Search
Search results
Lyndsey Gollogly (2893 KP) rated Cruel ( Savannah Heirs 1) in Books
Jan 20, 2024
14 of 220
Kindle
Cruel ( Savannah Heirs 1)
By Raven Kennedy & Coralee June
⭐️⭐️⭐️
I’ve got a secret.
Savannah, Georgia is full of debutantes and greed. The Heirs own this town. They own me, too.
I don’t know what I did to ruin what we had. But their kindness turned cruel almost a year ago. I was prepared to leave it all behind and start over at a new school. But Rogue Kelly, the king of the Heirs, ruined that.
He doesn’t want me anymore but doesn’t want anyone else to have me either. I know too much to be set free, but not enough to stay.
The Heirs aren’t through with me yet. And I crave their cruelty too much to give up now.
When I first started reading this I honestly thought it would be a DNF but I was pleasantly surprised I actually liked it. I liked the story it had some bite reminded me a little of Penelope Douglas books. Not a bad read.
Kindle
Cruel ( Savannah Heirs 1)
By Raven Kennedy & Coralee June
⭐️⭐️⭐️
I’ve got a secret.
Savannah, Georgia is full of debutantes and greed. The Heirs own this town. They own me, too.
I don’t know what I did to ruin what we had. But their kindness turned cruel almost a year ago. I was prepared to leave it all behind and start over at a new school. But Rogue Kelly, the king of the Heirs, ruined that.
He doesn’t want me anymore but doesn’t want anyone else to have me either. I know too much to be set free, but not enough to stay.
The Heirs aren’t through with me yet. And I crave their cruelty too much to give up now.
When I first started reading this I honestly thought it would be a DNF but I was pleasantly surprised I actually liked it. I liked the story it had some bite reminded me a little of Penelope Douglas books. Not a bad read.
Nicole Hadley (380 KP) rated Get a Move On, Neuron! in Books
Jun 18, 2018
Get a Move On, Neuron! by Philip R. Kennedy presents a basic description of brain function to young readers who enjoy science.
Throughout the book the reader goes on a tour of the brain learning about different brain functions. The reader learn about some interesting issues during the tour; such as, memory, self-awareness, and emotions. Each brief chapter ends with a series of questions that recap and review the material. I find the questions a bit distracting since the answers are not provided. The illustrations are nice and helpful. The illustrations are not overly busy, in fact, they help emphasize the topic being discussed. A friendly looking neuron is the "instructor".
Young readers who enjoy science will enjoy this book and will learn a lot of interesting brain facts from this book. This book could be used within the science classroom for going beyond the lesson when discussing brain function.
I give this book 3/5 stars being of the continual repetition which caused the book to come off as boring at times.
I received this book from Choice Publishing via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Throughout the book the reader goes on a tour of the brain learning about different brain functions. The reader learn about some interesting issues during the tour; such as, memory, self-awareness, and emotions. Each brief chapter ends with a series of questions that recap and review the material. I find the questions a bit distracting since the answers are not provided. The illustrations are nice and helpful. The illustrations are not overly busy, in fact, they help emphasize the topic being discussed. A friendly looking neuron is the "instructor".
Young readers who enjoy science will enjoy this book and will learn a lot of interesting brain facts from this book. This book could be used within the science classroom for going beyond the lesson when discussing brain function.
I give this book 3/5 stars being of the continual repetition which caused the book to come off as boring at times.
I received this book from Choice Publishing via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Bobby Gillespie recommended There's a Riot Goin' On by Sly & The Family Stone in Music (curated)
Darren (1599 KP) rated American Assassin (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: American Assassin starts as normal American Mitch Rapp (O’Brien) sees his fiancée gunned down by terrorists and himself left for dead, 18 months later he has trained himself to eliminate the men responsible but little does he know that CIA agent Irene Kennedy (Lathan) has been watching his action.
When Kennedy arranges to save Mitch from a certain death, she recruits him for a special section of the CIA working under Stan Hurley (Keaton) who trains agents to go undercover but if caught or killed no one will come for them.
The first mission is to locate nuclear weapon components before former agent Ghost (Kitsch) can use or sell them giving somebody in the world a nuclear bomb that can wipe out millions.
Thoughts on American Assassin
Characters – Mitch Rapp is an American that loses everything at the hands of terrorists, he learns combat and language skills to go undercover in the terrorist cell for revenge, he gets recruited by the CIA where he must learn discipline but this is where he struggles because he always wants to go after the criminal. This character does feel like a young Jack Bauer because of his rule breaking attitude for the right reasons. Stan Hurley is the off the grid trainer who takes Mitch as part of his unit, he gets tired of the Mitch’s lack of discipline but knows he needs him to capture his former student. Irene Kennedy is the deputy director of the CIA, she sees the potential in Mitch forcing Hurley to take him on, but also falls into the standard CIA director figure that will risk their reputation to prove others wrong. Ghost is the former trainee of Hurley that is using all the skills gained to stay one step ahead of him while collecting the nuclear components.
Performances – Dylan O’Brien is an actor that got into the young adult films but this role showed an adult character, showing he could go onto action films without looking like the complete actions star. Michael Keaton looks like he did enjoy the mentoring role while also getting the action role he isn’t known for. Sanaa Lathan is good in her role even if the character is very generic. Taylor Kitsch does seem to be on the recovering his career tour showing everyone just how talented he is in the villainous role.
Story – The story does play out like an origin story for Mitch Rapp in the CIA, we see what motivated him to accept the offer, we see what makes him different from other potential agents. We have the standard level of threat, potential nuclear weapon and a story of needing to learn discipline to become a top agent while keeping his unique traits. This is an easy to watch but could easily be an over the top pilot for a television show.
Action/Thriller – The action starts out brutal with the terrorist attack, we also fall into the car chases, fights and shoot outs which are fun to watch, the final action sequences is just popcorn wow.
Settings – The settings take us on a tour of Europe which is fine and is giving us an iconic location moment, which is easy to locate for us.
Special Effects – The effects in the opening sequence are brutal but then it just becomes by the book stuff.
Scene of the Movie – Speed Boat fight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While it started with violent level, it did turn into Jack Bauer origin feeling.
Chances of Sequel: Easily could have one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Final Thoughts – This is an action film that is fun but not one of the greatest of the year.
Overall: Fun action packed blast.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/09/17/american-assassin-2017/
When Kennedy arranges to save Mitch from a certain death, she recruits him for a special section of the CIA working under Stan Hurley (Keaton) who trains agents to go undercover but if caught or killed no one will come for them.
The first mission is to locate nuclear weapon components before former agent Ghost (Kitsch) can use or sell them giving somebody in the world a nuclear bomb that can wipe out millions.
Thoughts on American Assassin
Characters – Mitch Rapp is an American that loses everything at the hands of terrorists, he learns combat and language skills to go undercover in the terrorist cell for revenge, he gets recruited by the CIA where he must learn discipline but this is where he struggles because he always wants to go after the criminal. This character does feel like a young Jack Bauer because of his rule breaking attitude for the right reasons. Stan Hurley is the off the grid trainer who takes Mitch as part of his unit, he gets tired of the Mitch’s lack of discipline but knows he needs him to capture his former student. Irene Kennedy is the deputy director of the CIA, she sees the potential in Mitch forcing Hurley to take him on, but also falls into the standard CIA director figure that will risk their reputation to prove others wrong. Ghost is the former trainee of Hurley that is using all the skills gained to stay one step ahead of him while collecting the nuclear components.
Performances – Dylan O’Brien is an actor that got into the young adult films but this role showed an adult character, showing he could go onto action films without looking like the complete actions star. Michael Keaton looks like he did enjoy the mentoring role while also getting the action role he isn’t known for. Sanaa Lathan is good in her role even if the character is very generic. Taylor Kitsch does seem to be on the recovering his career tour showing everyone just how talented he is in the villainous role.
Story – The story does play out like an origin story for Mitch Rapp in the CIA, we see what motivated him to accept the offer, we see what makes him different from other potential agents. We have the standard level of threat, potential nuclear weapon and a story of needing to learn discipline to become a top agent while keeping his unique traits. This is an easy to watch but could easily be an over the top pilot for a television show.
Action/Thriller – The action starts out brutal with the terrorist attack, we also fall into the car chases, fights and shoot outs which are fun to watch, the final action sequences is just popcorn wow.
Settings – The settings take us on a tour of Europe which is fine and is giving us an iconic location moment, which is easy to locate for us.
Special Effects – The effects in the opening sequence are brutal but then it just becomes by the book stuff.
Scene of the Movie – Speed Boat fight.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While it started with violent level, it did turn into Jack Bauer origin feeling.
Chances of Sequel: Easily could have one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Final Thoughts – This is an action film that is fun but not one of the greatest of the year.
Overall: Fun action packed blast.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/09/17/american-assassin-2017/
Sarah (7798 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
Dull
I'm so glad I didn't watch this film at the cinema. I don't think I could've gotten through it without falling asleep, it's that dull and drawn out.
Visually this film looks brilliant, the space scenes especially look great. It also has a very good cast, although unsurprisingly most appear to have been sidelined in favour of Ryan Gosling who is pretty average at best. This film may have been slightly more enjoyable had they gotten someone a little more charismatic in the lead role. I'm just very thankful for Corey Stoll as Aldrin for putting a little life into this! The main problem though is that it is far too long, drawn out and melodramatic, and spends too much time on the earth scenes and build up. They could have easily cut a lot of this out, speed up the pace and knock half an hour off the runtime without any noticeable issues. It isn't really helped though by the fact that we all know how this story turns out (spoiler - he walks on the moon at the end), so there's little suspense or tension and makes for rather a dull film.
I think I found the informative videos made for tourists to watch at Kennedy Space Center more entertaining than this film.
Visually this film looks brilliant, the space scenes especially look great. It also has a very good cast, although unsurprisingly most appear to have been sidelined in favour of Ryan Gosling who is pretty average at best. This film may have been slightly more enjoyable had they gotten someone a little more charismatic in the lead role. I'm just very thankful for Corey Stoll as Aldrin for putting a little life into this! The main problem though is that it is far too long, drawn out and melodramatic, and spends too much time on the earth scenes and build up. They could have easily cut a lot of this out, speed up the pace and knock half an hour off the runtime without any noticeable issues. It isn't really helped though by the fact that we all know how this story turns out (spoiler - he walks on the moon at the end), so there's little suspense or tension and makes for rather a dull film.
I think I found the informative videos made for tourists to watch at Kennedy Space Center more entertaining than this film.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy - Season 2 in TV
Aug 11, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Following on from the end of season 1, the family escape the Apocalypse only to find themselves scattered throughout the early 60's. The time line is wrong and another Apocalypses looms as an unknown event leads to nuclear obliteration by the Russians. Can they stop this apocalypse and find out the connection between the Kennedy assassination and their father?
As the family struggle to find one another the are faced with the reality of the 1960's, conspiracy, racism/segregation and homophobia.
As with the first season music plays a big part, both with the sound track and the story.
One of the good thing that seems to have come from services like Netflix producing/ordering series is that they don't have to follow the normal 13 episode format that standard television uses, this means that there are less 'filler' episodes which helps the story flow.
Season one had to spend some time introducing the main characters and in season season two we get to find out more about some of the characters, including the handler and Sir Reginald Hargreeves, although, where Reginald is involved I don't think you take anything at face value.
Season two does have similar themes to the the first including drug and Alcohol use which are character appropriate.
As the family struggle to find one another the are faced with the reality of the 1960's, conspiracy, racism/segregation and homophobia.
As with the first season music plays a big part, both with the sound track and the story.
One of the good thing that seems to have come from services like Netflix producing/ordering series is that they don't have to follow the normal 13 episode format that standard television uses, this means that there are less 'filler' episodes which helps the story flow.
Season one had to spend some time introducing the main characters and in season season two we get to find out more about some of the characters, including the handler and Sir Reginald Hargreeves, although, where Reginald is involved I don't think you take anything at face value.
Season two does have similar themes to the the first including drug and Alcohol use which are character appropriate.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jackie (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Spoiler! Her husband gets shot.
“Jackie” tells the story of the spiralling grief, loss and anger of Jackie Kennedy driven by the assassination of JFK in Dallas in November 1963. Hopping backwards and forwards in flashback, the film centres on the first interview given by Jackie (Natalie Portman, “Black Swan”) to a ‘Time’ journalist (Billy Crudup, “Watchmen”, “Spotlight”).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Through this interview we flashback to see Jackie as the young First Lady engaged in recording a TV special for a tour of the White House: nervous, unsure of herself and with a ‘baby girl’ voice. This contrasts with her demeanour in the interview which – although subject to emotional outburst and grief – is assured, confident and above all extremely assertive. We live the film through Jackie’s eyes as she experiences the arrival in Dallas, the traumatic events of November 22nd in Dealey Plaza, the return home to Washington and the complicated arrangement of the President’s funeral.
This is an acting tour de force for Natalie Portman, who is astonishingly emotional as the grief-stricken ex-first lady. She nails this role utterly and completely. Having already won the Golden Globe for an actress in a dramatic role, you would be a foolish man to bet against her not taking the Oscar. (I know I said just the other week that I though Emma Stone should get it for “La La Land” – as another Golden Globe winner, for the Comedy/Musical category – and a large part of my heart would still really like to see Stone win it…. But excellent as that performance was, this is a far more challenging role.)
In a key supporting role is Peter Sarsgaard (“The Magnificent Seven”) as Bobby Kennedy (although his lookalike is not one of the best: that accolade I would give to Gaspard Koenig, in an un-speaking role, as the young Ted Kennedy).
Also providing interesting support as Jackie’s priest is John Hurt (“Alien”, “Dr Who”) and, as Jackie’s close friend, the artist Bill Walton, is Richard E Grant (“Withnail and I”, who as he grows older is looking more and more like Geoffrey Rush – I was sure it was him!).
Director Pablo Larraín (whose previous work I am not familiar with) automatically assumes that EVERYONE has the background history to understand the narrative without further explanation: perhaps as this happened 54 years ago, this is a bit of a presumption for younger viewers? Naturally for people of my advanced years, these events are as burned into our collective psyches as the images in the Zapruder film.
While the film focuses predominantly, and brilliantly, on Jackie’s mental state, the film does gently question (via an outburst from Bobby) as to what JFK actually achieved in his all too short presidency – ‘Will he be remembered for resolving the Cuban missile crisis: something he originally created?’ rants Bobby. In reality, JFK is remembered in history for this assassination and the lost potential for what he might have done. I would have liked the script to have delved a little bit further into that collective soul-searching.
This is a very sombre movie in tone, from the bleak opening, with a soundtrack of sonorous strings, to the bleak weather-swept scenes at Arlington cemetery. The cinematography (by Stéphane Fontaine, “Rust and Bone”) cleverly contrasts between the vibrant hues of Jackie’s “Camelot” to the washed-out blueish tones of the post-assassination events. If you don’t feel depressed going into this film, you probably will be coming out! But the journey is a satisfying one nonetheless, and the script by Noah Oppenheim – in a SIGNIFICANT departure from his previous teen-flick screenplays for “Allegiant” and “The Maze Runner” – is both tight and thought-provoking.
Overall, a recommended watch which comes with a prediction: “And the Oscar goes to… Natalie Portman”.
Finally, note that for those of a squeamish disposition, there is a very graphic depiction of the assassination from Jackie’s point-of-view…. but this is not until nearly the end of the film, so you are reasonably safe until then!
Also as a final general whinge, could directors PLEASE place an embargo on the logos of more than two production companies coming up at the start of a film? This has about six of them and is farcical, aping the (very amusing) parody in “Family Guy” (as shown here).
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Small Great Things in Books
Mar 15, 2018
I read this book (a while back now!) as part of a readalong with lots of bookish friends on Instagram! It was called it #TheSmallGreatReadalong
see what we did there! Anyway, this review is coming so late compared to when I actually finished, but at least its here now!
My overall opinion on this one is that I liked it, but mainly because it was such a good discussion book, not because of the actual story. Now, that may sound controversial, that I didnt enjoy the bulk of a book all about racism, but thats not what I mean. Let me explain
I think this book did an amazing job at opening up the topic of racism to the reader. As a white woman, living in a pretty middle class existence, I know for a fact that I have unfair privileges and I will never fully understand the complexities of racism, as much as I try to educate myself. This novel certainly has opened my eyes to the some of the more subtle aspects of racism that I hadnt even thought about before. While there were the obvious racist themes in this novel, it wasnt those that shocked me the most, it was the parts that you dont often think about when you think of racism. So for that, for opening my eyes and my mind, I applaud Picoult for writing such a difficult and controversial book.
However, I think the teachings of this book could have been done in a more compelling story. At the end of the day, there was nothing inherently wrong with the plot, but I didnt quite connect with it. I found a lot of it unexciting and the twist at the end, that Picoult just has to add into each one of her books, was so blatantly obvious it didnt surprise me at all and kind of made the rest of the book feel a bit cheap?
Picoults writing isnt my favourite, it doesnt suck me in as much as other authors, but its still weaves a pretty interesting story. I think the characters in this book were far stronger than the plot.
My favourite part of this novel was watching Ruth and Kennedys relationship grow. I loved seeing how Kennedy steadily grew to understand Ruths frustrations and her plight to bring race to the forefront of peoples minds.
Overall, I did enjoy this book, mainly because of what it taught me and how its made me see things in a different way. But, its not the most exciting story Ive ever read and Im not big on the writing style.
My overall opinion on this one is that I liked it, but mainly because it was such a good discussion book, not because of the actual story. Now, that may sound controversial, that I didnt enjoy the bulk of a book all about racism, but thats not what I mean. Let me explain
I think this book did an amazing job at opening up the topic of racism to the reader. As a white woman, living in a pretty middle class existence, I know for a fact that I have unfair privileges and I will never fully understand the complexities of racism, as much as I try to educate myself. This novel certainly has opened my eyes to the some of the more subtle aspects of racism that I hadnt even thought about before. While there were the obvious racist themes in this novel, it wasnt those that shocked me the most, it was the parts that you dont often think about when you think of racism. So for that, for opening my eyes and my mind, I applaud Picoult for writing such a difficult and controversial book.
However, I think the teachings of this book could have been done in a more compelling story. At the end of the day, there was nothing inherently wrong with the plot, but I didnt quite connect with it. I found a lot of it unexciting and the twist at the end, that Picoult just has to add into each one of her books, was so blatantly obvious it didnt surprise me at all and kind of made the rest of the book feel a bit cheap?
Picoults writing isnt my favourite, it doesnt suck me in as much as other authors, but its still weaves a pretty interesting story. I think the characters in this book were far stronger than the plot.
My favourite part of this novel was watching Ruth and Kennedys relationship grow. I loved seeing how Kennedy steadily grew to understand Ruths frustrations and her plight to bring race to the forefront of peoples minds.
Overall, I did enjoy this book, mainly because of what it taught me and how its made me see things in a different way. But, its not the most exciting story Ive ever read and Im not big on the writing style.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Charade (1963) in Movies
Nov 15, 2020
The best Hitchcock film NOT Directed by Hitchcock
What do you get when you cross Cary Grant (NORTH BY NORTHWEST) with Audrey Hepburn (BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S) and a cavalcade of interesting faces like Walter Matthau (GOODBYE CHARLIE), James Coburn (THE GREAT ESCAPE), George Kennedy (IN HARM'S WAY) and Ned Glass (WEST SIDE STORY), put them in an exotic European location (this time, mostly, Paris) and have all of them chasing each other for a missing $250,000?
You have the best Alfred Hitchock film NOT Directed by Alfred Hitchcock.
Based on a story by Peter Stone, and Directed by Stanley Donen (SINGIN' IN THE RAIN), CHARADE is a throwback film, that shows the scramble for power and wealth in the beginnings of the cold war in Europe as a woman (Hepburn) searches for answers after her husband shows up deceased and she is instantly besieged by a bevy of mugs looking for some missing loot.
It's a fun and interesting whoddunnit and "whereisit"? With a central plot/love story hinging on the relationship between the Grant and Hepburn characters. And...this is where Charade succeeds greatly as the chemistry between the two is strong, thanks to the smart, forward-thinking idea of having Hepburn as on top of her game as Grant is of his. She is no "damsel in distress", but rather a worthy sparring partner for Grants (and the other mugs).
Of course, it doesn't hurt that Hepburn is dressed - impeccably - by Edith Head in stunning Givenchy outfits all set to the music of Henry Mancini.
Speaking of mugs, they don't get more character-y to look at than Matthau, Coburn, Kennedy and Glass and they all are terrific in their roles as shadowy, sinister figures who are after something that they think Hepburn has...but she just might not have it.
Beautifully shot by Donen in Paris of the early 1960's, this film captures a bygone era and a real feeling of a romanticized and glamorous Europe. This is interesting characters doing interesting things in an interesting way in an interesting place.
And...I'm glad all of this is interesting, for if you stopped for a moment to think about the plot - or the rather languid pace of this film - then Charade would lose quite a bit of it's luster and appeal.
But, fortunately for me, I didn't do that. I sat and immersed myself in these characters, settings and circumstances and was rewarded with a very entertaining evening brought to the screen by master players who know what they are doing.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
You have the best Alfred Hitchock film NOT Directed by Alfred Hitchcock.
Based on a story by Peter Stone, and Directed by Stanley Donen (SINGIN' IN THE RAIN), CHARADE is a throwback film, that shows the scramble for power and wealth in the beginnings of the cold war in Europe as a woman (Hepburn) searches for answers after her husband shows up deceased and she is instantly besieged by a bevy of mugs looking for some missing loot.
It's a fun and interesting whoddunnit and "whereisit"? With a central plot/love story hinging on the relationship between the Grant and Hepburn characters. And...this is where Charade succeeds greatly as the chemistry between the two is strong, thanks to the smart, forward-thinking idea of having Hepburn as on top of her game as Grant is of his. She is no "damsel in distress", but rather a worthy sparring partner for Grants (and the other mugs).
Of course, it doesn't hurt that Hepburn is dressed - impeccably - by Edith Head in stunning Givenchy outfits all set to the music of Henry Mancini.
Speaking of mugs, they don't get more character-y to look at than Matthau, Coburn, Kennedy and Glass and they all are terrific in their roles as shadowy, sinister figures who are after something that they think Hepburn has...but she just might not have it.
Beautifully shot by Donen in Paris of the early 1960's, this film captures a bygone era and a real feeling of a romanticized and glamorous Europe. This is interesting characters doing interesting things in an interesting way in an interesting place.
And...I'm glad all of this is interesting, for if you stopped for a moment to think about the plot - or the rather languid pace of this film - then Charade would lose quite a bit of it's luster and appeal.
But, fortunately for me, I didn't do that. I sat and immersed myself in these characters, settings and circumstances and was rewarded with a very entertaining evening brought to the screen by master players who know what they are doing.
Letter Grade: A-
8 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
David McK (3248 KP) rated Shattered (The Iron Druid Chronicles, #7) in Books
Jan 30, 2019
The most recent (as of the time of writing this review) of [a: Kevin Hearne|4414255|Kevin Hearne|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1289238438p2/4414255.jpg]'s 'Iron Druid series, which deals in a large part with 'daddy issues', and with the consequences Atticus faces for choosing to become the Iron Druid (iron, remember, is anathema to the faery races).
Since the start of the series, the number of Druids walking the earth has now trebled: no longer is there Atticus alone, but we now also have his apprentice Granuaile (sp?), as well as his old mentor who now goes by the name Owen Kennedy after being pulled off a time island at the start of this, after Atticus discovered him there at the end of the previous novel ([b: Hunted|17571837|Hunted|Karen Robards|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1386557434s/17571837.jpg|24510885]).
As before, this is told in the first person narrative, largely taking it turns split between the (now three) main characters. Comic relief, as always, is provided by Atticus and Granuaile's trusty canine companions Oberon and Orlaith respectively, who the three main characters are able to communicate telepathically with. Also, as before, this ends on a decided cliffhanger to set up the next novel: one that I will, without a doubt, be picking up when it comes out.
Since the start of the series, the number of Druids walking the earth has now trebled: no longer is there Atticus alone, but we now also have his apprentice Granuaile (sp?), as well as his old mentor who now goes by the name Owen Kennedy after being pulled off a time island at the start of this, after Atticus discovered him there at the end of the previous novel ([b: Hunted|17571837|Hunted|Karen Robards|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1386557434s/17571837.jpg|24510885]).
As before, this is told in the first person narrative, largely taking it turns split between the (now three) main characters. Comic relief, as always, is provided by Atticus and Granuaile's trusty canine companions Oberon and Orlaith respectively, who the three main characters are able to communicate telepathically with. Also, as before, this ends on a decided cliffhanger to set up the next novel: one that I will, without a doubt, be picking up when it comes out.