painful!
Harrison's brother Jasper plays a huge part here, and I think he should get a story too. Adrian's brother too, but to a lesser degree. He needs a happy ever after though, after such loss. OH!! Did I see that one being laid out?? Maybe not, we'll see!
But my overwhelming feeling (and ya'll know I'm all about sharing the feelings!) is that I want, no, I NEED the story of Adrian's uncles, Alex and Alan. Alex' diary was found in one of the couples (I forget which) house when they are remodeling. Adrian references Alex' diary here, and I so desperately want to hear their story. Although members of the Founding Families, they didn't have it as easy as the guys in Lavender Shores do now. I think THEIR story would be a welcome addition to this series.
As I read each one of these books, I find once I start, I cannot stop and I have read most of them in one sitting. They aren't short books, some 300 pages but everything just grinds to a halt when I start. So, please, keep them coming!
Ah stuff it!
5 full and shiny stars!
**same worded review will appear elsewhe
This is book 6 in the series, but you don't need to have read there other books to follow this one. They can all be read as stand alones. But they are all 4 and 5 star reviews, from me!
I keep flipping from 4 to 5 stars and back to four again, and I have no idea why I keep crossing the numbers out at the top of the page, so gonna split the difference and call it 4.5 stars, rounded up to 5 for the blog!
A little bit more of an emotional read, this one. I felt for Harrison, I really did. I cried for him when he runs, first from Will then from Adrian. And cheered for him when he finds himself, after being someone else for everyone for so very long.
But equally, Adrian wrecks your heart too! While he fights for what he feels for Harrison in the beginning, then letting it all out and going all in, and when he was waiting for Harrison to come back to him. Oh Lord, the waiting was painful!
Harrison's brother Jasper plays a huge part here, and I think he should get a story too. Adrian's brother too, but to a lesser degree. He needs a happy ever after though, after such loss. OH!! Did I see that one being laid out?? Maybe not, we'll see!
But my overwhelming feeling (and ya'll know I'm all about sharing the feelings!) is that I want, no, I NEED the story of Adrian's uncles, Alex and Alan. Alex' diary was found in one of the couples (I forget which) house when they are remodeling. Adrian references Alex' diary here, and I so desperately want to hear their story. Although members of the Founding Families, they didn't have it as easy as the guys in Lavender Shores do now. I think THEIR story would be a welcome addition to this series.
As I read each one of these books, I find once I start, I cannot stop and I have read most of them in one sitting. They aren't short books, some 300 pages but everything just grinds to a halt when I start. So, please, keep them coming!
Ah stuff it!
5 full and shiny stars!
**same worded review will appear elsewhe
Andy K (10823 KP) rated Back to the Future (1985) in Movies
Apr 10, 2019
My entire childhood
So funny how seeing a "decked out" DeLorean in a Target parking lot the other day made me want to rewatch Back to the Future again soon. It had been on my rewatch list ever since I purchased the trilogy on Blu Ray on Black Friday, but just hadn't gotten around to it yet.
To say this movie (and the original Star Wars trilogy) defined my childhood is an understatement. The year 1985 meant I was 14 years old and lived within biking distance of the theatre where it was showing. Only Back to the Future and The Empire Strikes Back have the distinction of being movies I saw at least fifteen times during their initial run; at one point every day for a week straight.
The story of how the film got made is an interesting as the perfect screenplay itself. Basically Bob Zemeckis and Bob Gale shopped the movie around after they had made a few films, including Used Cars (good movie), but studios weren't interested. Except Spielberg. Unfortunately, the duo had just worked with Spielberg on 1941 and it was a dud.
Luckily, Zemeckis directed Romancing the Stone in 1984, so they finally went back to Spielberg with that clout and got the deal done. BTTF was actually the first film released under Spielberg's Amblin Entertainment (with the E.T. logo) that Spielberg himself did not direct.
Then, casting. Filmmakers really wanted Michael J. Fox, but he was not available due to his TV schedule filming sitcom Family Ties. They had to move on, so they cast Eric Stoltz and filmed for 5 weeks.
Zemeckis felt like something wasn't right and asked Spielberg to take a look at the dailies. They agreed Stoltz was a good actor, but not right for the part of Marty McFly. They begged the Family Ties people to let Michael do both and they finally agreed. I can't believe how Michael did two full time jobs during production, but he did and managed to create an unforgettable character that will live forever in movie history.
If anyone ever decides it is a good idea to remake, reboot and/or get a sequel going I will personally go to their house and punch them in the face! ?
To say this movie (and the original Star Wars trilogy) defined my childhood is an understatement. The year 1985 meant I was 14 years old and lived within biking distance of the theatre where it was showing. Only Back to the Future and The Empire Strikes Back have the distinction of being movies I saw at least fifteen times during their initial run; at one point every day for a week straight.
The story of how the film got made is an interesting as the perfect screenplay itself. Basically Bob Zemeckis and Bob Gale shopped the movie around after they had made a few films, including Used Cars (good movie), but studios weren't interested. Except Spielberg. Unfortunately, the duo had just worked with Spielberg on 1941 and it was a dud.
Luckily, Zemeckis directed Romancing the Stone in 1984, so they finally went back to Spielberg with that clout and got the deal done. BTTF was actually the first film released under Spielberg's Amblin Entertainment (with the E.T. logo) that Spielberg himself did not direct.
Then, casting. Filmmakers really wanted Michael J. Fox, but he was not available due to his TV schedule filming sitcom Family Ties. They had to move on, so they cast Eric Stoltz and filmed for 5 weeks.
Zemeckis felt like something wasn't right and asked Spielberg to take a look at the dailies. They agreed Stoltz was a good actor, but not right for the part of Marty McFly. They begged the Family Ties people to let Michael do both and they finally agreed. I can't believe how Michael did two full time jobs during production, but he did and managed to create an unforgettable character that will live forever in movie history.
If anyone ever decides it is a good idea to remake, reboot and/or get a sequel going I will personally go to their house and punch them in the face! ?
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Survivor's Guide to Family Happiness in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Nina Popkin's mother has recently passed away and she's also freshly divorced. Adopted as a child, her mother's death rekindles Nina's desire to search for her birth mother. She's always felt as she's never belonged anywhere, searching strangers' faces and eyes for her potential birth mother. Amazingly, Nina manages to find her biological sister, Lindy, whom she actually knew as a kid from her neighborhood. But Lindy, who is obsessed with creating a perfect house and life, isn't too thrilled about her wayward sister bursting into her life. Lindy has three kids, a busy salon to run, and a lot of (hidden) anxiety to deal with. But Nina is force to be reckoned with and she's determined to bring Lindy on her journey to find their mother. But will this journey finally bring Nina the sense of peace and belonging she's always desired?
Dawson's novel is told from the varying points of view of its main women: Nina, Lindy, and their biological mother. It's a humorous--and sometimes heartbreaking--look at family and the different forms it can take. Dawson has created a cast of characters who seem incredibly real. She captures the little details just right, from family life with kids, to Nina's romantic woes. Nina is a trip: you can't help but love her and her relentless optimism. Even when the novel drags a bit in the middle, when you feel like Nina and the plot need a bit of a push, it recovers through its humor and Nina's personality. Perhaps the only part I found slightly weird was that Nina and Lindy's childhood neighborhood was so full of adopted children that they grew up knowing each other (though not knowing they were sisters), but perhaps that was truly par for the course for the era... who knows.
In the end, I really enjoyed this novel. It combines several other supporting characters, including the children of Nina's boyfriend, into a great read. At times it's truly laugh out loud funny, even if it gets a bit preposterous. But it's also heartfelt and touching and a lovely look at the bonds of family.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!); it is available everywhere as of 10/25/2016.
Dawson's novel is told from the varying points of view of its main women: Nina, Lindy, and their biological mother. It's a humorous--and sometimes heartbreaking--look at family and the different forms it can take. Dawson has created a cast of characters who seem incredibly real. She captures the little details just right, from family life with kids, to Nina's romantic woes. Nina is a trip: you can't help but love her and her relentless optimism. Even when the novel drags a bit in the middle, when you feel like Nina and the plot need a bit of a push, it recovers through its humor and Nina's personality. Perhaps the only part I found slightly weird was that Nina and Lindy's childhood neighborhood was so full of adopted children that they grew up knowing each other (though not knowing they were sisters), but perhaps that was truly par for the course for the era... who knows.
In the end, I really enjoyed this novel. It combines several other supporting characters, including the children of Nina's boyfriend, into a great read. At times it's truly laugh out loud funny, even if it gets a bit preposterous. But it's also heartfelt and touching and a lovely look at the bonds of family.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!); it is available everywhere as of 10/25/2016.