Search
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Impostor (Slide, #2) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
<b>Impostor</b> is a step up in the <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/series/72905-slide"; target="_blank">Slide series</a>, but only slightly. I still feel that the writing is, well, a little basic; it gets the job done, but that's about it. The main plot is an interesting idea that entertained, yet wasn't used to its full potential. I expected it to be darker and for there to be more peril involved, what with an "impostor" involved (impostor is a bit of a misnomer, it's not quite the term I'd use), but it never got close to that point. If there had been more grit and danger, the book could have been a killer sequel instead of disappointing. However, on the plus side, the mystery is tighter and better constructed, and I couldn't say for certain that I had figured it out, but I did have an idea (I so smart. Not.). The other plots are fine, somewhat predictable or didn't go as deep as they could have, but they were alright. All the plots are tied up just a little too neatly at the end, not that there isn't enough of the sliding power to be utilized for future books, but everything ends a little too rosy for the circumstances. Oh well.
In [b:Slide|9542582|Slide (Slide, #1)|Jill Hathaway|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1332450287s/9542582.jpg|14428945] (the first book), I found Vee to be a rather shallow characterization and dim as far as picking up on clues. I'm happy to say that changed in this book. Sure, she said/did stupid things, not because she was dumb, but because people do say and do stupid things, no matter their intelligence. It's a fact (okay, my fact, but it still counts). For most of the book Vee spent a lot of time having a snotty, self-absorbed, "woe is me" attitude, which might annoy some people, but made me believe her as a teenage character. Face it, most teenagers can act like that to some degree or another (I sure know I could be!). I'm not quite sure where the sliding power is going, if I like where it's gone, or if there's even going to be more books in the series, but it is an idea that has many possibilities. I'm just not positive that it'll ever get to them. Overall, a decent book that passes the time, but nothing spectacular that'll blow your mind (maybe, I could just be assuming things again).
Random notes:
This series sure has many awesome <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/work/editions/14428945-slide"; target="_blank">covers</a>.
What is with YA books featuring a female protagonist "borrowing" some of Veronica Mars' back story? This is the second one I've come across. O__o
In [b:Slide|9542582|Slide (Slide, #1)|Jill Hathaway|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1332450287s/9542582.jpg|14428945] (the first book), I found Vee to be a rather shallow characterization and dim as far as picking up on clues. I'm happy to say that changed in this book. Sure, she said/did stupid things, not because she was dumb, but because people do say and do stupid things, no matter their intelligence. It's a fact (okay, my fact, but it still counts). For most of the book Vee spent a lot of time having a snotty, self-absorbed, "woe is me" attitude, which might annoy some people, but made me believe her as a teenage character. Face it, most teenagers can act like that to some degree or another (I sure know I could be!). I'm not quite sure where the sliding power is going, if I like where it's gone, or if there's even going to be more books in the series, but it is an idea that has many possibilities. I'm just not positive that it'll ever get to them. Overall, a decent book that passes the time, but nothing spectacular that'll blow your mind (maybe, I could just be assuming things again).
Random notes:
This series sure has many awesome <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/work/editions/14428945-slide"; target="_blank">covers</a>.
What is with YA books featuring a female protagonist "borrowing" some of Veronica Mars' back story? This is the second one I've come across. O__o
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Shallows (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The Deathly Shallows, part 1
Every shark movie is inevitably compared (unfavourably) against Spielberg’s classic 1975 tourist-muncher. And “The Shallows” is no exception. But while not a 5-Fad classic, this flick comes pretty close by being hugely enjoyable and having a lot going for it.
Waxing lyrically. The shapely Blake Liveley.
Waxing lyrically. The shapely Blake Liveley.
Blake Lively (“The Age of Adeline“) plays surfer and trainee doctor Nancy, still grieving the recent death from cancer of her mother and travelling to a remote Mexican surf beach where she has photos of her mother surfing while pregnant with her. While surfing alone, Nancy is attacked a couple of hundred yards from the shore by a Great White and severely injured. She has the choice of refuge of either a low rock or another less palatable floating object. Choosing the rock (at low tide) she is faced with the dilemma of both surviving her injuries and then being rescued before the high tide takes the rock and leaves her to the mercy of the ever circling big-fish.
We're going to need a bigger rock.
We’re going to need a bigger rock.
A big summer blockbuster this is not, with a total cast of eleven (not including a guest appearance of Steven Seagull (as himself)). But the small cast doesn’t make it less gripping, and gripping it most certainly is, with tension building progressively (emphasised periodically by an on-screen clock) with the countdown to high tide.
Blake Lively is an underrated actress and really delivers the goods here. And bearing in mind the problems that Spielberg had with his mechanical shark Bruce (named after Spielberg’s lawyer) the appearance of the shark is limited to where actually needed, with Lively having to fill in the blanks with reaction shots. As your imagination is still far better than any special effects, this is hugely effective for certain sequences.
Pure horror: here Dad had gone down to the video rental and come back with 'Dirty Grandpa'.
Pure horror: her Dad had gone down to the video rental and come back with ‘Dirty Grandpa’.
The film draws similarities to another interesting entry in the “Jaws” genre – “Open Water 2: Adrift” from 2006. In that film there was the same incessant threat of shark attack combined with the audience frustration that safety (in that case, the deck of their yacht, if only they had let a ladder down) being so near. Here the 200 yards to the shore is shoutable to but still 190 yards too far.
The cinematography (by Flavio Martínez Labiano) is also just beautifully done with some stunning surf and underwater shots that not only highlight Ms Lively’s lithely (sic) figure and her Californian surfing skills, but also the beauty of the ‘Mexican coast’ (actually Lord Howe Island in New South Wales, Australia).
“The Shallows” was written by Anthony Jaswinski and directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (the director of “Non-Stop“, aka Taken 3.5). It comes with a truly impressive BvS quotient of just 5.9%!
So with all of this going for it, you would think that my rating is heading towards at least a 4.5. But all films like this require a satisfying denouement, and unfortunately this is where this one comes off the rails. It is just plain silly and, together with an unnecessary and irritating epilogue scene, diminishes what was on track to be one of the best films of the summer. So here’s the “One Mann’s Movies” solution:
Using Final Cut X, Adobe Premier or your favourite video editing suite, cut out the scene from 115:00 to 116:00 from “Jaws”;
Photoshop Blake Lively’s face onto Roy Scheider’s body.
Insert the finished clip into “The Shallows” at about 82 minutes in.
Enjoy a 5-Fad classic!
This limitation aside, it’s still worth your while hunting it out at a cinema near you, since the fantastic cinematography is best suited to a big screen.
Waxing lyrically. The shapely Blake Liveley.
Waxing lyrically. The shapely Blake Liveley.
Blake Lively (“The Age of Adeline“) plays surfer and trainee doctor Nancy, still grieving the recent death from cancer of her mother and travelling to a remote Mexican surf beach where she has photos of her mother surfing while pregnant with her. While surfing alone, Nancy is attacked a couple of hundred yards from the shore by a Great White and severely injured. She has the choice of refuge of either a low rock or another less palatable floating object. Choosing the rock (at low tide) she is faced with the dilemma of both surviving her injuries and then being rescued before the high tide takes the rock and leaves her to the mercy of the ever circling big-fish.
We're going to need a bigger rock.
We’re going to need a bigger rock.
A big summer blockbuster this is not, with a total cast of eleven (not including a guest appearance of Steven Seagull (as himself)). But the small cast doesn’t make it less gripping, and gripping it most certainly is, with tension building progressively (emphasised periodically by an on-screen clock) with the countdown to high tide.
Blake Lively is an underrated actress and really delivers the goods here. And bearing in mind the problems that Spielberg had with his mechanical shark Bruce (named after Spielberg’s lawyer) the appearance of the shark is limited to where actually needed, with Lively having to fill in the blanks with reaction shots. As your imagination is still far better than any special effects, this is hugely effective for certain sequences.
Pure horror: here Dad had gone down to the video rental and come back with 'Dirty Grandpa'.
Pure horror: her Dad had gone down to the video rental and come back with ‘Dirty Grandpa’.
The film draws similarities to another interesting entry in the “Jaws” genre – “Open Water 2: Adrift” from 2006. In that film there was the same incessant threat of shark attack combined with the audience frustration that safety (in that case, the deck of their yacht, if only they had let a ladder down) being so near. Here the 200 yards to the shore is shoutable to but still 190 yards too far.
The cinematography (by Flavio Martínez Labiano) is also just beautifully done with some stunning surf and underwater shots that not only highlight Ms Lively’s lithely (sic) figure and her Californian surfing skills, but also the beauty of the ‘Mexican coast’ (actually Lord Howe Island in New South Wales, Australia).
“The Shallows” was written by Anthony Jaswinski and directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (the director of “Non-Stop“, aka Taken 3.5). It comes with a truly impressive BvS quotient of just 5.9%!
So with all of this going for it, you would think that my rating is heading towards at least a 4.5. But all films like this require a satisfying denouement, and unfortunately this is where this one comes off the rails. It is just plain silly and, together with an unnecessary and irritating epilogue scene, diminishes what was on track to be one of the best films of the summer. So here’s the “One Mann’s Movies” solution:
Using Final Cut X, Adobe Premier or your favourite video editing suite, cut out the scene from 115:00 to 116:00 from “Jaws”;
Photoshop Blake Lively’s face onto Roy Scheider’s body.
Insert the finished clip into “The Shallows” at about 82 minutes in.
Enjoy a 5-Fad classic!
This limitation aside, it’s still worth your while hunting it out at a cinema near you, since the fantastic cinematography is best suited to a big screen.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Witches (2020) in Movies
Mar 6, 2021
Not a patch on the original
The Witches is a 2020 retelling of the Roald Dahl children’s story, from director Robert Zemeckis. Remakes and reboots have been commonplace in the movies for quite some time, so it’s no surprise that The Witches has been given a Hollywood makeover, especially as it has been 30 years since the original film adaptation was released in 1990. I will readily admit that the original film is a childhood favourite, so this remake has very big shows to fill.
This time round, the story has been transported to late 1960s Alabama. It follows a unnamed boy (named in the credits as simply ‘Hero Boy’), played by Jahzir Bruno, and his grandma (Octavia Spencer) as they encounter a witch in their home town, prompting her to whisk him away to a seaside resort. Unbeknownst to them, this seaside resort is also where the Grand High Witch (Anne Hathaway) is due to unveil her dastardly plans to transform the world’s children. In his bids to thwart the witches plans, Hero Boy bumps into some familiar names, greedy English boy Bruno Jenkins (Codie-Lei Eastick) and put-upon hotel manager Mr Stringer (Stanley Tucci).
I was very sceptical about this in general, and while I think my scepticism was most definitely warranted, I was at least pleasantly surprised that moving the action from England to 60s America worked. It gives the film a different vibe with a new setting (with some very good costume and set design too), yet still keeping the same base story. However I’m afraid that’s the only good change that they’ve made in this entire remake. The 60s setting works, but the hotel itself lacks the beauty and grandeur of the hotel in the original. Gone are the imposing shots of a beautiful old hotel set on top of a cliff with its gorgeous landscapes (which incidentally is a real life hotel called The Headland which is on my travel wish list), and instead replaced with something that looks good on the surface, but is sadly lacking in realism and has obviously been entirely computer generated.
And this is the major problem with The Witches (2020), it’s over reliance and overuse of CGI. Everything in this, from the mice to the hotel exteriors to the witches true appearance, are all computer generated, and not particularly well at that. The mice look pretty bad and unrealistic, but the worst of all is what they’ve done to the witches. The changes themselves may have worked had this used practical effects, but sadly the CGI only serves to highlight how ridiculous the changes are. From the missing two fingers on each hand to the elongated mouths with demon like tongues, the witches to begin with seem creepy but after this initial shock, you see how absurd and laughable they really are.
Unfortunately even the performances can’t save this adaptation. Octavia Spencer is as reliable as always and Jazhir Bruno and Codie-Lei Eastick are quite adorable, but the rest of the fairly decent cast are sadly misplaced. The usually loveable Stanley Tucci is given absolutely nothing to work with, not even giving him a chance to try and match up to Rowan Atkinson’s original Mr Stringer, and Chris Rock is sadly out of place as the voice of older Hero Mouse. However the worst offender here is Anne Hathaway. Admittedly she isn’t helped much by the poor transformations to the witches appearance, but all the CGI in the world couldn’t fix her questionable Eastern European accent and hammy performance. The fact that Angelica Huston put in a more sinister and believable performance with 90s facial prosthetics and practical effects is a credit to her and only highlights how bad a choice Hathaway was for this role.
While parts of this remake aren’t entirely condemnable, as some aspects do stick closer to Dahl’s original source material, overall it is a far inferior adaptation that loses everything that made the 1990 film such a classic. Gone are the sinister witches and the dark stories of missing children (the girl stuck in the picture is an image that has always stuck with me), instead replaced with a far too lighthearted story with an over reliance on CGI. The most worrying thing of all is that even Robert Zemeckis and Guillermo Del Toro being involved couldn’t save this.
This time round, the story has been transported to late 1960s Alabama. It follows a unnamed boy (named in the credits as simply ‘Hero Boy’), played by Jahzir Bruno, and his grandma (Octavia Spencer) as they encounter a witch in their home town, prompting her to whisk him away to a seaside resort. Unbeknownst to them, this seaside resort is also where the Grand High Witch (Anne Hathaway) is due to unveil her dastardly plans to transform the world’s children. In his bids to thwart the witches plans, Hero Boy bumps into some familiar names, greedy English boy Bruno Jenkins (Codie-Lei Eastick) and put-upon hotel manager Mr Stringer (Stanley Tucci).
I was very sceptical about this in general, and while I think my scepticism was most definitely warranted, I was at least pleasantly surprised that moving the action from England to 60s America worked. It gives the film a different vibe with a new setting (with some very good costume and set design too), yet still keeping the same base story. However I’m afraid that’s the only good change that they’ve made in this entire remake. The 60s setting works, but the hotel itself lacks the beauty and grandeur of the hotel in the original. Gone are the imposing shots of a beautiful old hotel set on top of a cliff with its gorgeous landscapes (which incidentally is a real life hotel called The Headland which is on my travel wish list), and instead replaced with something that looks good on the surface, but is sadly lacking in realism and has obviously been entirely computer generated.
And this is the major problem with The Witches (2020), it’s over reliance and overuse of CGI. Everything in this, from the mice to the hotel exteriors to the witches true appearance, are all computer generated, and not particularly well at that. The mice look pretty bad and unrealistic, but the worst of all is what they’ve done to the witches. The changes themselves may have worked had this used practical effects, but sadly the CGI only serves to highlight how ridiculous the changes are. From the missing two fingers on each hand to the elongated mouths with demon like tongues, the witches to begin with seem creepy but after this initial shock, you see how absurd and laughable they really are.
Unfortunately even the performances can’t save this adaptation. Octavia Spencer is as reliable as always and Jazhir Bruno and Codie-Lei Eastick are quite adorable, but the rest of the fairly decent cast are sadly misplaced. The usually loveable Stanley Tucci is given absolutely nothing to work with, not even giving him a chance to try and match up to Rowan Atkinson’s original Mr Stringer, and Chris Rock is sadly out of place as the voice of older Hero Mouse. However the worst offender here is Anne Hathaway. Admittedly she isn’t helped much by the poor transformations to the witches appearance, but all the CGI in the world couldn’t fix her questionable Eastern European accent and hammy performance. The fact that Angelica Huston put in a more sinister and believable performance with 90s facial prosthetics and practical effects is a credit to her and only highlights how bad a choice Hathaway was for this role.
While parts of this remake aren’t entirely condemnable, as some aspects do stick closer to Dahl’s original source material, overall it is a far inferior adaptation that loses everything that made the 1990 film such a classic. Gone are the sinister witches and the dark stories of missing children (the girl stuck in the picture is an image that has always stuck with me), instead replaced with a far too lighthearted story with an over reliance on CGI. The most worrying thing of all is that even Robert Zemeckis and Guillermo Del Toro being involved couldn’t save this.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Michael Bay had a lot to prove with the third instalment of his big bot franchise. The scathing reviews of Revenge of the Fallen from nearly every critic who went to see it proved that even giant robots aren’t safe from the picky eyes of the global audience. Now, I may get lambasted for this but I preferred number 2 to number 1, so let’s see if number 3 can impress.
Here, Bay returns to helm the latest addition: Dark of the Moon, it’s a good film nonetheless but it’s sci-fi themes, more so than in either of the previous offerings fail to provide enough impact to make it the best in the series.
Transformers: Dark of the Moon picks up three years after the last film and a lot has changed. Sam Witwicky again played by the fantastic Shia LeBeouf is now living in Washington, envious of his new girlfriend Carly Spencer and her fabulous lifestyle. Carly, played by newcomer Rosie Huntington-Whitely is about as wooden as a character can get; Whitely’s performance is very laboured and her on screen scenes suffer as a result; she’s a disappointment in a film that doesn’t really require it’s characters to do much; so that shows how bad she actually is.
Megan Fox is actually missed this time around, but it’s not too much of a problem because Rosie’s character is given exactly the same clothes, the same pout and practically the same lines.
Michael Bay has also lined up the legendary John Malkovich as Sam’s troubled new boss, his screen time is worth a watch but he feels wasted considering his lines amount to about 10 minutes of screen time. Patrick Dempsey also stars as good guy gone back; Dylan Gould.
The special effects coupled with the fantastic 3D make Transformers 3 a spectacle to watch, the bots are seamlessly integrated into the picture alongside their human counterparts and deliver once again, these films really are the pinnacle now for special effects.
Bay has managed to fashion a half coherent story out of the toy franchise which many critics were sceptical of, but it works really well. The film focuses on the space race of the 60’s and the reasons why the US wanted to beat everyone to the moon. In short, the Decepticons are looking for something that crash-landed on the moon; if they find it, then Cybertron will be reborn, using Earth as a template; oh no!
The last hour is just carnage, carnage, carnage as the entire city of Chicago is plunged into a post-apocalyptic world where the Decepticons rule and the Autobots are, alongside humans as slaves. Here, Bay really showcases his prowess for stunning cinematography and first class special effects, one scene in particular, involving a glass skyscraper is particularly awe-inspiring.
Speaking of the robots themselves, all the favourites return with their fantastic voice acting. Peter Cullen delivers Optimus Prime in his usual, gruff manner and a welcome addition is Star Trek’s Leonard Nimoy as veteran Autobot leader Sentinel Prime. Hugo Weaving also returns as a rough looking Megatron.
The problem that blights Transformers 3 is that there’s too much going on. I found myself lost in parts of the story because the film is constantly rushing to get to the next plot line. It’s frustrating that a film franchise criticised for its lack of story is penalised for having too much of one this time around, but this is the case here. As such, some of the best characters don’t get screen time. Josh Duhamel is only in the film for 5 minutes at a time, whilst Sam’s parents only get brief appearances which is a tragic shame as they are, all in all, the best human characters in the franchise.
Overall, Transformers has become one of my favourite film franchises of all time; it delivers on its promise and doesn’t pretend it’s going to be something else. Yes, they’re far too long (this one is just short of 3 hours), they’re exceptionally loud and mind-numbingly obnoxious but that’s what you should want from an action film. Transformers 3 delivers, and it delivers it like a smack in the face; but it falls down in a couple of areas where the others didn’t.
Michael Bay is a very talented film director who gives the best out of everything, but in response to his critics from the last movie, he has developed too much of the story and as such, it feels disjointed and ultimately a little disappointing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/07/07/transformers-dark-of-the-moon-2011/
Here, Bay returns to helm the latest addition: Dark of the Moon, it’s a good film nonetheless but it’s sci-fi themes, more so than in either of the previous offerings fail to provide enough impact to make it the best in the series.
Transformers: Dark of the Moon picks up three years after the last film and a lot has changed. Sam Witwicky again played by the fantastic Shia LeBeouf is now living in Washington, envious of his new girlfriend Carly Spencer and her fabulous lifestyle. Carly, played by newcomer Rosie Huntington-Whitely is about as wooden as a character can get; Whitely’s performance is very laboured and her on screen scenes suffer as a result; she’s a disappointment in a film that doesn’t really require it’s characters to do much; so that shows how bad she actually is.
Megan Fox is actually missed this time around, but it’s not too much of a problem because Rosie’s character is given exactly the same clothes, the same pout and practically the same lines.
Michael Bay has also lined up the legendary John Malkovich as Sam’s troubled new boss, his screen time is worth a watch but he feels wasted considering his lines amount to about 10 minutes of screen time. Patrick Dempsey also stars as good guy gone back; Dylan Gould.
The special effects coupled with the fantastic 3D make Transformers 3 a spectacle to watch, the bots are seamlessly integrated into the picture alongside their human counterparts and deliver once again, these films really are the pinnacle now for special effects.
Bay has managed to fashion a half coherent story out of the toy franchise which many critics were sceptical of, but it works really well. The film focuses on the space race of the 60’s and the reasons why the US wanted to beat everyone to the moon. In short, the Decepticons are looking for something that crash-landed on the moon; if they find it, then Cybertron will be reborn, using Earth as a template; oh no!
The last hour is just carnage, carnage, carnage as the entire city of Chicago is plunged into a post-apocalyptic world where the Decepticons rule and the Autobots are, alongside humans as slaves. Here, Bay really showcases his prowess for stunning cinematography and first class special effects, one scene in particular, involving a glass skyscraper is particularly awe-inspiring.
Speaking of the robots themselves, all the favourites return with their fantastic voice acting. Peter Cullen delivers Optimus Prime in his usual, gruff manner and a welcome addition is Star Trek’s Leonard Nimoy as veteran Autobot leader Sentinel Prime. Hugo Weaving also returns as a rough looking Megatron.
The problem that blights Transformers 3 is that there’s too much going on. I found myself lost in parts of the story because the film is constantly rushing to get to the next plot line. It’s frustrating that a film franchise criticised for its lack of story is penalised for having too much of one this time around, but this is the case here. As such, some of the best characters don’t get screen time. Josh Duhamel is only in the film for 5 minutes at a time, whilst Sam’s parents only get brief appearances which is a tragic shame as they are, all in all, the best human characters in the franchise.
Overall, Transformers has become one of my favourite film franchises of all time; it delivers on its promise and doesn’t pretend it’s going to be something else. Yes, they’re far too long (this one is just short of 3 hours), they’re exceptionally loud and mind-numbingly obnoxious but that’s what you should want from an action film. Transformers 3 delivers, and it delivers it like a smack in the face; but it falls down in a couple of areas where the others didn’t.
Michael Bay is a very talented film director who gives the best out of everything, but in response to his critics from the last movie, he has developed too much of the story and as such, it feels disjointed and ultimately a little disappointing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/07/07/transformers-dark-of-the-moon-2011/
*** I received a free advance copy of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review ***
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasé, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
I have read Adrian Tchakovsky's Shadows of the Apt series and loved it.
I recently read his Dogs of War and enjoyed it. However I think this has somewhat tainted Ironclads for me.
Ireonclads sees us again in the near-future where the UK (read as England which annoyed me, being Scottish) has gained independence from Europe and subsequently gone bust and been bought over by the USA. The USA is likewise invading or at war with much of the rest of the world. These wars are now fought mainly in corporate interest (but then what's new *cough gulf war cough*) with armies of poorly equipped government soldiers being dent in to conflict occasionally supported by corporate playboys (generally the heir to the corporate fortunes) in their massive armoured scion suits (hence iron-clad) where they are fully protected from pretty much everything. These playboys tend to be captured by each other and ransomed back to their families, guffawing at their japes all the way.
The story sees one small group of US soldiers sent in to deepest darkest Sweden to rescue one such playboy who got himself too far ahead of the army and appears to have gone missing but without ransom (without his scion suit).
Being a short (200 pages) book worked well for me, I felt any more scenes or narrative would have felt like padding and this was its natural length.
However, for me this book felt like the notes or background story to Dogs of War and has suffered from my having read the latter. That book notes that wars used to be fought with machines and robots but moves on to cybernetically enhanced animals. This book felt like a side story or introduction to the Dogs of War world and little more.
Other aspects of the story chimed with that of Dogs of War as well and showed the author to be a little short of ideas - living beings with their brains/bodies cybernetically enhanced, swarms of insects used to disrupt communications, the USA being a little bit invadey and corrupt etc.
While this is not my usual cup of tea, I have enjoyed other sci-fi and felt this was a little slapdash. I didn't like the narrative style, finding the blasé, informal tones of the army sergeant both jarring and poorly executed. And while I don't need to be spoon-fed the plot, I found some elements badly or barely explained (what DID the Finns do?!) and the major plot twist neither surprising nor worth the wait.
Tchaikovsky can describe a battle scene well and you get a feel for the whole battle as well as the key conflicts, so the action itself is fairly gripping at times. However, the finished article left me feeling a bit meh.
All in all I am glad I read this, but had expected better things from his sci-fi given Children of Time won the Arthur C Clarke award.
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Next Door in Books
Jun 10, 2021
82 of 250
Kindle
Next Door
Compiled by Matt Shaw
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
From the mind behind "MASTERS OF HORROR" comes a new horror anthology to keep you up at night!
Whilst Matt Shaw is busy producing, writing and directing the feature film NEXT DOOR he decided to put together a horror anthology of the same name, and with the same theme as the motion picture. None of the stories in this collection feature in the film; the two products are completely separate other than the central concept of exploring who does live NEXT DOOR to us?
Given the fact these are some of the biggest names in horror, you can bet that whomever is living next door probably won't be the friendliest of characters...
The year is 2019 and technology has come so far that we spend more time staring at our mobile devices, and screens in general, than getting to know our next door neighbour. Gone are the days of knowing everyone who lives on the same street, or in the same village. Instead we leave our houses, avoid eye-contact or give the bare minimum of grunts to those we see and go about our daily lives without a care for anyone else. No more street parties, no more kindly neighbours checking in on you, no more Christmas cards from the little old lady who lives across the street. There's only "us" and our technology.
This anthology takes a look at who lives NEXT DOOR and what secrets they may be keeping. And who knows, maybe it will serve as warning to you that, really, you should be paying attention to those living close-by. After all, Fred West was someone's neighbour once...
Featuring stories by:
Tim Lebbon
Shaun Hutson
Ryan C. Thomas
Jeremy Bates
David Moody
Guy N. Smith
Matthew Stokoe
Justin Woodward
Gary McMahon
Rich Hawkins
Jim Goforth
Matt Shaw
1. A Family-Friendly Neighbourhood by Ryan C Thomas
This was actually quite funny and sweet in a gruesome clever way. All the toys turning into little knife wielding creepy thing only to find out they are their kids souls! They just want to be together 😂
2. Final Feast by Guy N. Smith
Quick little story of the cannibal next door! I loved it!
3. Insurgents by Rich Hawkins
A story of a war ruined mind, a soldier dealing with his demons. Well written just not my normal read.
4. Mirror Image by David Moody
A couple move into a new house with an extra handy neighbour. I enjoyed this one funny how my husband is so crap at DIY too 😂😂
5. Neighbour Hood by Tim Lebbon
Omg this has to be the creepiest one so far and the whole reason I never use my attics’!!!
6. Dinner Date by Jeremy Bates
A bit slower than the others think I just got a little bored. Never accept dinner invitations before getting to know the guy no matter how hot he is! Silly girl!
7. Why Does Randolph Draw by Matthew Stokeoe
Got to be honest I didn’t finish it I just got so bored after page 5! Just wasn’t catching me.
8. Saturday Night Whiskey by Justin M.Woodward
This was really god and well put together a kids last cry for help from his dodgy uncle!
9. Sixteen by Jim Goforth
This felt so rushed even for a short story! Although it’s a good lesson of don’t get involved with swinging neighbours 😂
10. Pornography by Matt Saw
Haha she didn’t see that coming
11. Somewhere in Here by Gary McMahon
This was one creepy ass story and for one so short I’m throughly creeped out!!
12 By Darkness Hidden by Shaun Hutson
This was pretty good a urban legend type story. Villages can be super strange places.
I really enjoyed this compilation got some great new authors added to my list too.
Kindle
Next Door
Compiled by Matt Shaw
Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments
From the mind behind "MASTERS OF HORROR" comes a new horror anthology to keep you up at night!
Whilst Matt Shaw is busy producing, writing and directing the feature film NEXT DOOR he decided to put together a horror anthology of the same name, and with the same theme as the motion picture. None of the stories in this collection feature in the film; the two products are completely separate other than the central concept of exploring who does live NEXT DOOR to us?
Given the fact these are some of the biggest names in horror, you can bet that whomever is living next door probably won't be the friendliest of characters...
The year is 2019 and technology has come so far that we spend more time staring at our mobile devices, and screens in general, than getting to know our next door neighbour. Gone are the days of knowing everyone who lives on the same street, or in the same village. Instead we leave our houses, avoid eye-contact or give the bare minimum of grunts to those we see and go about our daily lives without a care for anyone else. No more street parties, no more kindly neighbours checking in on you, no more Christmas cards from the little old lady who lives across the street. There's only "us" and our technology.
This anthology takes a look at who lives NEXT DOOR and what secrets they may be keeping. And who knows, maybe it will serve as warning to you that, really, you should be paying attention to those living close-by. After all, Fred West was someone's neighbour once...
Featuring stories by:
Tim Lebbon
Shaun Hutson
Ryan C. Thomas
Jeremy Bates
David Moody
Guy N. Smith
Matthew Stokoe
Justin Woodward
Gary McMahon
Rich Hawkins
Jim Goforth
Matt Shaw
1. A Family-Friendly Neighbourhood by Ryan C Thomas
This was actually quite funny and sweet in a gruesome clever way. All the toys turning into little knife wielding creepy thing only to find out they are their kids souls! They just want to be together 😂
2. Final Feast by Guy N. Smith
Quick little story of the cannibal next door! I loved it!
3. Insurgents by Rich Hawkins
A story of a war ruined mind, a soldier dealing with his demons. Well written just not my normal read.
4. Mirror Image by David Moody
A couple move into a new house with an extra handy neighbour. I enjoyed this one funny how my husband is so crap at DIY too 😂😂
5. Neighbour Hood by Tim Lebbon
Omg this has to be the creepiest one so far and the whole reason I never use my attics’!!!
6. Dinner Date by Jeremy Bates
A bit slower than the others think I just got a little bored. Never accept dinner invitations before getting to know the guy no matter how hot he is! Silly girl!
7. Why Does Randolph Draw by Matthew Stokeoe
Got to be honest I didn’t finish it I just got so bored after page 5! Just wasn’t catching me.
8. Saturday Night Whiskey by Justin M.Woodward
This was really god and well put together a kids last cry for help from his dodgy uncle!
9. Sixteen by Jim Goforth
This felt so rushed even for a short story! Although it’s a good lesson of don’t get involved with swinging neighbours 😂
10. Pornography by Matt Saw
Haha she didn’t see that coming
11. Somewhere in Here by Gary McMahon
This was one creepy ass story and for one so short I’m throughly creeped out!!
12 By Darkness Hidden by Shaun Hutson
This was pretty good a urban legend type story. Villages can be super strange places.
I really enjoyed this compilation got some great new authors added to my list too.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Final Destination 5 (2011) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Did we really need another Final Destination film? After the last, merely average movie, the answer on everyone’s lips was a firm and resounding no. However, a surprising return to form for the franchise has ensured that even this old goat has life in it yet.
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Gone are the cheap, cheesy shocks that littered Final Destination 3 and 4. In their place are the genuine thrills and spills from the first two films. The movie returns the guessing game element to its audience and for that I am thoroughly grateful.
Newcomer Steven Quale helms this instalment which combines excellent 3D with fantastic special effects and a dazzling set of opening credits which showcase the deaths from the films that preceded it. I wasn’t expecting much from this film, I have to admit, but the credits really are a highlight as you try and remember which film each death is from.
As with any film in the Final Destination franchise, an epic opening disaster is the norm. Whilst the motorway pileup from Final Destination 2 has been the best up until now, the bridge collapse in this film is utterly mesmerising and edge of your seat thrilling. From the flawless special effects to the scale of the production, it surpasses anything seen before in the series.
The deaths have also returned to form too. Instead of out and out cheese, they’re shocking to the point of jaw-dropping. It’ll have you checking every loose nut and bolt from now on and probably have you resisting that fashionable laser eye surgery too. Thankfully though, away from the deaths, it errs on the side of humorous without delving into slapstick.
Nicholas D’Agosto leads a small cast as they try and find a way to cheat death after surviving that epic bridge disaster. An interesting storyline this time around has the cast told that they are able to cheat death by killing someone else, therefore having their life swapped with yours. The acting from all corners leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue and performances are unashamedly wooden but this is a small point in a film that really does shock and surprise.
However, perhaps the best part of the film and the reason why it’s so enjoyable is the final twist, a twist that will leave you shouting at the screen in dismay. It’s practically impossible to see it coming until the last 5 minutes and in these last minutes you realise just how clever director Steven Quale has been in creating this film.
It may not be the most original movie to ever grace the big screen and the cast aren’t going to trouble the Oscars but Final Destination 5 returns a lifeless franchise to what it once was, bloody good fun and as such it is by far, the best in the series.
So, the question now is; do we need Final Destination 6?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/09/21/review-final-destination-5-2011/
Debbiereadsbook (1110 KP) rated Unlikely Hero (AUDIO) in Books
May 14, 2018
excellent narration of a great book!
Independent reviewer for Divine Magazine, I was gifted the audio version of this book.
Brock never got over Eric leaving him, but he understood why Eric needed to go. When Eric calls, 9 years later, Brock drops everything and calls upon his considerable resources to find Eric's 3 year old daughter , who has been kidnapped. But having Eric and Josie under his roof, to keep them safe, has Brock thinking about all the things he missed out on.
I loved this!!
Brock loved Eric, never stopped so of course he's gonna help him find his daughter! I loved that, right from Eric turning up at his office, Brock is calling him baby. I don;'t usually, so it surprised me here that I did love it! I think it surprised Brock too, the first time he did it!
Brock makes no apologies for his wealth and power and he pulls no punches in using both to keep Eric and Josie safe, and in finding out who is doing this.
But we don't get Eric, at all. This is told entirely from Brock's POV in the third person. And I really REALLY needed to hear from Eric at key points along the way: when Josie is first discovered gone; when he walks into Brock's office and when he finds out just who is behind it all. This is the only reason I gave the book 4 stars, because Eric is not given a voice, and he needed one.
I loved the supporting cast, especially Max and Gordon. They have a tale to tell, not least because of what goes down here!
Jeff Gelder narrates. This is the first, as far as I can see, that I have listened to of his work and I was very impressed. His reading voice is deep and even, and his voices consistent and easily identifiable in multi person conversations. Loved his voice for Josie, who sounded just like a 3 year old should, with all the funny things they say. Gelder gets over all of Brock's emotions in all the right places.
I cannot fault the narration. Gelder is firmly on my to listen list!
4 stars for the book
5 stars for the narration.
4.5 (rounded down to 4) overall.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Brock never got over Eric leaving him, but he understood why Eric needed to go. When Eric calls, 9 years later, Brock drops everything and calls upon his considerable resources to find Eric's 3 year old daughter , who has been kidnapped. But having Eric and Josie under his roof, to keep them safe, has Brock thinking about all the things he missed out on.
I loved this!!
Brock loved Eric, never stopped so of course he's gonna help him find his daughter! I loved that, right from Eric turning up at his office, Brock is calling him baby. I don;'t usually, so it surprised me here that I did love it! I think it surprised Brock too, the first time he did it!
Brock makes no apologies for his wealth and power and he pulls no punches in using both to keep Eric and Josie safe, and in finding out who is doing this.
But we don't get Eric, at all. This is told entirely from Brock's POV in the third person. And I really REALLY needed to hear from Eric at key points along the way: when Josie is first discovered gone; when he walks into Brock's office and when he finds out just who is behind it all. This is the only reason I gave the book 4 stars, because Eric is not given a voice, and he needed one.
I loved the supporting cast, especially Max and Gordon. They have a tale to tell, not least because of what goes down here!
Jeff Gelder narrates. This is the first, as far as I can see, that I have listened to of his work and I was very impressed. His reading voice is deep and even, and his voices consistent and easily identifiable in multi person conversations. Loved his voice for Josie, who sounded just like a 3 year old should, with all the funny things they say. Gelder gets over all of Brock's emotions in all the right places.
I cannot fault the narration. Gelder is firmly on my to listen list!
4 stars for the book
5 stars for the narration.
4.5 (rounded down to 4) overall.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Graham Massey recommended Welcome by Santana in Music (curated)
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Nintendo Switch in Tech
Aug 13, 2018
One massive selling point (just about) outweighs the negatives
If I’m being frankly honest, I never would’ve bought a Switch had Legend of Zelda and Mario Kart been available on the PS4. Those games are the reason why I invested in this console and although the games themselves are fantastic, the console itself is a little hit and miss.
I’ll start with the positives: it looks good and especially in grey, it looks quite sleek and smart and fits in well with the rest of my tech. It’s easy to set up and very simple to use. The joy cons are small but functional and work well when used as a full controller. The main selling point for this console though is the ability to use as a portable as well as docked on a tv screen. This is by far the best feature - gone are the days of arguing over who gets to play their favourite game. Now me & my other half can both play on separate consoles in peace without having arguments over the tv. The switching between docked and handheld is pretty seamless too and very impressive.
However, now for the negatives: the console interface is almost a little too basic. No apps, just a very simplified menu and store. Considering all other consoles nowadays come with lots of downloadable apps, the Switch appears to be a little bare. The joy cons whilst handy, aren’t ideal for long term gameplay when separated. Trying to play multiplayer using the tiny controllers for longer than half an hour or so gives you a serious case of rsi (and I work on a laptop for a living). Charging the joy cons is also a bit of a pain as unless you invest in extra accessories (more on that in a sec), your basic way of charging is clipping them onto the console either when in use portably or docked. The way the console fits into the dock itself also feels a little wobbly and can easily be subjected to scratches - definitely invest in a screen protector!
My main issue with the Switch though is how ridiculously overpriced it and all of its games and accessories are, especially considering some of the negatives I’ve stated above. Despite the fact that the console has been out now for nearly 18 months, it doesn’t seem like you can get many bargains. I appreciate you get a 2 in 1 console, but it still doesn’t feel like you get much in the box. What with all of the added extras you probably need to buy, like charging docks, additional joy cons and controllers, screen protectors etc plus games, this can run to quite a high price. Maybe it’s just because it’s still a fairly new console, but it still seems more expensive than the other mainstream consoles and their accessories.
Don’t get me wrong, the Switch is a fun console and the portable aspects are really fantastic. I can’t wait to take it on my next long haul flight. I just can’t shake the feeling that I’ve overpaid and other than the portability and the Nintendo specific games, I’m not sure if it has any other selling points.
I’ll start with the positives: it looks good and especially in grey, it looks quite sleek and smart and fits in well with the rest of my tech. It’s easy to set up and very simple to use. The joy cons are small but functional and work well when used as a full controller. The main selling point for this console though is the ability to use as a portable as well as docked on a tv screen. This is by far the best feature - gone are the days of arguing over who gets to play their favourite game. Now me & my other half can both play on separate consoles in peace without having arguments over the tv. The switching between docked and handheld is pretty seamless too and very impressive.
However, now for the negatives: the console interface is almost a little too basic. No apps, just a very simplified menu and store. Considering all other consoles nowadays come with lots of downloadable apps, the Switch appears to be a little bare. The joy cons whilst handy, aren’t ideal for long term gameplay when separated. Trying to play multiplayer using the tiny controllers for longer than half an hour or so gives you a serious case of rsi (and I work on a laptop for a living). Charging the joy cons is also a bit of a pain as unless you invest in extra accessories (more on that in a sec), your basic way of charging is clipping them onto the console either when in use portably or docked. The way the console fits into the dock itself also feels a little wobbly and can easily be subjected to scratches - definitely invest in a screen protector!
My main issue with the Switch though is how ridiculously overpriced it and all of its games and accessories are, especially considering some of the negatives I’ve stated above. Despite the fact that the console has been out now for nearly 18 months, it doesn’t seem like you can get many bargains. I appreciate you get a 2 in 1 console, but it still doesn’t feel like you get much in the box. What with all of the added extras you probably need to buy, like charging docks, additional joy cons and controllers, screen protectors etc plus games, this can run to quite a high price. Maybe it’s just because it’s still a fairly new console, but it still seems more expensive than the other mainstream consoles and their accessories.
Don’t get me wrong, the Switch is a fun console and the portable aspects are really fantastic. I can’t wait to take it on my next long haul flight. I just can’t shake the feeling that I’ve overpaid and other than the portability and the Nintendo specific games, I’m not sure if it has any other selling points.
