Search
Search results
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Foreigner (2017) in Movies
Dec 20, 2017
Boooo
If you're expecting me to say something nice about The Foreigner, please do us both a favor and click out of this review right now. On paper, it appears to be right up Jackie Chan's alley. After his daughter is killed in a terrorist attack, Quan (Jackie) is trying to hunt down the men that did it. He is willing to stop at nothing to get his revenge.
The formulaic aspect of the film ruins the entire experience. Here's the rundown: Jackie walks into Pierce Brosnan's office demanding names (Who did this????). When Brosnan is not forthcoming with the names, Jackie storms off usually doing something crazy in his departure. Brosnan sends men to take Jackie down. Jackie beats the crap out of them. When the men return, Brosnan asks, "How the hell did you get your ass kicked by this old man?"
Rinse and repeat.
I'm serious, it's so ridiculous at times it becomes almost comical. You would think with this straight-arrow formula, the film would be easy to follow, but there are a lot of moving parts and I mean A LOT. I found myself saying, "Say what now?" too many times to count. I don't know, maybe it was more of a lack of interest than confusion on my part. Blade Runner 2049 had a number of things going on throughout and it's one of the best films I've seen all year.
The Foreigner is one of those films where you think of all the other things you could be doing instead of watching it. Folding clothes. Grocery shopping. Picking boogers. Screaming at your dog to get out of the trash. I mean, ANYTHING else. Could a few solid action sequences have saved the film? Probably. Did it?
Nope.
I honestly don't know how this passed the smell test on Rotten Tomatoes. In the words of the wonderful Jay Sherman: It stinks. I give it a 42.
The formulaic aspect of the film ruins the entire experience. Here's the rundown: Jackie walks into Pierce Brosnan's office demanding names (Who did this????). When Brosnan is not forthcoming with the names, Jackie storms off usually doing something crazy in his departure. Brosnan sends men to take Jackie down. Jackie beats the crap out of them. When the men return, Brosnan asks, "How the hell did you get your ass kicked by this old man?"
Rinse and repeat.
I'm serious, it's so ridiculous at times it becomes almost comical. You would think with this straight-arrow formula, the film would be easy to follow, but there are a lot of moving parts and I mean A LOT. I found myself saying, "Say what now?" too many times to count. I don't know, maybe it was more of a lack of interest than confusion on my part. Blade Runner 2049 had a number of things going on throughout and it's one of the best films I've seen all year.
The Foreigner is one of those films where you think of all the other things you could be doing instead of watching it. Folding clothes. Grocery shopping. Picking boogers. Screaming at your dog to get out of the trash. I mean, ANYTHING else. Could a few solid action sequences have saved the film? Probably. Did it?
Nope.
I honestly don't know how this passed the smell test on Rotten Tomatoes. In the words of the wonderful Jay Sherman: It stinks. I give it a 42.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Love Wedding Repeat (2020) in Movies
Aug 16, 2020
Movie marketing departments, please repeat after me: "I will not mislead the audience with my blurb for the film."
Jack has to juggle with dramas at his sister's wedding to make sure a troublemaker doesn't ruin the whole day.
Love Wedding Repeat looks very much like every other romcom out there but its saving grace appeared to be an interesting cast and the fun alternate timelines we'd see as promised in the blurb... but don't get your hopes up on that last part. I rewatched the trailers to try and find out where I got the wrong end of the stick about this and I found it was only mildly implied, in fact, it's the synopsis that outright tells you "alternate versions of the same day".
What's given to us feels more like an accident, like they filmed heavy and then realised they were running out of time and needed to cram it in. The "alternate versions" are more of a footnote on the film and a wasted opportunity. You could have run the Groundhog Day-esque scenarios or had the comedy rewind sound and gone back to the beginning of the scene... but the comedy alternatives are really nowhere to be seen.
The lack of comedy doesn't stop there, for the most part the script isn't a great success, I don't think I even laughed once. It tries to rely on quite an aggressive humour (that might not make sense to you, but it does in my head!) and everything feels very forced.
A good cast can sometimes redeem those moments that don't land on the page but the majority of the characters are just forgettable. No one is particularly likeable and that was a real drawback when you add it onto all the other drawbacks.
Love Wedding Repeat feels terribly balanced, had any of the elements been even slightly better it could have made this more watchable, but alas, they weren't, so it wasn't. Simple as.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/love-wedding-repeat-movie-review.html
Jack has to juggle with dramas at his sister's wedding to make sure a troublemaker doesn't ruin the whole day.
Love Wedding Repeat looks very much like every other romcom out there but its saving grace appeared to be an interesting cast and the fun alternate timelines we'd see as promised in the blurb... but don't get your hopes up on that last part. I rewatched the trailers to try and find out where I got the wrong end of the stick about this and I found it was only mildly implied, in fact, it's the synopsis that outright tells you "alternate versions of the same day".
What's given to us feels more like an accident, like they filmed heavy and then realised they were running out of time and needed to cram it in. The "alternate versions" are more of a footnote on the film and a wasted opportunity. You could have run the Groundhog Day-esque scenarios or had the comedy rewind sound and gone back to the beginning of the scene... but the comedy alternatives are really nowhere to be seen.
The lack of comedy doesn't stop there, for the most part the script isn't a great success, I don't think I even laughed once. It tries to rely on quite an aggressive humour (that might not make sense to you, but it does in my head!) and everything feels very forced.
A good cast can sometimes redeem those moments that don't land on the page but the majority of the characters are just forgettable. No one is particularly likeable and that was a real drawback when you add it onto all the other drawbacks.
Love Wedding Repeat feels terribly balanced, had any of the elements been even slightly better it could have made this more watchable, but alas, they weren't, so it wasn't. Simple as.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/08/love-wedding-repeat-movie-review.html
Slow Motion Camera Free - Slow & Fast Video Camera
Photo & Video and Utilities
App
FREE for limited time! Take high-quality slow motion videos and edit them easily using your iOS...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Hillbilly Elegy (2020) in Movies
Apr 22, 2021
General Shoutiness and a glowering Glenn Close
I missed Ron Howard's "Hillbilly Elegy" when it came out at the end of last year, but principally wanted to catch up on it to see Glenn Close's Oscar nominated performance before Sunday's Oscars.
Positives:
- When this film started, I suspected that the Glenn Close nomination might be another 'Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love' - - where her acceptance speech is longer than the time spent on screen! But no. Because of the flashback format deployed in the film, she actually gets a good amount of air time. And it's a really solid and impressive performance.
- The supporting cast is also good. Amy Adams is given a lot to do with a challenging role, and (just about) pulls it off. And young Owen Asztalos as the younger J. D. particularly impressed me.
Negatives:
- Although it's based on J. D. Vance's true life story, I really struggled to get very invested in the story. The choppy nature of the narrative - hopping repeatedly between 'the present' and multiple flashback timelines - really doesn't help with this.
- The whole J. D. / Usha romance element almost felt like it belonged in a different film. In fact, I found it frustrating that I found the elements with J. D.'s struggles at college, with the emerging love and guidance of Usha, as a more compelling narrative than the druggie mother lead story. Perhaps the movie was just trying to be too ambitious?
- Apart from one 'personal decision' scene in a motel bedroom, there's not much of an "up-side" to the story for the viewer to take away. It's not a movie that I found a positive experience.
Viewer Advisory;
If you've had any history of life in a dysfunctional family, there is a lot of shouting, slapping and general tension in this movie which you might find disturbing.
Summary Thoughts:
So, I came to this to see the performance of Glenn Close, and it's very good. I would personally be surprised if she takes the Oscar for this. However, having been nominated eight times before and never won, the 'sympathy vote' may play here.
But one of my bellweathers for a movie is to think whether I'll remember it in six months time. I'm afraid this one is unlikely to pass the test. If you say "Hillbilly Elegy" to me in October, I'll probably recall a whole lot of shouty people and Glenn Close glowering at me from the screen. That's not a wholly great recommendation for a movie. Sorry Mr Howard, but this one's a 'miss' for me.
(For the full graphical review, please see the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/21/hillbilly-elegy-review/ ).
Positives:
- When this film started, I suspected that the Glenn Close nomination might be another 'Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love' - - where her acceptance speech is longer than the time spent on screen! But no. Because of the flashback format deployed in the film, she actually gets a good amount of air time. And it's a really solid and impressive performance.
- The supporting cast is also good. Amy Adams is given a lot to do with a challenging role, and (just about) pulls it off. And young Owen Asztalos as the younger J. D. particularly impressed me.
Negatives:
- Although it's based on J. D. Vance's true life story, I really struggled to get very invested in the story. The choppy nature of the narrative - hopping repeatedly between 'the present' and multiple flashback timelines - really doesn't help with this.
- The whole J. D. / Usha romance element almost felt like it belonged in a different film. In fact, I found it frustrating that I found the elements with J. D.'s struggles at college, with the emerging love and guidance of Usha, as a more compelling narrative than the druggie mother lead story. Perhaps the movie was just trying to be too ambitious?
- Apart from one 'personal decision' scene in a motel bedroom, there's not much of an "up-side" to the story for the viewer to take away. It's not a movie that I found a positive experience.
Viewer Advisory;
If you've had any history of life in a dysfunctional family, there is a lot of shouting, slapping and general tension in this movie which you might find disturbing.
Summary Thoughts:
So, I came to this to see the performance of Glenn Close, and it's very good. I would personally be surprised if she takes the Oscar for this. However, having been nominated eight times before and never won, the 'sympathy vote' may play here.
But one of my bellweathers for a movie is to think whether I'll remember it in six months time. I'm afraid this one is unlikely to pass the test. If you say "Hillbilly Elegy" to me in October, I'll probably recall a whole lot of shouty people and Glenn Close glowering at me from the screen. That's not a wholly great recommendation for a movie. Sorry Mr Howard, but this one's a 'miss' for me.
(For the full graphical review, please see the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/04/21/hillbilly-elegy-review/ ).
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Finding Steve McQueen (2019) in Movies
Nov 9, 2020
This heist comedy (we'll come to that later) sounds pretty good from the synopsis, I can't really elaborate much on it like I normally would because, for once, it's spot on!
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
I had a big issue almost straight off the bat... "In 1972"... that's how the synopsis starts. I had reread it just before starting the film and as it begins it actually flashes up "1980", very quickly it's explained (and it makes sense) but I didn't enjoy starting the film with that confusion. Now, if I was seeing this in the cinema it wouldn't have been an issue because you don't tend to sit there in the trailers reading the synopsis before it starts, but with it hitting digital you will be instantly seeing it before you press play... I know it's a really minor thing to be bugged by... but it did bug me.
The reason for the jump in years is that we're seeing Harry Barber telling his girlfriend, Molly, the story of his past and the heist. Flashbacks are a time-honoured tradition in films, but they're difficult to get right. The story jumps several times, but there's very little differentiation between time unless the diner is involved on one side of the jump. At one point it jumps because he talks at the camera and we hop back to Molly talking, it stuck out... it either never happened again or it blended in so well that I didn't notice it. It wouldn't be the first film to add something random like that and abandon the style choice. Some else will have to let me know if it happened more than I think it did.
These two things, combined with some free moving camerawork (that you know I hate) meant that I found the beginning of Finding Steve McQueen, especially when the heist that is pushed in the marketing doesn't appear for quite a while.
IMDb lists crime thriller as a guide... thriller is definitely the wrong word. Heist comedy (as per the PR I saw) is definitely more accurate, though I didn't find it particularly funny. It did bring a mild laugh out of me, but not enough to stamp it with the comedy tag. Even "heist" feels like it doesn't fit well, it may be about one but what's presented is much heavier on other parts of the story. It's more like a biopic with romance than crime. In the end that's a little bit disappointing when you're looking forward to crime.
William Fichtner was an instant standout for me, I thought he handled the role of Enzo Rotella particularly well, and there was a great dynamic with Louis Lombardi as Pauly. Rachael Taylor as Molly Murphy was great too, when she wasn't freaking me out with how much she looked like Nicole Kidman. Somehow I've never noticed that before so I'll have to put it down to a cunning makeup artist.
From there though I was underwhelmed. I'm not familiar with Travis Fimmel, and sadly, from this performance I've not been convinced to check out anything in his back catalogue. Apart from two well-played emotional scenes I didn't enjoy the character of Harry Barber at all.
Had this been advertised as a biography instead of a crime/heist then I probably would have had a more favourable opinion, but we're presented with a slow and light film. I'm not expecting all crime films to be gritty and dark, but I do expect them to focus more on the actual crime and investigation. That's also where I found the flashback idea falling apart because we're shown things for context that Harry wouldn't have known and been able to tell Molly.
What I did love about this film was the setting and the look of everything. It had a wonderful freshness about it and that coupled with the costumes felt natural and like it captured the era perfectly.
I by no means hated this film, but I was extremely disappointed. The way the story was balanced means that the heist gets lost in everything else that's happening and although it's hailed as an amazing feat in American history it doesn't feel all that impressive in this portrayal. The only real criminal thing about this film was the underuse of Forest Whitaker.
As a biography I could have seen clear to give this a 3, maybe a 3.5, but as a crime I can't give it more than a 2. It feels entirely misrepresented, had it not been for the few excellent performances, and the hope of exciting crime drama, I think I would have turned it off.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/finding-steve-mcqueen-movie-review.html
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Detective Comics Volume 3: League of Shadows in Books
Nov 30, 2020
<i>A little bit of "backstory": I am a sucker for well-executed Ra's al Ghul story! To me, he is one of Batman's best adversaries and one of my personal faves! Add in more human, less off-the-scale like he is under Tom King's run Batman, and you've got a great treat for me! Now, that said, on to my review.</i>
<img src="https://i.imgur.com/MW33UBM.gif"; width="300" height="200">
I am still enjoying my return to reading DC's books rather than the current slop Marvel is serving up. My latest undertaking has been James Tynion IV's run on DETECTIVE COMICS. Last night, I devoured the 3rd volume, "League of Shadows", largely for the reasons in my backstory above.
I know some folks on interwebs have issues with Tynion's writing for the Dark Knight. I've read things like "bland" and "his stories go NOWHERE". I don't know which of his Batman entries they are reading, but thus far, not a one has disappointed.
This one was particularly interesting as it dealt with Cassandra Cain, a former Batgirl/now calling herself "Orphan" as that is what her parents have chosen to do, leaving her <i>orphaned</i>. Her mother is Sandra Wu-San, or as she is better known, Lady Shiva. There is no love lost between Cassandra and her mother; essentially, Shiva treats the poor girl as if she was dead, not even a product of her womb. Sad, really. But, it is good to see Cassandra and Shiva's relationship dealt with following the whole "Rebirth".
I may be in a serious minority here, but I really liked the ending (not <i>really</i> much of Spoiler), where Batman holds her in a embrace, letting her known she is not alone..ever. Sure, Bats is all about the whole "Dark Knight" and "Oooh, feel my scary presence, criminals!", but it was nice to see his human, father-esque side to his character. Much better than the way he is being handled in his main book!
Equally meaty and worthwhile was Ra's inclusion as part of the story. I found him to be well-written, feeling much like "The Demon's Head" that is his being. I was totally able to hear, in my head, his dialogue as read by David Warner, who did his voice in BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES. That definitely seems like Tynion is truly writing at the top of his game!
I was also quite pleased with the subplot of more background to Batwoman's character. I was not really that familiar with her character, other than in the animated DC film. That aside, I found her to be real and decidedly interesting, especially her relationship with her father. Again, some excellent writing from Tynion!
And speaking of Batwoman, how cool was it to see Batman assembling Bat-Family 2.0? This plot element harkened back to the Silver Age, where DETECTIVE COMICS would often do double-sized issues that focused on the then-Bat-Fam: Batman, Robin (Dick Grayson, not yet Nightwing), Batgirl, and sometimes, Elongated Man would get a story in it as well.
The new Bat-Fam consists of Batman (of course!), Batwing (Lucius Fox's son), Batwoman, Orphan (Cassandra Cain), Azrael (who I consider to be not-so-interest, leaving me to skip the last issue of this volume as it was 100% Azrael-centric), Spoiler (Stephanie Brown), Red Robin, and the-now-trying-his-hand-at-being-a-rehabilitated-good-guy Clayface. Quite a mixed bag, almost like a Skittles version of the Bat-Fam, but interesting choices for a collaborative team.
The team functions well enough, but there is some static and tension, as would be true of any team assembled such as this lot. All in all, I really dug the gang, and they really worked well together. Super-smooth idea of introducing a Bat-Fam 2.0! Bravo, James Tynion IV,you are AWESOME for doing this!
It is also worth mentioning the artists for this volume: Marcio Takara and Christian Duce. I was already familiar with Takara's delicious style from his work on Marvel's ALL-NEW WOLVERINE. Christian Duce was previously unknown to me, but after seeing his super-legit art skills, he is going to be one for me to keep an eye for going forward!
Blah, blah, blah, am I right? I could go on and on, but if you weren't reading my blathering, you could be reading this excellent Bat-book. I was going to give it 5-Stars, but I see that I was just giving them out for a while not unlike Oprah giving away new cars! So, that's it! Go already! You need to get a'readin'!
<img src="https://i.imgur.com/MW33UBM.gif"; width="300" height="200">
I am still enjoying my return to reading DC's books rather than the current slop Marvel is serving up. My latest undertaking has been James Tynion IV's run on DETECTIVE COMICS. Last night, I devoured the 3rd volume, "League of Shadows", largely for the reasons in my backstory above.
I know some folks on interwebs have issues with Tynion's writing for the Dark Knight. I've read things like "bland" and "his stories go NOWHERE". I don't know which of his Batman entries they are reading, but thus far, not a one has disappointed.
This one was particularly interesting as it dealt with Cassandra Cain, a former Batgirl/now calling herself "Orphan" as that is what her parents have chosen to do, leaving her <i>orphaned</i>. Her mother is Sandra Wu-San, or as she is better known, Lady Shiva. There is no love lost between Cassandra and her mother; essentially, Shiva treats the poor girl as if she was dead, not even a product of her womb. Sad, really. But, it is good to see Cassandra and Shiva's relationship dealt with following the whole "Rebirth".
I may be in a serious minority here, but I really liked the ending (not <i>really</i> much of Spoiler), where Batman holds her in a embrace, letting her known she is not alone..ever. Sure, Bats is all about the whole "Dark Knight" and "Oooh, feel my scary presence, criminals!", but it was nice to see his human, father-esque side to his character. Much better than the way he is being handled in his main book!
Equally meaty and worthwhile was Ra's inclusion as part of the story. I found him to be well-written, feeling much like "The Demon's Head" that is his being. I was totally able to hear, in my head, his dialogue as read by David Warner, who did his voice in BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES. That definitely seems like Tynion is truly writing at the top of his game!
I was also quite pleased with the subplot of more background to Batwoman's character. I was not really that familiar with her character, other than in the animated DC film. That aside, I found her to be real and decidedly interesting, especially her relationship with her father. Again, some excellent writing from Tynion!
And speaking of Batwoman, how cool was it to see Batman assembling Bat-Family 2.0? This plot element harkened back to the Silver Age, where DETECTIVE COMICS would often do double-sized issues that focused on the then-Bat-Fam: Batman, Robin (Dick Grayson, not yet Nightwing), Batgirl, and sometimes, Elongated Man would get a story in it as well.
The new Bat-Fam consists of Batman (of course!), Batwing (Lucius Fox's son), Batwoman, Orphan (Cassandra Cain), Azrael (who I consider to be not-so-interest, leaving me to skip the last issue of this volume as it was 100% Azrael-centric), Spoiler (Stephanie Brown), Red Robin, and the-now-trying-his-hand-at-being-a-rehabilitated-good-guy Clayface. Quite a mixed bag, almost like a Skittles version of the Bat-Fam, but interesting choices for a collaborative team.
The team functions well enough, but there is some static and tension, as would be true of any team assembled such as this lot. All in all, I really dug the gang, and they really worked well together. Super-smooth idea of introducing a Bat-Fam 2.0! Bravo, James Tynion IV,you are AWESOME for doing this!
It is also worth mentioning the artists for this volume: Marcio Takara and Christian Duce. I was already familiar with Takara's delicious style from his work on Marvel's ALL-NEW WOLVERINE. Christian Duce was previously unknown to me, but after seeing his super-legit art skills, he is going to be one for me to keep an eye for going forward!
Blah, blah, blah, am I right? I could go on and on, but if you weren't reading my blathering, you could be reading this excellent Bat-book. I was going to give it 5-Stars, but I see that I was just giving them out for a while not unlike Oprah giving away new cars! So, that's it! Go already! You need to get a'readin'!
Geocaching Buddy
Navigation and Utilities
App
The ultimate tool for the serious geocacher when solving multi-caches, powered by Geocaching Live....
Kristin (149 KP) rated Before (Betwixt, #0.5) in Books
Dec 7, 2018
Disclaimer: I received an e-copy from the author in exchange for an honest review.
"Before" is an aptly-titled prequel to "Betwixt", and here we get to learn more about Dale and what happened in his life prior to the events of "Betwixt." I must say, when I initially read "Betwixt," I found myself wanting to know more about Dale's history and how he got to be the way he was: moody, stand-offish, an outcast from the school, etc. Thankfully, Melissa read my mind and gave us this prequel!
Dale is the second child of a loving couple who only want what's best for him, but he sees it as a bunch of rules to keep him down, all based around what his dad's congregation would think if the preacher's son went off the rails. Funny thing, that's exactly what all the rules make him do, and he just gets wilder and more reckless the more they try to tie him down. He's tired of being compared to his older sister, the model of normalcy and obedience, and he's determined to make his own decisions, no matter the consequences. His friends (if you can call them that) encourage this behavior in him, and it isn't long before things spiral out of control.
If you enjoyed "Betwixt" or have a desire to read it but haven't gotten around to it yet, I would definitely recommend you read this one. Dale's story is really interesting, and it helps set up his involvement in "Betwixt" and also explains more about why he chooses to play the part he does in that story. Well done!!
5 stars =)
"Before" is an aptly-titled prequel to "Betwixt", and here we get to learn more about Dale and what happened in his life prior to the events of "Betwixt." I must say, when I initially read "Betwixt," I found myself wanting to know more about Dale's history and how he got to be the way he was: moody, stand-offish, an outcast from the school, etc. Thankfully, Melissa read my mind and gave us this prequel!
Dale is the second child of a loving couple who only want what's best for him, but he sees it as a bunch of rules to keep him down, all based around what his dad's congregation would think if the preacher's son went off the rails. Funny thing, that's exactly what all the rules make him do, and he just gets wilder and more reckless the more they try to tie him down. He's tired of being compared to his older sister, the model of normalcy and obedience, and he's determined to make his own decisions, no matter the consequences. His friends (if you can call them that) encourage this behavior in him, and it isn't long before things spiral out of control.
If you enjoyed "Betwixt" or have a desire to read it but haven't gotten around to it yet, I would definitely recommend you read this one. Dale's story is really interesting, and it helps set up his involvement in "Betwixt" and also explains more about why he chooses to play the part he does in that story. Well done!!
5 stars =)
Merissa (13169 KP) rated Timber Lake (A Snowy Range Mystery #2) in Books
Oct 19, 2018
Timber Lake (A Snowy Range Mystery #2) by Nya Rawlyns
Timber Lake is the second book in the Snowy Range Mystery series, although it can be read as a standalone.
The story starts off with Michael and Sonny (Seamus) bumping into each other at a rodeo. There is instant attraction between them, but apart from a hot kiss, nothing happens. Then they meet again, but this time in a work capacity. Sparks once again fly, but not always in a good way. These two need to learn how to work together in harsh conditions, and maybe how to love together!
This is a very different story to the first. I was expecting it to follow on in some way from book one, but it is a completely separate story. There is a lot of angst in this book, as the two MC's are looking at life and each other in very different ways. Just when you think they are working things out, there is some confusion/disagreement, that sets things off again.
I found this book to be very well written, with no editing or grammatical errors to disrupt my reading flow. The characters are well rounded (whether they annoy you or not!). The descriptions are enough to make picturing the scenes in your mind very easy.
If you like a bit of mystery with your romance, then I can definitely recommend this book/series.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
The story starts off with Michael and Sonny (Seamus) bumping into each other at a rodeo. There is instant attraction between them, but apart from a hot kiss, nothing happens. Then they meet again, but this time in a work capacity. Sparks once again fly, but not always in a good way. These two need to learn how to work together in harsh conditions, and maybe how to love together!
This is a very different story to the first. I was expecting it to follow on in some way from book one, but it is a completely separate story. There is a lot of angst in this book, as the two MC's are looking at life and each other in very different ways. Just when you think they are working things out, there is some confusion/disagreement, that sets things off again.
I found this book to be very well written, with no editing or grammatical errors to disrupt my reading flow. The characters are well rounded (whether they annoy you or not!). The descriptions are enough to make picturing the scenes in your mind very easy.
If you like a bit of mystery with your romance, then I can definitely recommend this book/series.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
ClareR (5950 KP) rated A Curious History of Sex in Books
Feb 25, 2020
A Curious History of Sex is probably going to be one of my top reads of the year. This is why you should read it too (because let’s face it, if you’re reading my review, you’re either curious or you’ve read it too!):
1. It’s really well researched. The writer, Dr. Kate Lister, really knows her subject, and it shows, because
2. you have to know your subject to make something that could be really serious into something rather funny and thoroughly entertaining.
3. I’ve learnt a lot from this book, some things I’m not so sure that I would have ever found out about without reading this, and some that I never knew I NEEDED to know about!
4. The added photos are fascinating: there’s art, photos (ranging from the informative to the titillating, via some things that are frankly terrifying - some of the doctors equipment, for example!!).
5. You’ll want to tell all of your friends and selected family really inappropriate, yet interesting facts. Or maybe that’s just me...
6. Whores of Yore on Twitter will be your next stop, either whilst you’re reading the book, or as soon as you’ve turned the last page (or when you’ve finished reading my review! Go on - do it!). It’s great!
So, you’ll be wanting to go out and buy or borrow your copy now - am I right? Because it really is a fascinating read, and I suggest you do buy it as soon as possible!
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this book - it was the most entertaining, eye-opening 10 days I’ve had in a while!
1. It’s really well researched. The writer, Dr. Kate Lister, really knows her subject, and it shows, because
2. you have to know your subject to make something that could be really serious into something rather funny and thoroughly entertaining.
3. I’ve learnt a lot from this book, some things I’m not so sure that I would have ever found out about without reading this, and some that I never knew I NEEDED to know about!
4. The added photos are fascinating: there’s art, photos (ranging from the informative to the titillating, via some things that are frankly terrifying - some of the doctors equipment, for example!!).
5. You’ll want to tell all of your friends and selected family really inappropriate, yet interesting facts. Or maybe that’s just me...
6. Whores of Yore on Twitter will be your next stop, either whilst you’re reading the book, or as soon as you’ve turned the last page (or when you’ve finished reading my review! Go on - do it!). It’s great!
So, you’ll be wanting to go out and buy or borrow your copy now - am I right? Because it really is a fascinating read, and I suggest you do buy it as soon as possible!
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for serialising this book - it was the most entertaining, eye-opening 10 days I’ve had in a while!