Search
BookwormMama14 (18 KP) rated Dauntless (Valiant Hearts, #1) in Books
Jan 2, 2019
Medieval England, the ruthless King John sits on the throne. And Lady Merry Ellison has but one mission: To see to the safety of her “men”.
Set in the year 1216, England is in ruin. The nation is divided, scores of outlaws live in the forest and they do what they must to survive. Lady Merry will do anything to protect the orphans that make up their band known as “The Ghosts of Farthingale Forest”. Timothy Grey longs to become someone of power and authority. So he sets out to capture the ghosts, not knowing who their leader is. Will he turn in the ghosts and earn approval from his master? Or will he follow his heart and the leading of God?
Dauntless is the first book that I have read by Dina Sleiman, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. It was very engaging and quite the page turner. I loved how she used older English, but not so “olde” that I couldn’t understand the book. The “Historical Notes” were very informative and helpful to read. I wish I would have read it first, even thought there are a few spoilers in it. Her portrayal of the supernatural was very vivid. I liked it a lot! This story was a good reminder that things happen in our lives that we don’t always understand. But we must remember that God has a purpose for everything. Although we may never know why, we must trust Him and know that He truly knows best. Yes, I know, easier said than done. But in this story, the journey of reestablishing faith in God was amazing to behold and I pray that it brings you hope.
I received a free digital edition of Dauntless from Bethany House Publishers through NetGalley in exchange for my honest review.
Set in the year 1216, England is in ruin. The nation is divided, scores of outlaws live in the forest and they do what they must to survive. Lady Merry will do anything to protect the orphans that make up their band known as “The Ghosts of Farthingale Forest”. Timothy Grey longs to become someone of power and authority. So he sets out to capture the ghosts, not knowing who their leader is. Will he turn in the ghosts and earn approval from his master? Or will he follow his heart and the leading of God?
Dauntless is the first book that I have read by Dina Sleiman, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. It was very engaging and quite the page turner. I loved how she used older English, but not so “olde” that I couldn’t understand the book. The “Historical Notes” were very informative and helpful to read. I wish I would have read it first, even thought there are a few spoilers in it. Her portrayal of the supernatural was very vivid. I liked it a lot! This story was a good reminder that things happen in our lives that we don’t always understand. But we must remember that God has a purpose for everything. Although we may never know why, we must trust Him and know that He truly knows best. Yes, I know, easier said than done. But in this story, the journey of reestablishing faith in God was amazing to behold and I pray that it brings you hope.
I received a free digital edition of Dauntless from Bethany House Publishers through NetGalley in exchange for my honest review.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Bag Man (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Sometimes it sucks to be a delivery guy when you don’t know what you are
carrying in a tightly sealed leather bag. Anything can happen when too many
people are interested in what The Bag Man is carrying when it gets a
limited theatrical run starting Feb 28th.
When Jack (John Cusack) is a fixer/hitman under the employ of Dragna
(Robert De Niro), a crime lord — tasked to bring a leather bag to a seedy
hotel — the people he runs into are more shadier than he is. All he has to
do is to wait for the arrival of this gangster and not look at what’s
inside.
Both the movie and night is long while Jack fends for himself. His dealings
with the motel manager (beautifully played by Crispin Glover) is far more
interesting than the lady of the night, Rivka (Rebecca Da Costa), he meets.
Together what they end up in is a cat and mouse game of nearly everybody
from this sleepy hole-in-the-wall after them. Everyone is interested in
what the bag contains, and this Macguffin never strays far from the plot.
Even though the concept of what’s in the bag is hardly original, this
narrative device will keep some people — characters included — invested
in wondering what’s so important about it. When the contents are revealed,
will what’s revealed be King Midas’ gold or the evils from Pandora’s Box?
This loose thriller has its moments where viewers will be glued to the
suspense but ultimately, it’s this movie’s pacing that slows the action
down. Losing 10-15 minutes might help in keeping the tale tight.
That can help everyone, audience included, from not losing interest. Sooner
or later, the cat has to be let out of the bag.
carrying in a tightly sealed leather bag. Anything can happen when too many
people are interested in what The Bag Man is carrying when it gets a
limited theatrical run starting Feb 28th.
When Jack (John Cusack) is a fixer/hitman under the employ of Dragna
(Robert De Niro), a crime lord — tasked to bring a leather bag to a seedy
hotel — the people he runs into are more shadier than he is. All he has to
do is to wait for the arrival of this gangster and not look at what’s
inside.
Both the movie and night is long while Jack fends for himself. His dealings
with the motel manager (beautifully played by Crispin Glover) is far more
interesting than the lady of the night, Rivka (Rebecca Da Costa), he meets.
Together what they end up in is a cat and mouse game of nearly everybody
from this sleepy hole-in-the-wall after them. Everyone is interested in
what the bag contains, and this Macguffin never strays far from the plot.
Even though the concept of what’s in the bag is hardly original, this
narrative device will keep some people — characters included — invested
in wondering what’s so important about it. When the contents are revealed,
will what’s revealed be King Midas’ gold or the evils from Pandora’s Box?
This loose thriller has its moments where viewers will be glued to the
suspense but ultimately, it’s this movie’s pacing that slows the action
down. Losing 10-15 minutes might help in keeping the tale tight.
That can help everyone, audience included, from not losing interest. Sooner
or later, the cat has to be let out of the bag.
The Man Who Saw the Future: A Biography of William Lilly
Book
Winter, 1643. Astrologer William Lilly is gazing at a pot of piss. Parliament has asked him to help:...
Catch That Tiger
Noel Botham and Bruce Montague
Book
With exclusive access toprivate diariesand dozens of photographs, this is theincredible story of one...
His Truth is Marching On
Book
John Lewis, who at age twenty-five marched in Selma, Alabama, and was beaten on the Edmund Pettus...
Punk Drunk And Trembling by Wild Beasts
8.3
Rate It
Album Watch
England's Wild Beasts were founded in 2002 by Hayden Thorpe (guitar, vocals) and Ben Little...
indie
Tombland (The Shardlake series Book 7)
Book
Summer, 1549. Two years after the death of Henry VIII, England is sliding into chaos . . . The...
Robin Hood: Hero of the People
6.0
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Play as Robin Hood and his merry men in this solo card game. As Robin Hood you’ll rob from the...
Mandy and G.D. Burkhead (26 KP) rated The Book of Kings in Books
May 20, 2018
Shelf Life – The Book of Kings Has a Few Gems and a Few Warts
Contains spoilers, click to show
Unlike other short story anthologies I could mention, this one wasn’t mostly horrible. Instead, the stories inside run the gamut from stupid to brilliant and from annoying to nothing special to fun and memorable. A little something for everyone, then.
So since I can’t review it with one blanket sentiment, let’s instead take a quick look at a handful of the 20 all-original stories inside. The following are the tales that most stood out to me during my reading, for better or worse.
“The Kiss” by Alan Dean Foster – A woman walking through a snowy city finds a frog who says he’s a prince, so she kisses him. He turns into a guy and stabs her to death.
Oh boy, we’re not off to a great start here. This story could have been told in a page or so and been an interesting twist on the old tale, but instead the author drew it out over three pages by choosing the absolute most pretentious choice of words for every damn sentence. The guy doesn’t stab the woman, his “knife describes a Gothic arc.” She doesn’t shout or whisper or ask what’s going on, she “expels a querrelous trauma.” It’s not snowing on her face, “trifles of ice as beautiful as they were capricious tickled her exposed cheeks, only to be turned into simulacra of tears as they were instantly metamorphosed by the bundled furnace of her body.”
Yes, really.
The sheer purpleness of this prose might be excused for a deliberately lofty and overwrought tale, but it absolutely does not fit a story about a girl getting shanked by a frog on the street. If the contrast between what’s happening and how it’s presented is supposed to seem absolutely ridiculous, then it’s a success. This reads more like a writing exercise for seeing how unbearably melodramatic you can tell a simple story that the author went ahead and published anyway. I only read it last night as of the time of this particular bit of review, but I still have a headache.
“Divine Right” by Nancy Holder – A king grieving for his recently passed daughter and only heir tries to figure out how to keep his legacy from dying out and eventually decides on a way to choose a successor, sealing his decision by making a pact with God.
I really liked this one, partly for the great characterization of the king via his priorities. He’s not a bastion of righteousness or a tyrannical despot. He might be a pretty decent ruler, or he might not, depending on your priorities and the angle from which you view him. Mostly he’s written to be believable for his position and time period, pride and failings and all.
But what really sealed this story for me was the ironic bent of the plot that I can’t really discuss in any more depth without spoiling it except to say that it definitely fit with the tone and left an appropriate message. So let’s just give it a thumbs up and leave it at that.
“In the Name of the King” by Judith Tarr – If you know the story of Hatshepsut, an Egyptian queen who ruled as Pharaoh, then this is an extra interesting story. It follows both Hatshepsut and her lover in the afterlife and the legacy they’re leaving behind after their deaths, in which they take a surprisingly active interest for dead people.
If you know your history, though, you know where this is going, and it’s very touching as it gets there. It’s also character-centric in a way that makes its dead cast members seem very much alive. This one’s a good contender for my favorite story in the whole anthology.
“Please to See the King” by Debra Doyle and James D. Macdonald – A small glimpse of about one evening each into the lives of two seemingly unrelated, seemingly unimportant men against the backdrop of the battles being fought over a vague and distant rebellion against a vague and distant crown.
To say more would be to spoil the story, which is short, sweet, and interesting. It gives you just enough details, and no more, that you can piece together a much deeper story with room left for speculation about who certain characters really were and what exactly just happened. I’ve spent more time thinking about how the ending may be interpreted than it took me to read it, which is a good sign of nuance done right.
“The Name of a King” by Diana L. Paxson – This’n c’n rightf’ly b’ put in w’ th’ other st’ries I woul’n’t oth’rwise b’ther t’ mention ‘cept fer th’ o’erwrought dialectic style o’ nearly all o’ th’ dialogue, whut c’n git on yer nerves right quick-like whene’er any’ne op’ns their mouths. An’ while I’m ‘ere, th’ settin’ w’s rife wi’ plen’y o’ hints at deeper d’tails whut was ne’er sufficien’ly delved into or whut impact’d th’ actu’l plot much. Felt like part o’ a fant’sy series whut I was ‘spected t’ b’ f’miliar wit’ but wasn’t, an’ whut di’n’t give me ’nuff t’ git f’miliar wit’ just fr’m this st’ry.
Oth’rwise, t’w’sn’t t’ b’d, I s’pose. Bit borin’.
“Coda: Working Stiff” by Mike Resnick and Nicholas A. DiChario – This one was just fun. Again trying not to give away any twists or revelations, this one follows a journalist interviewing a bus driver who used to be a big, famous king back in his heyday but is now content (or so he says) with his obscure life of working a simple job in the day and drinking in his spartan home at night.
Who this ex-king really is probably isn’t who you think it’s gonna be at first, but the story does still technically, and cheekily, fit in with the premise of the book overall. It reminds me very much of something Neil Gaiman might have written, or maybe Terry Pratchett if he’d decided to tackle the kingly premise from a more modern and realistic approach.
There are still 14 stories left in here, many of which are also good reads, or at least decent. In fact, looking back through it again, the only real dud that stands out to me is “The Kiss.” The weakest of what’s left are either adaptations of stories that didn’t really do it for me (“The Tale of Lady Ashburn” by John Gregory Betancourt) or weird original works that weren’t really memorable in what they set out to do (“A Parker House Roll” by Dean Wesley Smith).
Overall, The Book of Kings is a fun and interesting romp through a number of royal worlds, themes, and tones. As such, anyone who gives it a look will probably have the same general sentiment I did at the end, with a few things to like and a few to point to as examples of what doesn’t work for them. Me, I got a bit of the inspiration I was looking for and a few memorable tales out of it, so I’ll forgive the warts.
So since I can’t review it with one blanket sentiment, let’s instead take a quick look at a handful of the 20 all-original stories inside. The following are the tales that most stood out to me during my reading, for better or worse.
“The Kiss” by Alan Dean Foster – A woman walking through a snowy city finds a frog who says he’s a prince, so she kisses him. He turns into a guy and stabs her to death.
Oh boy, we’re not off to a great start here. This story could have been told in a page or so and been an interesting twist on the old tale, but instead the author drew it out over three pages by choosing the absolute most pretentious choice of words for every damn sentence. The guy doesn’t stab the woman, his “knife describes a Gothic arc.” She doesn’t shout or whisper or ask what’s going on, she “expels a querrelous trauma.” It’s not snowing on her face, “trifles of ice as beautiful as they were capricious tickled her exposed cheeks, only to be turned into simulacra of tears as they were instantly metamorphosed by the bundled furnace of her body.”
Yes, really.
The sheer purpleness of this prose might be excused for a deliberately lofty and overwrought tale, but it absolutely does not fit a story about a girl getting shanked by a frog on the street. If the contrast between what’s happening and how it’s presented is supposed to seem absolutely ridiculous, then it’s a success. This reads more like a writing exercise for seeing how unbearably melodramatic you can tell a simple story that the author went ahead and published anyway. I only read it last night as of the time of this particular bit of review, but I still have a headache.
“Divine Right” by Nancy Holder – A king grieving for his recently passed daughter and only heir tries to figure out how to keep his legacy from dying out and eventually decides on a way to choose a successor, sealing his decision by making a pact with God.
I really liked this one, partly for the great characterization of the king via his priorities. He’s not a bastion of righteousness or a tyrannical despot. He might be a pretty decent ruler, or he might not, depending on your priorities and the angle from which you view him. Mostly he’s written to be believable for his position and time period, pride and failings and all.
But what really sealed this story for me was the ironic bent of the plot that I can’t really discuss in any more depth without spoiling it except to say that it definitely fit with the tone and left an appropriate message. So let’s just give it a thumbs up and leave it at that.
“In the Name of the King” by Judith Tarr – If you know the story of Hatshepsut, an Egyptian queen who ruled as Pharaoh, then this is an extra interesting story. It follows both Hatshepsut and her lover in the afterlife and the legacy they’re leaving behind after their deaths, in which they take a surprisingly active interest for dead people.
If you know your history, though, you know where this is going, and it’s very touching as it gets there. It’s also character-centric in a way that makes its dead cast members seem very much alive. This one’s a good contender for my favorite story in the whole anthology.
“Please to See the King” by Debra Doyle and James D. Macdonald – A small glimpse of about one evening each into the lives of two seemingly unrelated, seemingly unimportant men against the backdrop of the battles being fought over a vague and distant rebellion against a vague and distant crown.
To say more would be to spoil the story, which is short, sweet, and interesting. It gives you just enough details, and no more, that you can piece together a much deeper story with room left for speculation about who certain characters really were and what exactly just happened. I’ve spent more time thinking about how the ending may be interpreted than it took me to read it, which is a good sign of nuance done right.
“The Name of a King” by Diana L. Paxson – This’n c’n rightf’ly b’ put in w’ th’ other st’ries I woul’n’t oth’rwise b’ther t’ mention ‘cept fer th’ o’erwrought dialectic style o’ nearly all o’ th’ dialogue, whut c’n git on yer nerves right quick-like whene’er any’ne op’ns their mouths. An’ while I’m ‘ere, th’ settin’ w’s rife wi’ plen’y o’ hints at deeper d’tails whut was ne’er sufficien’ly delved into or whut impact’d th’ actu’l plot much. Felt like part o’ a fant’sy series whut I was ‘spected t’ b’ f’miliar wit’ but wasn’t, an’ whut di’n’t give me ’nuff t’ git f’miliar wit’ just fr’m this st’ry.
Oth’rwise, t’w’sn’t t’ b’d, I s’pose. Bit borin’.
“Coda: Working Stiff” by Mike Resnick and Nicholas A. DiChario – This one was just fun. Again trying not to give away any twists or revelations, this one follows a journalist interviewing a bus driver who used to be a big, famous king back in his heyday but is now content (or so he says) with his obscure life of working a simple job in the day and drinking in his spartan home at night.
Who this ex-king really is probably isn’t who you think it’s gonna be at first, but the story does still technically, and cheekily, fit in with the premise of the book overall. It reminds me very much of something Neil Gaiman might have written, or maybe Terry Pratchett if he’d decided to tackle the kingly premise from a more modern and realistic approach.
There are still 14 stories left in here, many of which are also good reads, or at least decent. In fact, looking back through it again, the only real dud that stands out to me is “The Kiss.” The weakest of what’s left are either adaptations of stories that didn’t really do it for me (“The Tale of Lady Ashburn” by John Gregory Betancourt) or weird original works that weren’t really memorable in what they set out to do (“A Parker House Roll” by Dean Wesley Smith).
Overall, The Book of Kings is a fun and interesting romp through a number of royal worlds, themes, and tones. As such, anyone who gives it a look will probably have the same general sentiment I did at the end, with a few things to like and a few to point to as examples of what doesn’t work for them. Me, I got a bit of the inspiration I was looking for and a few memorable tales out of it, so I’ll forgive the warts.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (2019) in Movies
Oct 15, 2019
In “Maleficent: Mistress of Evil”; Angelina Jolie returns as the title character to the smash Live-Action film based on the classic Fairy Tale and Animated film.
In the years since the last film ended; Aurora (Elle Fanning) has relished in her role as Princess over the Moors and all of the enchanted creatures that live within it. When she accepts a proposal from Prince Phillip (Harris Dickinson), this sets off a chain of celebratory events as they all prepare for the big day which will unite the two lands.
Phillip’s parents King John (Robert Lindsay) and Queen Ingrith (Michelle Pfeiffer) are eager for the union while Maleficent strongly opposes it and tells Aurora that there will be no wedding. When Aurora persists; Maleficent reluctantly accepts an invitation to dinner at the Castle where things soon go horribly wrong and Maleficent is accused of putting a curse on the King.
Injured while fleeing, Maleficent is wounded and takin in by others of her kind who are preparing for war against the humans as a dark and dangerous plan is underway and the survival of the enchanted creatures is threatened.
The film then becomes a tense adventure with plenty of action, magic, and fantasy which is a nice framework for the great visual effects of the film.
I had been concerned that the film might be too dark for the usual audience for this type of film and there are moments where my concerns are validated. However there is much more charm, fantasy and wonder in the film and if anyone has ever read the original Grimm Fairy Tales; they will know that this is considerably toned down compared to what they offered.
The film has some great visuals to it but they never overshadow the characters in the film as Jolie seems to be taking gleeful delight in playing the title character but allows herself to have some fun with the character at times which helps her emerge as a well-rounded character versus being a staple Fairy Tale Villain.
The film may take a bit of time getting up to the main events but it does so to give more time for the characters to develop which helps them stand out from the usual good/bad monikers given to many fantasy characters.
The supporting cast is solid especially the performances by Pfeiffer and Chiwetel Ejiofor who add much to the complexity of the film and also invoke many themes of discussion that mirrors what is happening in much of society today.
In the end the film delivers a strong performance by Jolie and plenty of magic to make this a modern Fairy Tale Disney classic in the making.
3.5 stars out of 5.
In the years since the last film ended; Aurora (Elle Fanning) has relished in her role as Princess over the Moors and all of the enchanted creatures that live within it. When she accepts a proposal from Prince Phillip (Harris Dickinson), this sets off a chain of celebratory events as they all prepare for the big day which will unite the two lands.
Phillip’s parents King John (Robert Lindsay) and Queen Ingrith (Michelle Pfeiffer) are eager for the union while Maleficent strongly opposes it and tells Aurora that there will be no wedding. When Aurora persists; Maleficent reluctantly accepts an invitation to dinner at the Castle where things soon go horribly wrong and Maleficent is accused of putting a curse on the King.
Injured while fleeing, Maleficent is wounded and takin in by others of her kind who are preparing for war against the humans as a dark and dangerous plan is underway and the survival of the enchanted creatures is threatened.
The film then becomes a tense adventure with plenty of action, magic, and fantasy which is a nice framework for the great visual effects of the film.
I had been concerned that the film might be too dark for the usual audience for this type of film and there are moments where my concerns are validated. However there is much more charm, fantasy and wonder in the film and if anyone has ever read the original Grimm Fairy Tales; they will know that this is considerably toned down compared to what they offered.
The film has some great visuals to it but they never overshadow the characters in the film as Jolie seems to be taking gleeful delight in playing the title character but allows herself to have some fun with the character at times which helps her emerge as a well-rounded character versus being a staple Fairy Tale Villain.
The film may take a bit of time getting up to the main events but it does so to give more time for the characters to develop which helps them stand out from the usual good/bad monikers given to many fantasy characters.
The supporting cast is solid especially the performances by Pfeiffer and Chiwetel Ejiofor who add much to the complexity of the film and also invoke many themes of discussion that mirrors what is happening in much of society today.
In the end the film delivers a strong performance by Jolie and plenty of magic to make this a modern Fairy Tale Disney classic in the making.
3.5 stars out of 5.