Search
LaBMaC (116 KP) rated Psychopath with Piers Morgan (Crime Documentary) in TV
Jul 10, 2019
Direct and in depth interview technique (3 more)
Able to see family interaction in video footage
Mothers point of view is shared
Expert point of view is shared
Over dramatisation (1 more)
Piers questions repeatedly ask Paris to describe feelings that he may not have.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Paris Bennett is a diagnosed psychopath incarcerated in the Ferguson Unit within Texas State prison for stabbing his 4 year old sister to death.
Piers, revealing that Paris has a 'genius' level intellect.. an IQ score of 141 'wants to find out how their (psychopaths) minds work'.
When Piers opens the interview, in which he is separated from Paris by 'toughened glass', Paris begins with 'Since this is going to be done for ITV would you like me to speak in Queens English'. The comment, clearly planned, is blurted out almost in excitement and followed with a self-satisfied smile. Immediately, arrogance comes accross reflecting his narcissism.
This interview is mesmerising in that, despite his attempts to control his responses, you see the presentation of psychopathy quite clearly in the detachment and monotone used by Paris in describing horrific acts.
The documentary provides context by showing videotaped interactions between Paris, his sister and his mother which while appearing normal and happy, contained the odd disturbing comment from Paris that may have revealed his mindset. For example, to his mother:' what is your favourite sentence?,' I don't know ',' kill Charity's children? '.
Piers carries it out in a professional manner, calmly yet assertively seeking information. However the focus of his questions, on asking Paris to describe emotions, while helping to reveal the nature of psychopathy, do seem unfair.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this documentary is the fact that Charity, who has another child, has not only remained in contact with Paris but that she encourages his contact with his sibling rather than putting as much distance between him and Paris as possible.
Because Paris was a juvenile when convicted he will be up for parole in a few years in spite of his diagnosis.
Piers, revealing that Paris has a 'genius' level intellect.. an IQ score of 141 'wants to find out how their (psychopaths) minds work'.
When Piers opens the interview, in which he is separated from Paris by 'toughened glass', Paris begins with 'Since this is going to be done for ITV would you like me to speak in Queens English'. The comment, clearly planned, is blurted out almost in excitement and followed with a self-satisfied smile. Immediately, arrogance comes accross reflecting his narcissism.
This interview is mesmerising in that, despite his attempts to control his responses, you see the presentation of psychopathy quite clearly in the detachment and monotone used by Paris in describing horrific acts.
The documentary provides context by showing videotaped interactions between Paris, his sister and his mother which while appearing normal and happy, contained the odd disturbing comment from Paris that may have revealed his mindset. For example, to his mother:' what is your favourite sentence?,' I don't know ',' kill Charity's children? '.
Piers carries it out in a professional manner, calmly yet assertively seeking information. However the focus of his questions, on asking Paris to describe emotions, while helping to reveal the nature of psychopathy, do seem unfair.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this documentary is the fact that Charity, who has another child, has not only remained in contact with Paris but that she encourages his contact with his sibling rather than putting as much distance between him and Paris as possible.
Because Paris was a juvenile when convicted he will be up for parole in a few years in spite of his diagnosis.
The Sugarless Plum
10.0
Rate It
Book
It started as the perfect story. Zippora Karz was a member of the famed New York City Ballet by the...
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Allegedly in Books
Apr 10, 2019
Mary Addison was nine years old when she allegedly killed 3 month old, Alyssa Richardson. Now, it's 6 years later and Mary finds herself pregnant with her own child. She doesn't want anyone to take the baby from her, but who would allow a baby killer to keep a baby. Mary is now living in a group home for juvenile girls. When she turns 18, who knows what is going to happen with her. She has always been a smart girl and is determined to turn her life around and make something of herself, for her and Bean(what she calls the baby). Mary doesn't talk much, but when she finds a way that may help her to keep the baby, she starts talking about that night and filling in gaps that the police were always missing in the story. Will Mary be able to walk away from these charges for good, or will they stick?
I have heard a lot of raving about this book, so I had to pick it up. This is the first book by Tiffany D. Jackson and it was amazing. I can't wait to read the rest of her books which I hear are just as good if not better.
Does a nine year old little girl have the ability and know-how to kill another child? Many people had different ideas about the type of child that Mary was. She was very quiet and very smart and took care of her mother. But did Mary really kill Alyssa? She loved Alyssa and Mrs. Richardson, so why would she hurt the baby? All through the book, you have a soft place in your heart for Mary. I was dying to find out what really happened that night according to Mary, and it took a while to get to that part.
Looking at Mary's life through the group home and back and forth from present day to the night of the accident and the investigation following you have to make your own decision about what truly happened and who is to blame. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and can't wait to read more from Tiffany D. Jackson.
I have heard a lot of raving about this book, so I had to pick it up. This is the first book by Tiffany D. Jackson and it was amazing. I can't wait to read the rest of her books which I hear are just as good if not better.
Does a nine year old little girl have the ability and know-how to kill another child? Many people had different ideas about the type of child that Mary was. She was very quiet and very smart and took care of her mother. But did Mary really kill Alyssa? She loved Alyssa and Mrs. Richardson, so why would she hurt the baby? All through the book, you have a soft place in your heart for Mary. I was dying to find out what really happened that night according to Mary, and it took a while to get to that part.
Looking at Mary's life through the group home and back and forth from present day to the night of the accident and the investigation following you have to make your own decision about what truly happened and who is to blame. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and can't wait to read more from Tiffany D. Jackson.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Beautiful Broken Rules in Books
Feb 13, 2018
College student Emerson Moore has a hard and fast set of rules for relationships -- mainly: avoid them like the plague. She won't sleep with any guy more than three times, to prevent attachment of any kind. So far, Emerson has had great success with this, and she's having fun. Then Emerson meets Jaxon - when he and his twin brother, Jace, move in with Emerson's best friend, Cole. Emerson quickly becomes close to Jaxon. Is he the one who will turn her set of rules on its head?
This book had promise and it was a quick read, but overall, I just found it ridiculous and the writing was terrible - stilted and juvenile. It reminded me of something a middle schooler would write (though hopefully they wouldn't stray into this sexualized subject matter). Emerson is a college student absolutely determined not to have a relationship based on the fact that her parents split -- she has certainly had trauma in her life to cause her feelings, but her insane attachment to this gets to be a little silly. She is a poor communicator and a frustrating protagonist. The character development is nil and we're basically just told things about her and the rest of the characters, rather than shown them, or allowed to see things develop on their own.
Furthermore, some of the stereotypes in this book are beyond frustrating. Emerson's willingness to embrace being the school "slut" (a word she seems to have no problem with) is awful. When Jaxon enters the scene, no one seems to have an issue with his insane over-protectiveness and anger issues. It would be one thing if this was written somewhat cheekily, a la "Twilight," but these characters genuinely seem to think their actions and motivations are okay. The end result is a portrayal of college as nothing but sexual encounters with a mix of sexual harassment and domestic abuse thrown in. It all overshadows what could be a decent story (girl with commitment issues meets handsome guy with shadowy past). There were certainly some bright spots, but overall it just left me feeling too icky.
This book had promise and it was a quick read, but overall, I just found it ridiculous and the writing was terrible - stilted and juvenile. It reminded me of something a middle schooler would write (though hopefully they wouldn't stray into this sexualized subject matter). Emerson is a college student absolutely determined not to have a relationship based on the fact that her parents split -- she has certainly had trauma in her life to cause her feelings, but her insane attachment to this gets to be a little silly. She is a poor communicator and a frustrating protagonist. The character development is nil and we're basically just told things about her and the rest of the characters, rather than shown them, or allowed to see things develop on their own.
Furthermore, some of the stereotypes in this book are beyond frustrating. Emerson's willingness to embrace being the school "slut" (a word she seems to have no problem with) is awful. When Jaxon enters the scene, no one seems to have an issue with his insane over-protectiveness and anger issues. It would be one thing if this was written somewhat cheekily, a la "Twilight," but these characters genuinely seem to think their actions and motivations are okay. The end result is a portrayal of college as nothing but sexual encounters with a mix of sexual harassment and domestic abuse thrown in. It all overshadows what could be a decent story (girl with commitment issues meets handsome guy with shadowy past). There were certainly some bright spots, but overall it just left me feeling too icky.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Death in Profile in Books
Mar 15, 2018
(I've changed this down to 3 stars from 4 stars cause think back, it wasn't actually that good, I just think I was really happy to find a Netgalley book that didn't bore me to death)
Firstly I'd like to thank Netgalley and Urbane Publications for giving me the opportunity to read this book.
Death in Profile is an excellent twist on modern crime drama novels. It's refreshing to find all the characters have a clear head with no underlying disturbances like we see with many other detective characters. While the plot for this novel is nothing too bold or different from other books out there, it still manages to feel unique.
I like how Sampson doesn't focus on simply one person throughout the book, but instead lets you in to each persons life in little snippets making you want to keep reading and find out more and more about each person. While Metcalfe and Willis are interesting as separate people I found their relationship juvenile, in all honesty. The way they went about each other was really rather unimaginable.
For me, the characters made this book fun and exciting because I didn't feel the plot was anything too incredibly amazing and I found the 'shock twist' a little... disappointing. I would have preferred the story to continue in the direction it was already heading by that point rather than the real outcome. I also found the last few pages of the book a bit pointless and it confused me slightly as to why it was included, I think it completely took away from the amazement you were supposed to feel about the outcome of the investigation into the serial killings.
Other than that and a few spelling mistakes here and there (which I couldn't keep note of due to there being no page numbers on the kindle), I actually did very much like this book and was reaching for it of a night time as well as during my travelling hours. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a crime drama without the troubled cop or gritty suspense. Definitely a fun and quick read.
Firstly I'd like to thank Netgalley and Urbane Publications for giving me the opportunity to read this book.
Death in Profile is an excellent twist on modern crime drama novels. It's refreshing to find all the characters have a clear head with no underlying disturbances like we see with many other detective characters. While the plot for this novel is nothing too bold or different from other books out there, it still manages to feel unique.
I like how Sampson doesn't focus on simply one person throughout the book, but instead lets you in to each persons life in little snippets making you want to keep reading and find out more and more about each person. While Metcalfe and Willis are interesting as separate people I found their relationship juvenile, in all honesty. The way they went about each other was really rather unimaginable.
For me, the characters made this book fun and exciting because I didn't feel the plot was anything too incredibly amazing and I found the 'shock twist' a little... disappointing. I would have preferred the story to continue in the direction it was already heading by that point rather than the real outcome. I also found the last few pages of the book a bit pointless and it confused me slightly as to why it was included, I think it completely took away from the amazement you were supposed to feel about the outcome of the investigation into the serial killings.
Other than that and a few spelling mistakes here and there (which I couldn't keep note of due to there being no page numbers on the kindle), I actually did very much like this book and was reaching for it of a night time as well as during my travelling hours. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a crime drama without the troubled cop or gritty suspense. Definitely a fun and quick read.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Trespassers (2019) in Movies
Oct 30, 2019
Not Memorable In the Slightest
In Trespassers, two couples looking for a weekend respite wind up getting way more than what they bargained for when a stranger randomly shows up.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Things get off to such a good start, it makes me wish they had managed to keep this intensity for the rest of the movie. Your “What the hell?” moment comes extremely early and you know it’s only a matter of time before things reach that level of craziness again. When I watched the first ten minutes, I expected to be in for a serious treat. I was wrong…
Characters: 4
Cinematography/Visuals: 1
The film is shot in such a way that doesn’t do the best job of capturing the intensity of the moment. It left me wondering what director Orson Oblowitz was going for. It was uneven at best, feeling professional in some spots and juvenile in others.
Conflict: 8
From the moment that stranger shows up, the intensity ratchets up way high. There are a number of scare moments to keep you entertained. I also appreciated the interpersonal turmoil as well between the couples. From jump, you get the feeling that something is off and slowly each layer of the onion is peeled back.
Entertainment Value: 6
I would have been way more entertained had I given two shits about the characters involved. They all felt expendable to me which made it hard to reman rooted in the story. There are some pretty solid moments to be had, but there was definitely something lacking.
Memorability: 3
As I write this review, Tresspassers is playing in the background. I’ve already found myself saying a couple times, “Oh, that’s right! That happened!” The movie as a whole lacks staying power. When it’s all said and done, it doesn’t really stick to your ribs.
Pace: 5
Plot: 2
Resolution: 7
Overall: 56
There are certain movies you can only watch once and be done with them. Then there are movies that you can avoid altogether. Kind of like Tresspassers. Save your time on this one.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Things get off to such a good start, it makes me wish they had managed to keep this intensity for the rest of the movie. Your “What the hell?” moment comes extremely early and you know it’s only a matter of time before things reach that level of craziness again. When I watched the first ten minutes, I expected to be in for a serious treat. I was wrong…
Characters: 4
Cinematography/Visuals: 1
The film is shot in such a way that doesn’t do the best job of capturing the intensity of the moment. It left me wondering what director Orson Oblowitz was going for. It was uneven at best, feeling professional in some spots and juvenile in others.
Conflict: 8
From the moment that stranger shows up, the intensity ratchets up way high. There are a number of scare moments to keep you entertained. I also appreciated the interpersonal turmoil as well between the couples. From jump, you get the feeling that something is off and slowly each layer of the onion is peeled back.
Entertainment Value: 6
I would have been way more entertained had I given two shits about the characters involved. They all felt expendable to me which made it hard to reman rooted in the story. There are some pretty solid moments to be had, but there was definitely something lacking.
Memorability: 3
As I write this review, Tresspassers is playing in the background. I’ve already found myself saying a couple times, “Oh, that’s right! That happened!” The movie as a whole lacks staying power. When it’s all said and done, it doesn’t really stick to your ribs.
Pace: 5
Plot: 2
Resolution: 7
Overall: 56
There are certain movies you can only watch once and be done with them. Then there are movies that you can avoid altogether. Kind of like Tresspassers. Save your time on this one.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated 30 Minutes or Less (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
You don’t have to be imaginative to envision the plot behind “30 Minutes or Less”, because this is a story that is wildly over told. Just listing the components make it clear that no inventive or unexpected plot devices were considered in the creation of this summer comedy. There is the pizza boy who finds himself in the wrong place at the wrong time, a set of bumbling idiots who are planning a bank heist and even a girl who is oblivious to the longstanding affection of her brother’s best friend. But somehow even with this wildly over told plot the movie manages to be sporadically very funny.
“ 30 Minutes or Less” is, like so many of the big comedy hits of the last few years, a film that centers around well crafted honest yet crass dialogue between experienced comedic actors. Timing is critical to the success of the film and thankfully the actors in “30 Minutes or Less” are funny people who repeatedly manage to execute good lines.
The cast is the shining aspect of the film; a hodgepodge crew of comedians you likely already know. The best friend Chet is portrayed by the ever funny Aziz Ansari of Televisions’ “Parks and Recreation”. The bomb clad pizza boy Nick is played by Jesse Einsenberg who also starred in “The Social Network” and “Zombieland”. And this role is not a far cry from Einsenberg’s role in “Zombieland” aside from the lack of character development and on screen chemistry leading lady Kate, played by former TV “Greek” bad girl Dilshad Vadsaria.
The film is backed by a fun soundtrack of grooves that significantly assist in maintaining a quickened pace, even when the story is less than laughably slow. There are also a number of diverse yet comedic fight scenes that spot the film, from a juvenile slap fight to the use of a blow torch.
But the smattering of creative lines, sure to be repeated in excess by the post-emo generation, did not manage to hold up this film that unfortunately ran out of steam within “30 Minutes or Less”.
“ 30 Minutes or Less” is, like so many of the big comedy hits of the last few years, a film that centers around well crafted honest yet crass dialogue between experienced comedic actors. Timing is critical to the success of the film and thankfully the actors in “30 Minutes or Less” are funny people who repeatedly manage to execute good lines.
The cast is the shining aspect of the film; a hodgepodge crew of comedians you likely already know. The best friend Chet is portrayed by the ever funny Aziz Ansari of Televisions’ “Parks and Recreation”. The bomb clad pizza boy Nick is played by Jesse Einsenberg who also starred in “The Social Network” and “Zombieland”. And this role is not a far cry from Einsenberg’s role in “Zombieland” aside from the lack of character development and on screen chemistry leading lady Kate, played by former TV “Greek” bad girl Dilshad Vadsaria.
The film is backed by a fun soundtrack of grooves that significantly assist in maintaining a quickened pace, even when the story is less than laughably slow. There are also a number of diverse yet comedic fight scenes that spot the film, from a juvenile slap fight to the use of a blow torch.
But the smattering of creative lines, sure to be repeated in excess by the post-emo generation, did not manage to hold up this film that unfortunately ran out of steam within “30 Minutes or Less”.
Bizzy Bear Builds a House
Book and Games
4.0
Rate It
App
Bizzy Bear is back! This is the second brilliant Bizzy Bear story app, based on the popular board...
The Nickel Boys
Book
In this bravura follow-up to the Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award-winning #1 New York Times...
The Scarlet Thread (Fated Destruction, #1)
8.0
Rate It
Book
My name Kaidance Monroe, and sometimes when I touch people, I see how they die. After I saw my...