Search
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Mr. Deathmask in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<I>This book was sent to me by the author in exchange for an honest review.</I>
A satanic cult, an angel, a ghost, and lots of murder,<I> Mr. Deathmask</I> is a novel like none other. Horror-novelist Lee McGeorge has created a character that blurs the lines between good and evil. Members of a satanic cult in the heart of London are slowly being killed off one-by-one by a mysterious figure going by the name of Mr Deathmask. The murders shock the community, not only in their brutality but because the worshippers of the “one true Lord” should not be able to be harmed by another living being.
Mr Deathmask, so named for collecting the death masks of his victims, is a man with superhuman strength who is believed to be a “son of light”, i.e. an angel. Accompanied by a ghost of a girl, Magdalena, he plans to seek out and destroy the satanic cult before they can raise the son of the devil.
To begin with, it is not easy to differentiate between the good and the bad. On one side is the anonymous murderer, and the other, the perverted and barbaric sect with unearthly powers. But once innocent lives get tangled up in the violent fiasco, it is clear whom the readers are expected to root for.
Hiding behind the façade of doctors and other professionals in the public sector, the cult easily preys on vulnerable people, resorting to sickening methods to satisfy their abominable desires. Difficult as it is to read about these vile deeds, <i>Mr. Deathmask</i> becomes gripping, the race is on to prevent unnecessary death and get revenge for something that happened centuries ago.
<i>Mr. Deathmask</i> is not for the delicate-minded individual due to its violent and sexual nature. Plenty of expletives and foul terminology make up the narrative, which, although is to be expected in this nature of novel, is not the easiest story to stomach.
Unlike previous books with heavy themes or social connotations, Lee McGeorge has penned <i>Mr. Deathmask</i> as a form of entertainment rather than to challenge morals and judgement of his readers. However, it still has its fair share of shock tactics to keep the story going. It will certainly entertain fans of the author and the genre.
A satanic cult, an angel, a ghost, and lots of murder,<I> Mr. Deathmask</I> is a novel like none other. Horror-novelist Lee McGeorge has created a character that blurs the lines between good and evil. Members of a satanic cult in the heart of London are slowly being killed off one-by-one by a mysterious figure going by the name of Mr Deathmask. The murders shock the community, not only in their brutality but because the worshippers of the “one true Lord” should not be able to be harmed by another living being.
Mr Deathmask, so named for collecting the death masks of his victims, is a man with superhuman strength who is believed to be a “son of light”, i.e. an angel. Accompanied by a ghost of a girl, Magdalena, he plans to seek out and destroy the satanic cult before they can raise the son of the devil.
To begin with, it is not easy to differentiate between the good and the bad. On one side is the anonymous murderer, and the other, the perverted and barbaric sect with unearthly powers. But once innocent lives get tangled up in the violent fiasco, it is clear whom the readers are expected to root for.
Hiding behind the façade of doctors and other professionals in the public sector, the cult easily preys on vulnerable people, resorting to sickening methods to satisfy their abominable desires. Difficult as it is to read about these vile deeds, <i>Mr. Deathmask</i> becomes gripping, the race is on to prevent unnecessary death and get revenge for something that happened centuries ago.
<i>Mr. Deathmask</i> is not for the delicate-minded individual due to its violent and sexual nature. Plenty of expletives and foul terminology make up the narrative, which, although is to be expected in this nature of novel, is not the easiest story to stomach.
Unlike previous books with heavy themes or social connotations, Lee McGeorge has penned <i>Mr. Deathmask</i> as a form of entertainment rather than to challenge morals and judgement of his readers. However, it still has its fair share of shock tactics to keep the story going. It will certainly entertain fans of the author and the genre.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Bells On Her Toes in Books
Nov 8, 2019
When a body is discovered in a burnt-out barn, DCI Peter Hatherall and DI Fiona Williams are assigned to investigate. The barn is owned by a racehorse trainer and the two detectives struggle to penetrate the closed and secretive world of horse racing to uncover who the body is and why they were murdered. As the body count rises Hatharall's personal life starts to impact on his professional judgement putting not only the investigation but lives at risk.
The police procedural has a long and distinguished history and Febry does an excellent job in following the formula and adding enough twists and turns to keep the reader guessing. Everything is told from a personal point of view (mostly Williams') and the author does a great job in conveying personality through how events are described. One of the key suspects also provides some of their thoughts between chapters and this very effectively cranks the tension up.
The cast of characters is very convincing. The detective with personal problems has very much become a cliche but Hatherall is drawn in a very realistic and human light and is clearly struggling. Williams has her own relationship issues and their interaction has a ring of authenticity. The cast of suspects is wide and a number of them could easily be guily. What is certain is that it will take time for all the secrets to be uncovered.
The plot has many twists and plenty of red herrings for both the reader and the detectives to fall foul of. The stakes are constantly raised until the final confrontation.
When reading this book I was reminded of one of my favourite detective thriller novelists, Reginald Hill. The characterisation, the plot twists and some of the way Febry plays with the reader's expectations reminded so much of a Dalziel and Pascoe novel. I think that's a very fair comparison and although Peter Hathersall is not at all like Andy Dalziel he is still a detective who works with both facts and instinct
This books is part of a series (and indeed one of the other books in the series is mentioned in passing) and if this novel is anything to go by the series is one to read as soon as possible. Anyone who likes a good detective novel with interesting characters and plenty of twists will like this. A lot.
The police procedural has a long and distinguished history and Febry does an excellent job in following the formula and adding enough twists and turns to keep the reader guessing. Everything is told from a personal point of view (mostly Williams') and the author does a great job in conveying personality through how events are described. One of the key suspects also provides some of their thoughts between chapters and this very effectively cranks the tension up.
The cast of characters is very convincing. The detective with personal problems has very much become a cliche but Hatherall is drawn in a very realistic and human light and is clearly struggling. Williams has her own relationship issues and their interaction has a ring of authenticity. The cast of suspects is wide and a number of them could easily be guily. What is certain is that it will take time for all the secrets to be uncovered.
The plot has many twists and plenty of red herrings for both the reader and the detectives to fall foul of. The stakes are constantly raised until the final confrontation.
When reading this book I was reminded of one of my favourite detective thriller novelists, Reginald Hill. The characterisation, the plot twists and some of the way Febry plays with the reader's expectations reminded so much of a Dalziel and Pascoe novel. I think that's a very fair comparison and although Peter Hathersall is not at all like Andy Dalziel he is still a detective who works with both facts and instinct
This books is part of a series (and indeed one of the other books in the series is mentioned in passing) and if this novel is anything to go by the series is one to read as soon as possible. Anyone who likes a good detective novel with interesting characters and plenty of twists will like this. A lot.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back (1980) in Movies
May 6, 2020 (Updated May 6, 2020)
May The Force Be With You: The Middle
Empire Strikes Back- i heard that this movie is peoples, all time greatest/best sequel and the best movie out of the oringal trilogy. To me, no. Episode 4 and 6 are better. Their are excellent sences like.. the battle at Hoth, when Han gets Frozen and the battle between Dark Vader and Luke. The rest of the movie is slow and boring.
The plot: The adventure continues in this "Star Wars" sequel. Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher) and Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) face attack by the Imperial forces and its AT-AT walkers on the ice planet Hoth. While Han and Leia escape in the Millennium Falcon, Luke travels to Dagobah in search of Yoda. Only with the Jedi master's help will Luke survive when the dark side of the Force beckons him into the ultimate duel with Darth Vader (David Prowse).
To me their are better movie sequels than this one like.. "Back To The Future Part II", "Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers", "The Dark Knight", "Captain America: The Winter Soilder", "Toy Story 2", "Terminator 2: Judgement Day" and "Aliens". All of these sequels are 10x better than Empire Strikes Back.
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies – Nominated
AFI's 100 Years...100 Thrills – Nominated
AFI's 100 Years...100 Heroes and Villains:
Darth Vader – No. 3 Villain
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes:
"I am your father." – Nominated
"Do, or do not. There is no try." – Nominated
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies (10th
Anniversary Edition) – Nominated.
Darth Vader was ranked as the third-greatest film villain of all time in the American Film Institute's 2003 list of the 100 greatest heroes and villains, and Wizard magazine selected the ending of The Empire Strikes Back as the greatest cliffhanger of all time.
The line "No, I am your father" is often misquoted as "Luke, I am your father." The line was selected as one of the 400 nominees for the American Film Institute's 100 Years... 100 Movie Quotes, a list of the greatest American film quotes.
I think Empire Strikes Back, even though its good. Its overrated and hyped up, to the point were its not just not as good as people say it is.
Like i said its good, but not excellent.
The plot: The adventure continues in this "Star Wars" sequel. Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher) and Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) face attack by the Imperial forces and its AT-AT walkers on the ice planet Hoth. While Han and Leia escape in the Millennium Falcon, Luke travels to Dagobah in search of Yoda. Only with the Jedi master's help will Luke survive when the dark side of the Force beckons him into the ultimate duel with Darth Vader (David Prowse).
To me their are better movie sequels than this one like.. "Back To The Future Part II", "Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers", "The Dark Knight", "Captain America: The Winter Soilder", "Toy Story 2", "Terminator 2: Judgement Day" and "Aliens". All of these sequels are 10x better than Empire Strikes Back.
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies – Nominated
AFI's 100 Years...100 Thrills – Nominated
AFI's 100 Years...100 Heroes and Villains:
Darth Vader – No. 3 Villain
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes:
"I am your father." – Nominated
"Do, or do not. There is no try." – Nominated
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies (10th
Anniversary Edition) – Nominated.
Darth Vader was ranked as the third-greatest film villain of all time in the American Film Institute's 2003 list of the 100 greatest heroes and villains, and Wizard magazine selected the ending of The Empire Strikes Back as the greatest cliffhanger of all time.
The line "No, I am your father" is often misquoted as "Luke, I am your father." The line was selected as one of the 400 nominees for the American Film Institute's 100 Years... 100 Movie Quotes, a list of the greatest American film quotes.
I think Empire Strikes Back, even though its good. Its overrated and hyped up, to the point were its not just not as good as people say it is.
Like i said its good, but not excellent.
Les Fleurs du Mal by Rabit
6.0
Rate It
Album Watch
Les Fleurs Dul Mal is the absorbingly grotesque sophomore album by pioneering artist, DJ and label...
electronic experimental
Sailing toward Osiris
Tabletop Game
Pharaoh is dead and his funerary barge sails slowly down the Nile toward his tomb where his spirit...
BoardGames 2018Games EgyptianGames
Ross (3284 KP) rated Resistance in Books
Sep 20, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
A dystopian sci-fi tale in which people ("elementals") are split into 4 classes (air - artistic types, water - scientific types, fire - law-enforcing types, and earth - working class grunts) with a strict set of rules and beliefs to be followed. Any attempt to betray these rules would result in swift punishment by the peacekeepers.
Anaiya, one such peacekeeper, is tasked with finding and infiltrating a group of rebels who have started painting the word "resistance" on walls. In order to infiltrate them, she has to undergo a new untested treatment that tries to change her class from fire to air. Thereafter the tale is a pretty standard one of intrigue, plotting and red herrings.
For me the ideas behind the world were interesting, but not very well explained or explored early on. I realise with a book like this any attempt to do so would jar with the atmosphere it is trying to get at, but there are ways to deliver the information needed.
The storyline was pretty much paper-thin and sacrificed in order to have some lengthy, overly descriptive poetic narrative (for example at least 6 pages of the book is devoted to blow by blow accounts of pool matches). The supposed revelation at the end was such an obvious anti-climax as to be ridiculous. I took it to be a symbol of how Anaiya's treatment warped her judgement of who the main suspect is, but it was delivered as a big revelation.
The use of technology in sci-fi always annoys me - new tech that is not described and overly used, with a ridiculous name (a wristplate that can immediately tell you what substances are in your blood as well as heart rate etc, and also be used to download music, play music, communicate, pay for things etc etc).
Similarly, the plot to reveal the head of the resistance hinged on the use of some new technology invented by a member of the resistance itself. This was so flimsy as to be laughable. Also, the fact that a heavy-handed police force like the peacekeepers would look for such tenuous proof of the leadership of the resistance before acting is just plain wrong. The first few chapters, and some of the conversations Anaiya has after her change, serve to show how heavy-handed they are, and any hint of someone's involvement in such treasonous activity would result in swift action.
Overall, the book is atmospheric and interesting but quite badly executed.
And the word "trajectory" is massively overused and at times wrongly used.
Anaiya, one such peacekeeper, is tasked with finding and infiltrating a group of rebels who have started painting the word "resistance" on walls. In order to infiltrate them, she has to undergo a new untested treatment that tries to change her class from fire to air. Thereafter the tale is a pretty standard one of intrigue, plotting and red herrings.
For me the ideas behind the world were interesting, but not very well explained or explored early on. I realise with a book like this any attempt to do so would jar with the atmosphere it is trying to get at, but there are ways to deliver the information needed.
The storyline was pretty much paper-thin and sacrificed in order to have some lengthy, overly descriptive poetic narrative (for example at least 6 pages of the book is devoted to blow by blow accounts of pool matches). The supposed revelation at the end was such an obvious anti-climax as to be ridiculous. I took it to be a symbol of how Anaiya's treatment warped her judgement of who the main suspect is, but it was delivered as a big revelation.
The use of technology in sci-fi always annoys me - new tech that is not described and overly used, with a ridiculous name (a wristplate that can immediately tell you what substances are in your blood as well as heart rate etc, and also be used to download music, play music, communicate, pay for things etc etc).
Similarly, the plot to reveal the head of the resistance hinged on the use of some new technology invented by a member of the resistance itself. This was so flimsy as to be laughable. Also, the fact that a heavy-handed police force like the peacekeepers would look for such tenuous proof of the leadership of the resistance before acting is just plain wrong. The first few chapters, and some of the conversations Anaiya has after her change, serve to show how heavy-handed they are, and any hint of someone's involvement in such treasonous activity would result in swift action.
Overall, the book is atmospheric and interesting but quite badly executed.
And the word "trajectory" is massively overused and at times wrongly used.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Bad Moms (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019 (Updated Aug 6, 2019)
When moms get tired of being perfect, not being appreciated and decide to give their spoiled children a lesson and just enjoy every minute of their day instead – that’s when the movie Bad Moms happens.
Amy Mitchell (Mila Kunis) is a 32-year-old modern mom, who has a seemingly perfect life: a great marriage, over-achieving kids, a beautiful home and a career. However, she is over-worked and so exhausted that she’s reached the point where she is about to snap. Her life has been reduced to spending a lot of time driving her kids to their extracurricular activities and trying to be just in time for everything. Her perfect life is just a smoke screen, her husband Mike (David Walton) has been unemployed for a while, doesn’t care about helping with anything house- or kids-related, and enjoys a little bit too much online entertainment. In addition to being spoiled, her daughter Jane (Oona Laurence) has some anxiety issues and her son Dylan (Emjay Anthony) has never done his own homework. To make it even more interesting, Amy has to deal with the judgement of PTA Queen, Bee Gwendolyn, (Christina Applegate) and her minions Stacy (Jada Pinkett Smith) and Vicky (Annie Mumolo).
After one hectic day, all Amy can do is stop at a bar and grab a glass of whiskey. There she meets two other underappreciated moms, Kiki (Kristen Bell) and Carla (Kathryn Hahn). Over drinks they vent and declare that they’re tired of living up to expectations and not being appreciated for all their hard work. So they decide to be bad moms.
I love seeing Christina Applegate as the villain; she is smart, evil and pulls all the strings, driving everyone to the edge but nobody can say anything because they’re terrified of her. But the one that dominates the comedy is Kathryn Hann. You would think you might be tired of seeing her in just about every movie released in the last 10 years, but oh boy is this woman hilarious! She plays the divorced working mother whose every line, good or bad, makes the audience ask again and again “Did she just say that?”
I really enjoyed this movie. It is the perfect summer comedy that all audiences can enjoy, especially moms who can really relate. This is The Hangover for moms. I assure you will laugh nonstop because it has a wild drunk trip to the grocery store, a memorable show-and-tell demonstration and a really funny lecture about unflattering bras. I promise you will leave the theater with a smile.
Amy Mitchell (Mila Kunis) is a 32-year-old modern mom, who has a seemingly perfect life: a great marriage, over-achieving kids, a beautiful home and a career. However, she is over-worked and so exhausted that she’s reached the point where she is about to snap. Her life has been reduced to spending a lot of time driving her kids to their extracurricular activities and trying to be just in time for everything. Her perfect life is just a smoke screen, her husband Mike (David Walton) has been unemployed for a while, doesn’t care about helping with anything house- or kids-related, and enjoys a little bit too much online entertainment. In addition to being spoiled, her daughter Jane (Oona Laurence) has some anxiety issues and her son Dylan (Emjay Anthony) has never done his own homework. To make it even more interesting, Amy has to deal with the judgement of PTA Queen, Bee Gwendolyn, (Christina Applegate) and her minions Stacy (Jada Pinkett Smith) and Vicky (Annie Mumolo).
After one hectic day, all Amy can do is stop at a bar and grab a glass of whiskey. There she meets two other underappreciated moms, Kiki (Kristen Bell) and Carla (Kathryn Hahn). Over drinks they vent and declare that they’re tired of living up to expectations and not being appreciated for all their hard work. So they decide to be bad moms.
I love seeing Christina Applegate as the villain; she is smart, evil and pulls all the strings, driving everyone to the edge but nobody can say anything because they’re terrified of her. But the one that dominates the comedy is Kathryn Hann. You would think you might be tired of seeing her in just about every movie released in the last 10 years, but oh boy is this woman hilarious! She plays the divorced working mother whose every line, good or bad, makes the audience ask again and again “Did she just say that?”
I really enjoyed this movie. It is the perfect summer comedy that all audiences can enjoy, especially moms who can really relate. This is The Hangover for moms. I assure you will laugh nonstop because it has a wild drunk trip to the grocery store, a memorable show-and-tell demonstration and a really funny lecture about unflattering bras. I promise you will leave the theater with a smile.
The History of William Marshal
Book
The History of William Marshal is the earliest surviving biography of a medieval knight - indeed it...
Successful Key Account Management in a Week: Be a Brilliant Key Account Manager in Seven Simple Steps
Book
Key account management just got easier 'This little book is a real gem' Professor Malcolm McDonald...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Free Fire (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
At a rundown warehouse in 1970’s Boston, Justine (Brie Larson) and Ord (Armie Hammer) are brokering a deal between a South African arms dealer (Sharlto Copley) and members of the IRA (Cillian Murphy & Michael Smiley). Tensions flare almost immediately between the two sides and an inevitable battle of wills and gunplay ensues when two members of their entourage take decisive action on a fresh grudge from the night before.
It may say Scorsese’s producing, but Free Fire definitely smacks more of a Tarantino-influenced affair and I can think of no better example, in recent years anyway, that proves the lasting legacy of his still awe-inspiring debut, Reservoir Dogs. After years of making deliberately obtuse films (High Rise, A Field in England), Ben Wheatley has finally made something accessible, but unfortunately, Free Fire can’t pack the same visceral punch and narrative competence as the films that it takes influence from. I’m having flashbacks to about this time last year when I reviewed another film from A24, Green Room. I walked out of Free Fire in much the same manner; on a high, feeling satisfied from what appeared to be something unique and notable. As the hours have passed and I’m preparing my summation, the sentiment has all but vanished and I’m wanting of something with a little more substance. Granted, an 90 minute runtime can only accommodate so much, but I have to ask: could all that time spent crawling around in the dust and the rubble, as realistic a light that it may or may not shine on the authenticity of an actual shootout, have been used instead to get inside our characters motivations, driving us to really care about their fates? There’s no doubt that from its style and attitude, there was the potential for this to be the Reservoir Dogs for a new generation, but ultimately it’s just not a very memorable experience.
What will save Free Fire from obscurity is a cast that, despite having little plot to work with, is firing on all cylinders. An exemplary job is done from Oscar winners on down to character actors whose faces you know, but names you don’t. There isn’t one weak link in the chain and their performances have an excellent balance of toughness and levity that grounds them just enough to allow for suspension of disbelief. I might chastise Ben Wheatley as a storyteller, but there’s no doubt that he has an ear for great dialogue and fine judgement on the performers to deliver it.
It may say Scorsese’s producing, but Free Fire definitely smacks more of a Tarantino-influenced affair and I can think of no better example, in recent years anyway, that proves the lasting legacy of his still awe-inspiring debut, Reservoir Dogs. After years of making deliberately obtuse films (High Rise, A Field in England), Ben Wheatley has finally made something accessible, but unfortunately, Free Fire can’t pack the same visceral punch and narrative competence as the films that it takes influence from. I’m having flashbacks to about this time last year when I reviewed another film from A24, Green Room. I walked out of Free Fire in much the same manner; on a high, feeling satisfied from what appeared to be something unique and notable. As the hours have passed and I’m preparing my summation, the sentiment has all but vanished and I’m wanting of something with a little more substance. Granted, an 90 minute runtime can only accommodate so much, but I have to ask: could all that time spent crawling around in the dust and the rubble, as realistic a light that it may or may not shine on the authenticity of an actual shootout, have been used instead to get inside our characters motivations, driving us to really care about their fates? There’s no doubt that from its style and attitude, there was the potential for this to be the Reservoir Dogs for a new generation, but ultimately it’s just not a very memorable experience.
What will save Free Fire from obscurity is a cast that, despite having little plot to work with, is firing on all cylinders. An exemplary job is done from Oscar winners on down to character actors whose faces you know, but names you don’t. There isn’t one weak link in the chain and their performances have an excellent balance of toughness and levity that grounds them just enough to allow for suspension of disbelief. I might chastise Ben Wheatley as a storyteller, but there’s no doubt that he has an ear for great dialogue and fine judgement on the performers to deliver it.