Search
Search results
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated A Short History of the World in Books
Aug 5, 2018
Best known for his classic fiction, HG Wells also wrote a non-fiction book summarising the history of the world, going from the history of the solar system, right up to the date the book was published in 1922.
As I hoped, the book often reads like a novel, with 67 distinct sections, each like a mini story. In order to fit the history of the whole world into one book, by nature the story telling ranges from nice and rapid, to a little too rapid. I found it rather like a catalogue of numerous interesting little nuggets of information. Despite covering events from all over the world, the topics often flow seamlessly from one topic to the next. Due to so many overlapping topics, this history of the world isn't told in a linear purely chronological pattern, but has to go backwards a little, now and again.
At various times throughout, the stories are gripping and Wells successfully brings history to life. I particularly liked the various sections on religious leaders. Appropriately, Wells tackles religion as would any unbiased historian-become storyteller. I also enjoyed the beginning, where Wells paints a crystal clear picture of our solar system and the vast empty space that our dramas are within. His description of our galaxy sounds nothing short of beautiful.
The book was meant to be predominantly factual, but Wells did include a substantial amount of speculation and opinion. This does not distract from the storyline, but adds value in generating the concepts of the time periods.
It covers progress and prosperity as much as carnage and decimation, and provides good explanations of everything it covers. (Although it would benefit from more illustrations). At times it feels detail heavy but also gives the reader a feel for each age - the book is not limited to which country went to war with which country and when, but also examines changes in ways of thinking through the ages. Including the Ancient Greek philosophers, Arabian progress in maths and science, the advent of experimental science, and the development of political and social ideas in Wells’ time.
I was reassured to learn that despite not studying the history of the world in its entirety in school, I was already familiar with much of the book’s content. Having said that, there were also topics where I really felt I was learning something. I read Wells’ opinion on why the Roman Empire fell, and how the industrial revolution was not merely a revolution in machinery, but rather a revolution in how people conducted their everyday lives. There were also some important figures from history described that were never mentioned in my school days, particularly Charlemagne and Roger Bacon.
Towards the end of the book, Wells correctly predicts another war like that of the Great War. However his final message was one of faith and hope in humanity’s progress.
With such a huge scope, Wells must have struggled with deciding what topics to include and what to exclude. I thought he ought to have included a touch more detail on Ancient Egypt, and on the causes of the Great War (World War 1). As a British person myself I would have liked to have seen more on British history.
Likewise, if the book were written now rather than 1922 I began to speculate on what he would and wouldn’t have included. I imagine there would certainly be a section on World War 2, rockets into space, the internet, and 9/11. He would have provided an excellently conducted section on how humans are destroying the planet.
One of the beauties of this book has to be its availability. If you type “short history of the world” into Google, the free PDF of this book takes up much of the first 2 pages of results. If you’re sketchy on world history, this book will fill in the main blanks, and is worth a read if this is your aim, especially if you wish to do so quickly. The fact that it’s split up into so many succinct sections also means that you can pick up and put down the book as often as opportunity allows. It also works well as a reference book, as it does not need to be read from cover to cover in order to look up one particular event or time period.
In summary, this book would be a welcome addition to bookshelf (or ebook library) of the general non-fiction fan or historian.
Find more of my book review on www.bookblogbycari.com
As I hoped, the book often reads like a novel, with 67 distinct sections, each like a mini story. In order to fit the history of the whole world into one book, by nature the story telling ranges from nice and rapid, to a little too rapid. I found it rather like a catalogue of numerous interesting little nuggets of information. Despite covering events from all over the world, the topics often flow seamlessly from one topic to the next. Due to so many overlapping topics, this history of the world isn't told in a linear purely chronological pattern, but has to go backwards a little, now and again.
At various times throughout, the stories are gripping and Wells successfully brings history to life. I particularly liked the various sections on religious leaders. Appropriately, Wells tackles religion as would any unbiased historian-become storyteller. I also enjoyed the beginning, where Wells paints a crystal clear picture of our solar system and the vast empty space that our dramas are within. His description of our galaxy sounds nothing short of beautiful.
The book was meant to be predominantly factual, but Wells did include a substantial amount of speculation and opinion. This does not distract from the storyline, but adds value in generating the concepts of the time periods.
It covers progress and prosperity as much as carnage and decimation, and provides good explanations of everything it covers. (Although it would benefit from more illustrations). At times it feels detail heavy but also gives the reader a feel for each age - the book is not limited to which country went to war with which country and when, but also examines changes in ways of thinking through the ages. Including the Ancient Greek philosophers, Arabian progress in maths and science, the advent of experimental science, and the development of political and social ideas in Wells’ time.
I was reassured to learn that despite not studying the history of the world in its entirety in school, I was already familiar with much of the book’s content. Having said that, there were also topics where I really felt I was learning something. I read Wells’ opinion on why the Roman Empire fell, and how the industrial revolution was not merely a revolution in machinery, but rather a revolution in how people conducted their everyday lives. There were also some important figures from history described that were never mentioned in my school days, particularly Charlemagne and Roger Bacon.
Towards the end of the book, Wells correctly predicts another war like that of the Great War. However his final message was one of faith and hope in humanity’s progress.
With such a huge scope, Wells must have struggled with deciding what topics to include and what to exclude. I thought he ought to have included a touch more detail on Ancient Egypt, and on the causes of the Great War (World War 1). As a British person myself I would have liked to have seen more on British history.
Likewise, if the book were written now rather than 1922 I began to speculate on what he would and wouldn’t have included. I imagine there would certainly be a section on World War 2, rockets into space, the internet, and 9/11. He would have provided an excellently conducted section on how humans are destroying the planet.
One of the beauties of this book has to be its availability. If you type “short history of the world” into Google, the free PDF of this book takes up much of the first 2 pages of results. If you’re sketchy on world history, this book will fill in the main blanks, and is worth a read if this is your aim, especially if you wish to do so quickly. The fact that it’s split up into so many succinct sections also means that you can pick up and put down the book as often as opportunity allows. It also works well as a reference book, as it does not need to be read from cover to cover in order to look up one particular event or time period.
In summary, this book would be a welcome addition to bookshelf (or ebook library) of the general non-fiction fan or historian.
Find more of my book review on www.bookblogbycari.com
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Spotlight (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Greetings & Salutations Fellow Movie Fanatics!
We’ve definitely got a serious drama film for you this time around. Not for the faint of heart but
one that discusses a serious controversy that shook the foundations of the Catholic community
not only in the city of Boston but also America and the rest of the world.
Directed by Thomas McCarthy (The Station Agent, The Visitor, Up, Win Win, Million Dollar Arm,
and The Cobbler) and co-written by McCarthy and Josh Singer (The West Wing, Law &
Order:SVU) ‘Spotlight’ follows the Boston Globe’s investigation and coverage of the
Massachusetts Catholic sex abuse scandal which was brought to the public’s attention in early
2002 after nearly a year of investigation and research by the Boston Globe’s ‘Spotlight Team’
the oldest continuously running newspaper investigative group in the United States.
Starring Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams, and Brian d’Arcy James, as reporters
Michael Rezendes, Walter “Robby” Robinson, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Matt Carroll, the movie
begins just after the Globe’s new editor Marty Baron’s (Liev Schreiber) arrival in Boston. At a
time when more and more people are going to the Internet to get their news the Globe is like
many other large newspapers around the country facing declining revenue and possible job
losses. What appears to be an isolated case involving one priest soon evolves into something
much bigger than one church or one diocese and the Spotlight Team sets out to uncover a
conspiracy within the church hide an epidemic of abuse which has been covered up for
decades.
To say that this scandal is horrifying to think about is an understatement. Knowing it was
covered up for so many years is even worse. I remember when I first started seeing the news
stories about it how sick it made me feel. In a day and age where the news is now more about
ratings and how many news organizations have become compromised and biased beyond
belief, the truth no matter how bad it might be is a rare thing. This film is basically a dramatic,
well written, and well acted account of the reporter’s investigation into the scandal … the
complete and true story and its scope … and bring it to the public’s attention. So that the people
would know what happened and also perhaps, help bring some sort of closure to the victims.
The film helps to put the whole scandal and its scope in perspective.
With an excellent supporting cast including Gene Amoroso, John Slattery, Liev Schreiber,
Jamey Sheridan, Stanley Tucci, Billy Crudup, Maureen Keiller, Paul Guilfoyle, Len Cariou,
Neal Huff, and Michael Cyril Creighton, ‘Spotlight’ is a film certainly worthy of mention. It shows
that sometimes even in this world of ‘instant news’ that sometimes, the most important stories
are brought to light they way they were brought to our attention before the Internet, before
computers, before satellites. By honest reporters who wanted the public to know the truth.
I’m giving this film 4 out of 5 stars. As I mentioned earlier, it puts the whole scandal in
perspective and allows you to see it theoretically from the perspective of the reporters and the
situations it sometimes places them in in their public and personal lives.
On behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ i’d like to say Thanks For Reading’ and we’ll
see you at the movies
Review By Lauren Dove
The movie all together was slower than I thought it might be. Coming from a person that enjoys conspiracy theories, I enjoyed the movie. However, someone who is not interested in the plot line I don’t think would enjoy it.
I think the movie could have added a little more drama, in order to draw in more people. I would watch this movie when comes out on dvd, probably would not pay money to see in a movie theater. I think the facts themselves were shocking to a lot people although it wasn’t surprising for me. A large powerful group such as the church I would expect some corruption.
I feel like the plot line built up and was expecting this grand finally that never came. I was expecting this to go a lot farther than it did. It really didn’t tell us what happened to the people themselves who were found guilty. Or what was done or not done to change after all the victims came forward with all these accusations of being sexually abused by priest in the Catholic Church. I would give this movie 3 out of 5 stars.
We’ve definitely got a serious drama film for you this time around. Not for the faint of heart but
one that discusses a serious controversy that shook the foundations of the Catholic community
not only in the city of Boston but also America and the rest of the world.
Directed by Thomas McCarthy (The Station Agent, The Visitor, Up, Win Win, Million Dollar Arm,
and The Cobbler) and co-written by McCarthy and Josh Singer (The West Wing, Law &
Order:SVU) ‘Spotlight’ follows the Boston Globe’s investigation and coverage of the
Massachusetts Catholic sex abuse scandal which was brought to the public’s attention in early
2002 after nearly a year of investigation and research by the Boston Globe’s ‘Spotlight Team’
the oldest continuously running newspaper investigative group in the United States.
Starring Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams, and Brian d’Arcy James, as reporters
Michael Rezendes, Walter “Robby” Robinson, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Matt Carroll, the movie
begins just after the Globe’s new editor Marty Baron’s (Liev Schreiber) arrival in Boston. At a
time when more and more people are going to the Internet to get their news the Globe is like
many other large newspapers around the country facing declining revenue and possible job
losses. What appears to be an isolated case involving one priest soon evolves into something
much bigger than one church or one diocese and the Spotlight Team sets out to uncover a
conspiracy within the church hide an epidemic of abuse which has been covered up for
decades.
To say that this scandal is horrifying to think about is an understatement. Knowing it was
covered up for so many years is even worse. I remember when I first started seeing the news
stories about it how sick it made me feel. In a day and age where the news is now more about
ratings and how many news organizations have become compromised and biased beyond
belief, the truth no matter how bad it might be is a rare thing. This film is basically a dramatic,
well written, and well acted account of the reporter’s investigation into the scandal … the
complete and true story and its scope … and bring it to the public’s attention. So that the people
would know what happened and also perhaps, help bring some sort of closure to the victims.
The film helps to put the whole scandal and its scope in perspective.
With an excellent supporting cast including Gene Amoroso, John Slattery, Liev Schreiber,
Jamey Sheridan, Stanley Tucci, Billy Crudup, Maureen Keiller, Paul Guilfoyle, Len Cariou,
Neal Huff, and Michael Cyril Creighton, ‘Spotlight’ is a film certainly worthy of mention. It shows
that sometimes even in this world of ‘instant news’ that sometimes, the most important stories
are brought to light they way they were brought to our attention before the Internet, before
computers, before satellites. By honest reporters who wanted the public to know the truth.
I’m giving this film 4 out of 5 stars. As I mentioned earlier, it puts the whole scandal in
perspective and allows you to see it theoretically from the perspective of the reporters and the
situations it sometimes places them in in their public and personal lives.
On behalf of my fellows at ‘Skewed & Reviewed’ i’d like to say Thanks For Reading’ and we’ll
see you at the movies
Review By Lauren Dove
The movie all together was slower than I thought it might be. Coming from a person that enjoys conspiracy theories, I enjoyed the movie. However, someone who is not interested in the plot line I don’t think would enjoy it.
I think the movie could have added a little more drama, in order to draw in more people. I would watch this movie when comes out on dvd, probably would not pay money to see in a movie theater. I think the facts themselves were shocking to a lot people although it wasn’t surprising for me. A large powerful group such as the church I would expect some corruption.
I feel like the plot line built up and was expecting this grand finally that never came. I was expecting this to go a lot farther than it did. It really didn’t tell us what happened to the people themselves who were found guilty. Or what was done or not done to change after all the victims came forward with all these accusations of being sexually abused by priest in the Catholic Church. I would give this movie 3 out of 5 stars.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Trumbo (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
What is it that makes, not a great, but even a good biopic? It is certainly no enviable task, trying to condense decades of a person’s life into a mere two hours. Choosing what to keep and what to leave, stringing events together so that they feel as though they are one complete narrative opposed to a series of vignettes. And then there are the inevitable purists who will write off the entire product based on a single detail either left out or composited due to running time or budgetary restrictions. Over the years, I have found myself wrestling with my opinion of Braveheart. Do I enjoy it for its epic qualities, or do I cast it aside as the wretched historical inaccuracies fly in the face of what is one of the most important times in a country’s past?
The answer is simply, and stolen from another great historical epic, are you not entertained? Film can and should be powerful and informative. It can and should influence our thinking and encourage an emotional response, but above all, it should entertain. Trumbo does all of the above, ticks all the necessary boxes on the list of what makes a great biopic and whatever historical inaccuracies lie within be damned. Director Jay Roach, writer John McNamara and an ensemble so good it has to be seen to be believed have made, if not the best biopic of the year (that distinction still stays with Steve Jobs for now), then certainly the most enjoyable.
Where I find myself in reviewing Trumbo is trying not to sound monotonous in singing its high praises. Whether you’re interested in a message or not, because there is a good one in there, it’s a film that demands to be seen just on the strength of the cohesiveness that comes from the writing, the acting and (I still can’t believe I’m about to write this about the man who made all three Austin Powers movies) the directing.
I could prattle on endlessly about how overwhelmingly good this cast is, but the names speak for themselves. Bryan Cranston showcases that he is not just the best thing on television, but also a big-screen powerhouse. Helen Mirren, in her inimitable fashion and with beautiful understatement, is a force to be reckoned with, seething venom and self-righteousness. Louis C.K. finally breaks out of his stand-up comic persona to give a truly heartfelt performance played with surprisingly restrained vulnerability. The chemistry between him and Bryan Cranston will no doubt leave you wanting more. And John Goodman… well, it’s John Goodman. He continues to prove that no matter how small a part he has to play, it will stay with you long after you’ve left the theater. Hands down, and these are only four out of a dozen terrific performances, there hasn’t been an ensemble this stunning since L.A. Confidential.
It should also be mentioned that Michael Stuhlbarg, David James Elliott and Dean O’Gorman, who portray Edward G. Robinson, John Wayne and Kirk Douglas respectively, are unquestionably destined to go down as the unsung heroes of Trumbo. Their efforts, not just to imitate but to fully realize these Hollywood stars of a by-gone era, are a further complement to inspired casting and commitment to honoring the lives of the people portrayed on screen.
In short (and well done for making it this far through monotonous and truly well-deserved praise), if you have to see one film this Thanksgiving season that doesn’t star Tom Hardy as England’s notorious Kray brothers, see Trumbo.
The answer is simply, and stolen from another great historical epic, are you not entertained? Film can and should be powerful and informative. It can and should influence our thinking and encourage an emotional response, but above all, it should entertain. Trumbo does all of the above, ticks all the necessary boxes on the list of what makes a great biopic and whatever historical inaccuracies lie within be damned. Director Jay Roach, writer John McNamara and an ensemble so good it has to be seen to be believed have made, if not the best biopic of the year (that distinction still stays with Steve Jobs for now), then certainly the most enjoyable.
Where I find myself in reviewing Trumbo is trying not to sound monotonous in singing its high praises. Whether you’re interested in a message or not, because there is a good one in there, it’s a film that demands to be seen just on the strength of the cohesiveness that comes from the writing, the acting and (I still can’t believe I’m about to write this about the man who made all three Austin Powers movies) the directing.
I could prattle on endlessly about how overwhelmingly good this cast is, but the names speak for themselves. Bryan Cranston showcases that he is not just the best thing on television, but also a big-screen powerhouse. Helen Mirren, in her inimitable fashion and with beautiful understatement, is a force to be reckoned with, seething venom and self-righteousness. Louis C.K. finally breaks out of his stand-up comic persona to give a truly heartfelt performance played with surprisingly restrained vulnerability. The chemistry between him and Bryan Cranston will no doubt leave you wanting more. And John Goodman… well, it’s John Goodman. He continues to prove that no matter how small a part he has to play, it will stay with you long after you’ve left the theater. Hands down, and these are only four out of a dozen terrific performances, there hasn’t been an ensemble this stunning since L.A. Confidential.
It should also be mentioned that Michael Stuhlbarg, David James Elliott and Dean O’Gorman, who portray Edward G. Robinson, John Wayne and Kirk Douglas respectively, are unquestionably destined to go down as the unsung heroes of Trumbo. Their efforts, not just to imitate but to fully realize these Hollywood stars of a by-gone era, are a further complement to inspired casting and commitment to honoring the lives of the people portrayed on screen.
In short (and well done for making it this far through monotonous and truly well-deserved praise), if you have to see one film this Thanksgiving season that doesn’t star Tom Hardy as England’s notorious Kray brothers, see Trumbo.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Sanctuary in Books
Apr 27, 2018
rating: 3.8/5
My Summary: Lea is a refugee who has survived for the past few months living in the wild and traveling from house to random house, just trying to stay alive. When she is found, ill, by American soldiers and taken care of and healed, she has a choice—leave the soldiers and spend the winter by herself, homeless, with no protection in the middle of a war, or trade sex for protection and safety from Major Russell. She chooses the exchange. But Lea and Russell both are not prepared for the outcome of the bargain—Love. Lea and Russell are married, and try to build a real relationship from their original bargain. Can they make it work…
Thoughts: I really hate it when a book has what I call “happy-land syndrome—” where everything works out nicely, relationships are smooth and when they’re rough their fixed quickly and painlessly, and everyone lives happily ever after. This book does have a happily ever after of some sort, but it most certainly does not have happy-land syndrome. This book was a picture of a real marriage—the ups, the downs, the arguments, the forgiveness. There were clear differences between passion, lust, and love (which is always refreshing), and there were arguments the way real arguments happen. There was pride, there was sympathy, and there was forgiveness.
There was a lot of humor in this book! Now mind you it was not a “funny” book, but there were some very good funny pieces of dialogue.
Plot: This book didn’t have a complicated plot, or any huge unexpected occurrences. It was a “simple” story line—but it was a very addicting read. That’s not to say that everything that happened was dull or boring or expected, it just means it was definitely not a sitting-on-the-edge-of-your-seat kind of romance. It was more like a cuddle-up-with-a-cup-of-tea-and-a-blanket kind of romance. It flowed smoothly, and the pacing was very good—not to fast, not too slow. The only thing about the pacing was that the part where they realized that they’d fallen in love didn’t feel like any kind of climax. Which could have been the point, as it did sort of happen slowly.
Characters: I liked the fact that the characters in this book were like real people—they had their strengths and weaknesses, their qualities and their flaws. Lea was stubborn and rebellious, and not at all submissive to her husband, yet she was a sweet and kind girl, and was willing to make sacrifices for Russell. Russell was a very kind man to Lea, and his protective attitude was appealing, however his language and his anger were his downfalls.
Writing: The writing in this book was good. It wasn’t fantastically breathtaking (J.K. Rowling, Robert Frost, Paolini, Dostoyevsky etc.), it wasn’t mediocre (Stephenie Meyer, Becca Fitzpatrick) and it wasn’t atrocious (Meg Cabot.). I can’t really place it in any of those categories. It sort of fell between the first two. It was very readable, it wasn’t dull and empty of good words with barely acceptable sentence structure, but it wasn’t something that sounded like poetry read aloud either. Again, very readable.
Content: There was a lot of sex in this book. I mean, it’s a romance about a girl who trades her body in exchange for being kept alive by a horny soldier, and I expected it, so I’m not saying I was surprised. I think it could have still been a very good powerful romance without all the details. I skipped a few paragraphs here and there. There was also a lot of language. And yes, it is the military, after all. Soldiers swear. They did in the book, too. I guess some people aren’t bothered by stuff like that in books. It wasn’t so bad that I wanted to stop reading, but I thought some of the words (and again, details) could have been left out and the book would have been just as good.
Recommendation: Ages 16+ at least, and wait until you’re 18 if you are picky about content. I rate high for the wonderfully relatable and realistic characters, high-ish for my enjoyment, and medium for plot and writing.
Click here to read the first chapter of Sanctuary.
My Summary: Lea is a refugee who has survived for the past few months living in the wild and traveling from house to random house, just trying to stay alive. When she is found, ill, by American soldiers and taken care of and healed, she has a choice—leave the soldiers and spend the winter by herself, homeless, with no protection in the middle of a war, or trade sex for protection and safety from Major Russell. She chooses the exchange. But Lea and Russell both are not prepared for the outcome of the bargain—Love. Lea and Russell are married, and try to build a real relationship from their original bargain. Can they make it work…
Thoughts: I really hate it when a book has what I call “happy-land syndrome—” where everything works out nicely, relationships are smooth and when they’re rough their fixed quickly and painlessly, and everyone lives happily ever after. This book does have a happily ever after of some sort, but it most certainly does not have happy-land syndrome. This book was a picture of a real marriage—the ups, the downs, the arguments, the forgiveness. There were clear differences between passion, lust, and love (which is always refreshing), and there were arguments the way real arguments happen. There was pride, there was sympathy, and there was forgiveness.
There was a lot of humor in this book! Now mind you it was not a “funny” book, but there were some very good funny pieces of dialogue.
Plot: This book didn’t have a complicated plot, or any huge unexpected occurrences. It was a “simple” story line—but it was a very addicting read. That’s not to say that everything that happened was dull or boring or expected, it just means it was definitely not a sitting-on-the-edge-of-your-seat kind of romance. It was more like a cuddle-up-with-a-cup-of-tea-and-a-blanket kind of romance. It flowed smoothly, and the pacing was very good—not to fast, not too slow. The only thing about the pacing was that the part where they realized that they’d fallen in love didn’t feel like any kind of climax. Which could have been the point, as it did sort of happen slowly.
Characters: I liked the fact that the characters in this book were like real people—they had their strengths and weaknesses, their qualities and their flaws. Lea was stubborn and rebellious, and not at all submissive to her husband, yet she was a sweet and kind girl, and was willing to make sacrifices for Russell. Russell was a very kind man to Lea, and his protective attitude was appealing, however his language and his anger were his downfalls.
Writing: The writing in this book was good. It wasn’t fantastically breathtaking (J.K. Rowling, Robert Frost, Paolini, Dostoyevsky etc.), it wasn’t mediocre (Stephenie Meyer, Becca Fitzpatrick) and it wasn’t atrocious (Meg Cabot.). I can’t really place it in any of those categories. It sort of fell between the first two. It was very readable, it wasn’t dull and empty of good words with barely acceptable sentence structure, but it wasn’t something that sounded like poetry read aloud either. Again, very readable.
Content: There was a lot of sex in this book. I mean, it’s a romance about a girl who trades her body in exchange for being kept alive by a horny soldier, and I expected it, so I’m not saying I was surprised. I think it could have still been a very good powerful romance without all the details. I skipped a few paragraphs here and there. There was also a lot of language. And yes, it is the military, after all. Soldiers swear. They did in the book, too. I guess some people aren’t bothered by stuff like that in books. It wasn’t so bad that I wanted to stop reading, but I thought some of the words (and again, details) could have been left out and the book would have been just as good.
Recommendation: Ages 16+ at least, and wait until you’re 18 if you are picky about content. I rate high for the wonderfully relatable and realistic characters, high-ish for my enjoyment, and medium for plot and writing.
Click here to read the first chapter of Sanctuary.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Alone (2020) in Movies
Nov 7, 2020
Fails To Live Up To It's Clone #Alive, Even Though It Was Made First (5/10)
Contains spoilers, click to show
Alone is a 2020 Survival/Horror movie directed by Johnny Martin and written by Matt Naylor. It was produced by Grindstone Entertainment Group and HIG Productions and distributed by Lionsgate. Producers who worked on the film include Rabih Aridi, Anne Jordan, and Johnny Martin. The movie stars Tyler Posey, Summer Spiro and Donald Sutherland.
Aiden (Tyler Posey) who lives alone in an apartment complex, learns of a mysterious rapidly-spreading disease that's causing its victims to attack and eat uninfected people. From his balcony, he can see his neighbors fleeing and others attacking one another. The news reports for people to hide and stay inside so he barricades himself inside his apartment and starts rationing food. His complex is overrun by those that are infected, and with the world falling apart into chaos, he is left completely alone fighting for his life and dealing with complete isolation.
This movie got me so confused in the beginning and not because it was confusing but because it was so similar to #Alive. I mean everything was happening the same in the movie, so much so that I was starting to believe they were made by the same company or something. I looked it up and what I found was that Alone was actually made before it's Korean counterpart #Alive and that #Alive was based off of the same script for Alone. That being said, I would have to say that #Alive is the better film. Alone is not a bad zombie film but having seen #Alive first, Alone fails to live up to it's Korean rival. There were some pretty cool scenes and the movie didn't lack action although it is a little slow paced here and there but just seemed lacking on a couple of fronts. I want to say more but I'm going to save it for the spoiler section. As is I give this movie a 5/10. It's a decent movie and good zombie movie but didn't do anything to go above and beyond. Felt like your average zombie film.
Spoiler Section Review:
So this movie really freaked me out because of how everything plot wise was happening exactly like the movie #Alive. Like how first thing in the movie he starts seeing neighbors going berserk and attacking people, then how he hears the report on the news and how a neighbor barges into his apartment to escape the infected on his floor. It even unfolds the same way from there that the guy is bitten and infected already and how Aiden (Tyler Posey) goes to the kitchen for a knife and kicks the guy out of his apartment as he is transforming into a zombie. So many things happen the exact same from the movie #Alive like how he runs out of food and water, how he tries to kill himself and how he finds out that there is another survivor in the complex which is a girl (Summer Spiro) who he starts communicating with and helps him mentally from going stir crazy. The similarities made this movie way more predictable then normal but I was still going along for the ride because it was interesting enough for a first time watch but I don't feel there is really anything to watch this movie a second time for. Aiden's personality and character were pretty dull and didn't make you empathize with him much. Summer Spiro as Eva was more charming but also didn't have alot to get you invested in her character. The zombies or infected were pretty horrible too with most looking like they were just people who twitched and ran around and less like actual zombies. Also I have a hang up on zombies that don't eat people but look like they just want to spread a disease/virus and I felt like for some of them in this movie it looked liked they weren't really eating their victims. This movie wasn't as scary or cool as #Alive but like I said it's not terrible but suffers from a lot of things that could have been done different. I gave this movie a 5/10.
Aiden (Tyler Posey) who lives alone in an apartment complex, learns of a mysterious rapidly-spreading disease that's causing its victims to attack and eat uninfected people. From his balcony, he can see his neighbors fleeing and others attacking one another. The news reports for people to hide and stay inside so he barricades himself inside his apartment and starts rationing food. His complex is overrun by those that are infected, and with the world falling apart into chaos, he is left completely alone fighting for his life and dealing with complete isolation.
This movie got me so confused in the beginning and not because it was confusing but because it was so similar to #Alive. I mean everything was happening the same in the movie, so much so that I was starting to believe they were made by the same company or something. I looked it up and what I found was that Alone was actually made before it's Korean counterpart #Alive and that #Alive was based off of the same script for Alone. That being said, I would have to say that #Alive is the better film. Alone is not a bad zombie film but having seen #Alive first, Alone fails to live up to it's Korean rival. There were some pretty cool scenes and the movie didn't lack action although it is a little slow paced here and there but just seemed lacking on a couple of fronts. I want to say more but I'm going to save it for the spoiler section. As is I give this movie a 5/10. It's a decent movie and good zombie movie but didn't do anything to go above and beyond. Felt like your average zombie film.
Spoiler Section Review:
So this movie really freaked me out because of how everything plot wise was happening exactly like the movie #Alive. Like how first thing in the movie he starts seeing neighbors going berserk and attacking people, then how he hears the report on the news and how a neighbor barges into his apartment to escape the infected on his floor. It even unfolds the same way from there that the guy is bitten and infected already and how Aiden (Tyler Posey) goes to the kitchen for a knife and kicks the guy out of his apartment as he is transforming into a zombie. So many things happen the exact same from the movie #Alive like how he runs out of food and water, how he tries to kill himself and how he finds out that there is another survivor in the complex which is a girl (Summer Spiro) who he starts communicating with and helps him mentally from going stir crazy. The similarities made this movie way more predictable then normal but I was still going along for the ride because it was interesting enough for a first time watch but I don't feel there is really anything to watch this movie a second time for. Aiden's personality and character were pretty dull and didn't make you empathize with him much. Summer Spiro as Eva was more charming but also didn't have alot to get you invested in her character. The zombies or infected were pretty horrible too with most looking like they were just people who twitched and ran around and less like actual zombies. Also I have a hang up on zombies that don't eat people but look like they just want to spread a disease/virus and I felt like for some of them in this movie it looked liked they weren't really eating their victims. This movie wasn't as scary or cool as #Alive but like I said it's not terrible but suffers from a lot of things that could have been done different. I gave this movie a 5/10.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Camelot Burning (Metal & Lace, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I don't know much about Arthurian Lore it's probably one of the only story I've never read in it's original form aside from the original Grimm Brothers' Fairy Tales (but those are horrifying, so I'm not even going to bother). I somehow doubt that Magic Tree House who made Morgan LeFay a harmless fly or Wizard101's Avalonian world even counts, except for maybe the latter being used as visual aid. :p
But personally that's sort of the thrill in reading a retelling without reading the original one: no judging or comparing it's a mostly complete blank slate.
Camelot Burning follows Vivienne, a lady-in-waiting and Merlin's Apprentice, who wants a way out of Camelot's way of life. She even has a plan hatched at least until Morgan Le Fay enters the picture and she has to stay to build a weapon that could ultimately save Camelot.
Merlin is actually a fun character am I weird to say that I found him drunk yet wise? It's not an easy combo since most drunk people act... well, not wise at all. While I'm not exactly warm and fuzzy with the other characters yet, Merlin is a winner.
There's a very interesting way with magic Rose introduces. Usually when it comes to magic, the price is something minor or huge, depending on whatever is asked very similar to karma (or fate or etc.). Here though... it's the ultimate price if you use magic too much: *cues ominous music* your soul. That's like selling your soul to the devil! Unless you're a creepy villain who wants to take over the world, that's not usually the ultimate price. Minor = minor payback. Major = major payback. No ifs buts or wait, what's after that? o_O
<img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dV7rlbVhpPk/UyjGVWubEkI/AAAAAAAACyA/ngeF1DAiEmk/s1600/tumblr_m5x9n1xf3D1rqfhi2o1_500.gif"; height="143" width="200">
Behind the Blog Tidbit: Camelot Burning was one of those novels who got a neutral rating (rawly speaking). I would have rounded up to a 4.5 rather than a 4, but I chose not to for a few reasons:
~ Too predictable It could just be me, but I guessed that <spoiler>Vivienne was the coordinates to Avalon and Morgan Le Fay was acting innocent as a distraction.</spoiler>
~ Too much technicalities I felt like I was reading a foreign language, and that was not the words used in magic. It all felt really confusing.
~ It said The End.
<img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lsFMKEdcrBc/UyjG4_6Sj3I/AAAAAAAACyM/Q0tKlJ9xOLw/s1600/th.jpg"; height="155" width="200">
That last bullet didn't play a major impact. It's just a minor peeve, especially when it's the first novel in the series.
I fully enjoyed reading Kathryn Rose's debut novel. Camelot Burning takes a refreshing and unique spin on Arthurian lore, or more accurately Arthurian + Fantasy + Steampunk.
-----------------
Advance Review Copy provided by Flux for review
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/05/arc-review-camelot-burning-by-kathryn-rose.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
But personally that's sort of the thrill in reading a retelling without reading the original one: no judging or comparing it's a mostly complete blank slate.
Camelot Burning follows Vivienne, a lady-in-waiting and Merlin's Apprentice, who wants a way out of Camelot's way of life. She even has a plan hatched at least until Morgan Le Fay enters the picture and she has to stay to build a weapon that could ultimately save Camelot.
Merlin is actually a fun character am I weird to say that I found him drunk yet wise? It's not an easy combo since most drunk people act... well, not wise at all. While I'm not exactly warm and fuzzy with the other characters yet, Merlin is a winner.
There's a very interesting way with magic Rose introduces. Usually when it comes to magic, the price is something minor or huge, depending on whatever is asked very similar to karma (or fate or etc.). Here though... it's the ultimate price if you use magic too much: *cues ominous music* your soul. That's like selling your soul to the devil! Unless you're a creepy villain who wants to take over the world, that's not usually the ultimate price. Minor = minor payback. Major = major payback. No ifs buts or wait, what's after that? o_O
<img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dV7rlbVhpPk/UyjGVWubEkI/AAAAAAAACyA/ngeF1DAiEmk/s1600/tumblr_m5x9n1xf3D1rqfhi2o1_500.gif"; height="143" width="200">
Behind the Blog Tidbit: Camelot Burning was one of those novels who got a neutral rating (rawly speaking). I would have rounded up to a 4.5 rather than a 4, but I chose not to for a few reasons:
~ Too predictable It could just be me, but I guessed that <spoiler>Vivienne was the coordinates to Avalon and Morgan Le Fay was acting innocent as a distraction.</spoiler>
~ Too much technicalities I felt like I was reading a foreign language, and that was not the words used in magic. It all felt really confusing.
~ It said The End.
<img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lsFMKEdcrBc/UyjG4_6Sj3I/AAAAAAAACyM/Q0tKlJ9xOLw/s1600/th.jpg"; height="155" width="200">
That last bullet didn't play a major impact. It's just a minor peeve, especially when it's the first novel in the series.
I fully enjoyed reading Kathryn Rose's debut novel. Camelot Burning takes a refreshing and unique spin on Arthurian lore, or more accurately Arthurian + Fantasy + Steampunk.
-----------------
Advance Review Copy provided by Flux for review
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/05/arc-review-camelot-burning-by-kathryn-rose.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gi5Rk5yLloA/UtliaUbdL3I/AAAAAAAACbE/J27z92_qrYU/s1600/Official+Banner.png"; /></a>
Midge (525 KP) rated The Shadow Between Us in Books
Mar 23, 2019
A Moving & Poignant Novel
Carol Mason, the best-selling author of ’After You Left’ has written an incredibly moving and poignant novel in this slow-burn, very beautiful work of fiction.
Olivia moves to the pretty coastal town of Port Townsend, with her marriage on-the-rocks, and her life in pieces. She doesn’t know if things with her husband Mark are truly over, or quite why the phone call she longs for on her daughter’s birthday will never come.
After joining a letter-writing club held at her local cafe she meets Ned, an ex-soldier badly wounded in Afghanistan. This chance friendship revives unexpected emotions and memories she’d rather forget.
Can Olivia find the courage to confront what she’s hiding from and finally begin to heal the wounds that have torn her life apart?
Liv, as she is known to her husband, is an extremely intriguing character. Regularly displaying a cocktail of emotions, I could still really empathise with her. She could be caring and thoughtful one minute, but then be frank, blunt and very much to-the-point, the next moment. At times she was positively distant and unkind. She was not alone in her attitude and behaviour as some of the other characters in the story shared similar traits such as cafe owner Beth. For me, this added to and complemented this wonderful character-driven story.
THE SHADOW BETWEEN US was a very insightful and thought-provoking read about reflecting on the mistakes we sometimes make and finding hope in second chances. I
very much liked the emphasis on letter-writing, reading and quotes from favourite books, running throughout the story.
The dialogue between Olivia and Ned was lovely and liked how they had an almost immediate connection. I was very keen to see how their relationship might develop. I found THE SHADOW BETWEEN US a very enjoyable read, helped by Carol Mason’s beautiful writing which has depth and substance. The ending was very fulfilling although with an unexpected twist. I will definitely be reading more of her books in the future.
[Thanks to #NetGalley, Lake Union Publishing and Carol Mason for my ARC of #TheShadowBetweenUs in exchange for an honest review.]
Olivia moves to the pretty coastal town of Port Townsend, with her marriage on-the-rocks, and her life in pieces. She doesn’t know if things with her husband Mark are truly over, or quite why the phone call she longs for on her daughter’s birthday will never come.
After joining a letter-writing club held at her local cafe she meets Ned, an ex-soldier badly wounded in Afghanistan. This chance friendship revives unexpected emotions and memories she’d rather forget.
Can Olivia find the courage to confront what she’s hiding from and finally begin to heal the wounds that have torn her life apart?
Liv, as she is known to her husband, is an extremely intriguing character. Regularly displaying a cocktail of emotions, I could still really empathise with her. She could be caring and thoughtful one minute, but then be frank, blunt and very much to-the-point, the next moment. At times she was positively distant and unkind. She was not alone in her attitude and behaviour as some of the other characters in the story shared similar traits such as cafe owner Beth. For me, this added to and complemented this wonderful character-driven story.
THE SHADOW BETWEEN US was a very insightful and thought-provoking read about reflecting on the mistakes we sometimes make and finding hope in second chances. I
very much liked the emphasis on letter-writing, reading and quotes from favourite books, running throughout the story.
The dialogue between Olivia and Ned was lovely and liked how they had an almost immediate connection. I was very keen to see how their relationship might develop. I found THE SHADOW BETWEEN US a very enjoyable read, helped by Carol Mason’s beautiful writing which has depth and substance. The ending was very fulfilling although with an unexpected twist. I will definitely be reading more of her books in the future.
[Thanks to #NetGalley, Lake Union Publishing and Carol Mason for my ARC of #TheShadowBetweenUs in exchange for an honest review.]
BookwormMama14 (18 KP) rated The Golden Braid (Hagenheim, #6) in Books
Jan 2, 2019
A classic fairy tale, re-imagined like you would never believe! Experience the story of Rapunzel through new eyes.
Rapunzel is an accomplished artist and can throw a dagger better than anyone, however, she longs to learn how to read. When yet another young man proposes marriage to Rapunzel, Mother Gothel whisks them away to the city of Hagenheim. And her dream of learning to read might actually become a reality. When the handsome knight, Sir Gerek, saves them on the road, her opportunity to learn may be here at last! But Rapunzel has been brought up to fear everyone and everything in life. Especially men, claiming that none can be trusted. Despite this fact, Sir Gerek agrees to teach Rapunzel to read. As the story unfolds, truths are revealed, and everything Rapunzel has come to believe about herself changes. Will she find her "Happily Ever After?" Or will she allow fear to consume her as it does for so many.
The Golden Braid is not your typical "Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair!" re-telling of this classic fairy tale. There are deep truths and weighty lessons that resonate deep within your soul. We have all faced fears.
Have we allowed fear blind us to the truth that our Heavenly Father is protecting us and guiding us? Sometimes bad things happen, and we may never know why. But as children of God we must trust that He knows what He is doing and that He will guide our path. Love is another powerful aspect of this story. That human love, no matter how deep and true, will never be able to satisfy like God's love. While we need earthly love from our family and spouse, we must ultimately cling to the true love our Father love above all others. I had very high expectations for this book and Melanie Dickerson blew them all out of the water! I can not believe I have not read her books before now. I am thrilled to have found her books and am eagerly anticipating reading her next book: A Spy's Devotion.
I received a free digital copy of The Golden Braid from Thomas Nelson Publishers through NetGalley in exchange for my honest review.
Rapunzel is an accomplished artist and can throw a dagger better than anyone, however, she longs to learn how to read. When yet another young man proposes marriage to Rapunzel, Mother Gothel whisks them away to the city of Hagenheim. And her dream of learning to read might actually become a reality. When the handsome knight, Sir Gerek, saves them on the road, her opportunity to learn may be here at last! But Rapunzel has been brought up to fear everyone and everything in life. Especially men, claiming that none can be trusted. Despite this fact, Sir Gerek agrees to teach Rapunzel to read. As the story unfolds, truths are revealed, and everything Rapunzel has come to believe about herself changes. Will she find her "Happily Ever After?" Or will she allow fear to consume her as it does for so many.
The Golden Braid is not your typical "Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair!" re-telling of this classic fairy tale. There are deep truths and weighty lessons that resonate deep within your soul. We have all faced fears.
Have we allowed fear blind us to the truth that our Heavenly Father is protecting us and guiding us? Sometimes bad things happen, and we may never know why. But as children of God we must trust that He knows what He is doing and that He will guide our path. Love is another powerful aspect of this story. That human love, no matter how deep and true, will never be able to satisfy like God's love. While we need earthly love from our family and spouse, we must ultimately cling to the true love our Father love above all others. I had very high expectations for this book and Melanie Dickerson blew them all out of the water! I can not believe I have not read her books before now. I am thrilled to have found her books and am eagerly anticipating reading her next book: A Spy's Devotion.
I received a free digital copy of The Golden Braid from Thomas Nelson Publishers through NetGalley in exchange for my honest review.
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Peanut Butter Falcon (2019) in Movies
Oct 22, 2019 (Updated Oct 22, 2019)
Rule No.1........ Party!
The Peanutbutter Falcon is a heartwarming and charming tale of belonging, ambition and family. I've always loved and admired Shia labeouf and despite all the hate he gets I really do think he is an incredible actor and with how good this movie is I really hope people start to see that. Zak is a person with downs syndrome who escapes from his care home to peruse his dream of becoming a wrestler and upon meeting Shia's character the two form a bond and set of on an adventure together. Seeing these two very different personalities form a friendship is just so beautiful, powerful and endearing with Shia's character tormented/held back by guilt and Zack gottsagen's character desperate to be free to enjoy life, party and be taken seriously. Theres such a great redneck world built here and whilst the film is odd its also so pure with a charming weirdness so realistic you could mistake the film for being a true story. Themes of loss, guilt, motivation, happiness and destiny as well as the line between good and evil. However what I found really interesting was the messages about mental health/learning difficulties/oldage and how we tend to treat people with these conditions like they aren't human too. It even depicts how most people who work in the care industry fail to grasp that these people are just like us and how restricting, patronising and telling them no all the time is inhumane and leads to failing to truly understand them/form a bond with them. Performances are outstanding from both the mains really depicting two different inner struggles and personalities coming together during difficult times thus giving them purpose and hope. Its also stunning to look at too with a perfect soundtrack. If I had to I would liken this movie to Oh brother where art thou and while it does have some great humour it leans more to the serious side most of the time showing us not all families are perfect but no matter how dysfunctional they are the love is no less. Such a lovely film that even made me shed a few tears too.
