Search
Search results
Mondly: Learn French FREE - Conversation Course
Education and Travel
App
Learn French with free lessons daily. Let Mondly teach you the French language quickly and...
Mondly: Learn English FREE - Conversation Course
Education and Travel
App
Learn English with free lessons daily. Let Mondly teach you the English language quickly and...
Learn German: Language learning lessons by Mondly
Education and Travel
App
Learn German with free lessons daily. Let Mondly teach you the German language quickly and...
Mondly: Learn Swedish FREE - Conversation Course
Education and Travel
App
Learn Swedish with free lessons daily. Let Mondly teach you the Swedish language quickly and...
Mondly: Learn Italian FREE - Conversation Course
Education and Travel
App
Learn Italian with free lessons daily. Let Mondly teach you the Italian language quickly and...
Paris By Metro – Easy subway, Train & Tram Maps
Travel and Navigation
App
VISITING PARIS? Let Paris By Metro help you see more of the city and suburbs without getting lost -...
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Favorite Daughter in Books
Jun 21, 2019
A year ago, Jane Harris' daughter, Mary, died tragically. Ever since, Jane has been lost in a cloud of grief and anti-depressants. But with a ceremony celebrating Mary's life coming up, Jane feels it's time for her to reemerge and reengage with her family: husband David and daughter, Betsy, who is about to graduate from high school. The family lives in a gorgeous house in Orange County, California. But Jane quickly realizes that David is always busy--with work or the gym he claims--and Betsy is distant and angry. Jane adored Mary, her eldest, who had finished her first year of college before she died. But at the ceremony for Mary, she receives a note, claiming Mary's death wasn't an accident. Does someone know what happened to her daughter--and are they right? Was Mary's death not an accident?
"After a year of grieving, it's time to step back into my family, or what remains of it and that's precisely my plan."
So this review is going to be a little unpopular, perhaps, based on others I've seen. I'd like to point out that it's not a negative review, per se, just not a gushing review as so many others seem to be. I just felt a little let down by this one; it left me a little flat. I found a lot of the twists predictable and while I found the book a very compelling read, there was just something "off" that didn't make it a "wow" read.
Still, as mentioned, this is a very readable book, and it will keep you engaged. Jane is an interesting character, to say the least, even if I sometimes found her more clueless than diabolical. She is, of course, an unreliable narrator, and we are only allowed to learn things as Jane reveals them to us. As a result, we're left a little confused, never quite sure where we stand. One of the things I liked most about this book was how easy it is to get sucked into Jane's delusional world as the novel is told in a very conversational style, with her sometimes speaking directly to the reader. She's also a pretty terrible person and yet oddly fascinating.
"Without Mary to place my biggest hopes and dreams on, I'm left with Betsy."
Her relationship with her daughters is pretty messed up, to say the least, and as a result, the book can be pretty creepy and bizarre. It's definitely quite a wild ride. Still, I was a little disappointed at how much I figured out ahead of time; I would have liked to have been more surprised.
Overall, this is a quick read and it's pretty intriguing. You'll get caught up in Jane's delusions pretty easily, even if some of them are fairly easily telegraphed. Others really rave about this one, so hopefully you'll enjoy it even more than me. I still recommend it; it's an interesting read. 3 stars.
"After a year of grieving, it's time to step back into my family, or what remains of it and that's precisely my plan."
So this review is going to be a little unpopular, perhaps, based on others I've seen. I'd like to point out that it's not a negative review, per se, just not a gushing review as so many others seem to be. I just felt a little let down by this one; it left me a little flat. I found a lot of the twists predictable and while I found the book a very compelling read, there was just something "off" that didn't make it a "wow" read.
Still, as mentioned, this is a very readable book, and it will keep you engaged. Jane is an interesting character, to say the least, even if I sometimes found her more clueless than diabolical. She is, of course, an unreliable narrator, and we are only allowed to learn things as Jane reveals them to us. As a result, we're left a little confused, never quite sure where we stand. One of the things I liked most about this book was how easy it is to get sucked into Jane's delusional world as the novel is told in a very conversational style, with her sometimes speaking directly to the reader. She's also a pretty terrible person and yet oddly fascinating.
"Without Mary to place my biggest hopes and dreams on, I'm left with Betsy."
Her relationship with her daughters is pretty messed up, to say the least, and as a result, the book can be pretty creepy and bizarre. It's definitely quite a wild ride. Still, I was a little disappointed at how much I figured out ahead of time; I would have liked to have been more surprised.
Overall, this is a quick read and it's pretty intriguing. You'll get caught up in Jane's delusions pretty easily, even if some of them are fairly easily telegraphed. Others really rave about this one, so hopefully you'll enjoy it even more than me. I still recommend it; it's an interesting read. 3 stars.
Mondly: Learn American English Conversation Course
Education and Travel
App
Learn American English with free lessons daily. Let Mondly teach you the American English language...
Public Speaking Teleprompter Presenter Audio/Video
Business and Photo & Video
App
Speechmaker turns an iPhone or iPad into your personal mobile podium. Create, archive, rehearse,...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Arrival (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Wow – what a surprise.
Sometimes I can get very irritated by a trailer for giving too much away (case in point, “Room” – which I recut – and more recently “Passengers”). Sometimes I can get very excited by a really good teaser trailer (case in point, “10 Cloverfield Lane”). But most of the time a “ho hum” trailer typically drives the expectation of a “ho hum” film: “Jack Reacher: Never Look Back” being a good recent example. Then there is “Arrival”…
Because the trailer for “Arrival” belies absolutely nothing about the depth and complexity of the film. At face value, it looks like a dubious “Close Encounters” wannabe, with a threat of movement towards the likes of “Independence Day” and “The 5th Wave”. Actually what you get is a film that approaches the grandeur of “Close Encounters” but interlaces it with the intellectual depth of “Inception”, the mystery of “Intersteller” and a heavy emotional jolt or two of “Up”.
Amy Adams (“Batman vs Superman”) plays Dr Louise Banks, a language teacher at a US university facing a bunch of particularly disengaged students one morning. For good reason since world news is afoot. Twelve alien craft have positioned themselves strategically around the world, hanging a few feet from the ground in just the sort of way that bricks don’t. Banks is approached by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and offered the job of trying to communicate with the aliens: where did they come from? why are they here? Banks faces the biggest challenge of her academic career in trying to devise a strategy for communication without any foundation of knowledge on what level communication even works at for them. Assisted by Ian Donelly (Jeremy Renner, “Mission Impossible IV/V”, “Avengers”), a theoretical physicist, the pair try to crack the code against a deadline set by the inexorable rise of international tensions – driven by China’s General Chang (Tzi Ma, “Veep”; “24”).
Steven Spielberg made a rare error of judgement by adding scenes in his “Special Edition” of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” showing everyman power guy Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) entering the alien spacecraft. Some things are best left to the imagination. Here, a reprise of that mistake seems inevitable, but – perversely – seems to be pulled off with mastery and aplomb. The aliens are well rendered, and the small scale nature of the set (I’m sure I’ve been in similar dingy waiting rooms in UK railway stations!) is cleverly handled by the environmental conditions.
But where the screenplay really kills it is in the emergence of the real power unleashed by the translation work. To say any more would deliver spoilers, which I won’t do. But this is a masterly piece of science-fiction writing. The screenplay was by Eric Heisserer – someone with a limited scriptwriting CV of horror film reboots/sequels such as “Final Destination 5”, “The Thing” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” – so the portents were not good, which just adds to the surprise. If I were to be critical, some of the dialogue at times is a little TOO clever for its own good and smacks of Aaron Sorkin over-exposition: the comment about “They have a word for it in Hungary” for example went right over my head.
Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario”) deftly directs, leaving the pace of the story glacially slow in places to let the audience deduce what is going on at their own speed. This will NOT be to the liking of movie fans who like their films in a wham-bam of CGI, but was very much to my liking. The film in fact has very little exposition, giving you lots to think about after the credits roll: there were elements of the story (such as her book) that still generated debate with my better half on the drive home.
Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner are first rate and an effectively moody score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (“Sicario”; “The Theory of Everything”) round off the other high-point credits for me.
An extraordinary film, this is a must see for sci-fi fans but also for lovers of good cinema and well-crafted stories.
Because the trailer for “Arrival” belies absolutely nothing about the depth and complexity of the film. At face value, it looks like a dubious “Close Encounters” wannabe, with a threat of movement towards the likes of “Independence Day” and “The 5th Wave”. Actually what you get is a film that approaches the grandeur of “Close Encounters” but interlaces it with the intellectual depth of “Inception”, the mystery of “Intersteller” and a heavy emotional jolt or two of “Up”.
Amy Adams (“Batman vs Superman”) plays Dr Louise Banks, a language teacher at a US university facing a bunch of particularly disengaged students one morning. For good reason since world news is afoot. Twelve alien craft have positioned themselves strategically around the world, hanging a few feet from the ground in just the sort of way that bricks don’t. Banks is approached by Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) and offered the job of trying to communicate with the aliens: where did they come from? why are they here? Banks faces the biggest challenge of her academic career in trying to devise a strategy for communication without any foundation of knowledge on what level communication even works at for them. Assisted by Ian Donelly (Jeremy Renner, “Mission Impossible IV/V”, “Avengers”), a theoretical physicist, the pair try to crack the code against a deadline set by the inexorable rise of international tensions – driven by China’s General Chang (Tzi Ma, “Veep”; “24”).
Steven Spielberg made a rare error of judgement by adding scenes in his “Special Edition” of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” showing everyman power guy Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) entering the alien spacecraft. Some things are best left to the imagination. Here, a reprise of that mistake seems inevitable, but – perversely – seems to be pulled off with mastery and aplomb. The aliens are well rendered, and the small scale nature of the set (I’m sure I’ve been in similar dingy waiting rooms in UK railway stations!) is cleverly handled by the environmental conditions.
But where the screenplay really kills it is in the emergence of the real power unleashed by the translation work. To say any more would deliver spoilers, which I won’t do. But this is a masterly piece of science-fiction writing. The screenplay was by Eric Heisserer – someone with a limited scriptwriting CV of horror film reboots/sequels such as “Final Destination 5”, “The Thing” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” – so the portents were not good, which just adds to the surprise. If I were to be critical, some of the dialogue at times is a little TOO clever for its own good and smacks of Aaron Sorkin over-exposition: the comment about “They have a word for it in Hungary” for example went right over my head.
Denis Villeneuve (“Sicario”) deftly directs, leaving the pace of the story glacially slow in places to let the audience deduce what is going on at their own speed. This will NOT be to the liking of movie fans who like their films in a wham-bam of CGI, but was very much to my liking. The film in fact has very little exposition, giving you lots to think about after the credits roll: there were elements of the story (such as her book) that still generated debate with my better half on the drive home.
Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner are first rate and an effectively moody score by Jóhann Jóhannsson (“Sicario”; “The Theory of Everything”) round off the other high-point credits for me.
An extraordinary film, this is a must see for sci-fi fans but also for lovers of good cinema and well-crafted stories.