Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated In Time (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
t is said that time is money and in the new film “In Time” this statement takes on an entirely new meaning. In the future we learn that humans have been genetically created to stop aging at the age of 25. Once they reach this selected age, a clock starts to count down from one year. People can obtain more time via work, stealing it from others, or being gifted more time but once their clock hits zero, they expire or “Time Out” as it is called.
As the film opens, we are introduced to Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a man who is three years past twenty five who lives at home with his mother (Olivia Wilde). Will starts each day with barely enough time on his clock for another day, so he dutifully heads off to work each day to earn more time. As does his mother and everyone he knows since workers are paid at the end of their shifts by having more time added to their accounts. Many need to work daily in order to see the next day. To stop working is to die and since everything from food to rent and clothing is paid for in time from an individual’s account, they often have to make the choice between a transaction or more hours of life.
One evening after work, Will encounters a man named Henry (Matt Bomer), with over 100 years remaining on his clock and cautions the man that in this area he is likely to attract thieves. Will’s warnings go unheeded and soon a group of thugs arrive forcing Will to whisk the man away to safety. During their night in hiding, the man tells Will that after living for over a century, he is tired of the way the system is and how the rich can live forever while the working poor suffer just to live another day.
Will awakens the next morning to find the man gone and that his clock has now been credited the 100 years. Will locates the man just in time to watch him time out with a smile as he watches the sun rise. Flush with new wealth, Will plans to move his mother out of the slums and into a better life but when tragedy strikes, Will decides to move to where the wealth is as to take them for all he can.
Will soon finds himself in a high stakes card game at a casino and in a desperate move finds himself wealthier than he ever imagined. His actions impress very wealthy banking magnet Philippie Weiss (Vincent Kartheiser), who introduces him to his daughter Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried). Will and Sylvia hit it off as she is intrigued by someone who came into money rather than being born with it and imagines what life would be like with some excitement.
Will and Sylvia soon have their worlds turned upside down when Will is suspected in the death of Henry and find themselves on the run from a Timekeeper named Raymond (Cillian Murphy), who wants to bring Will to justice. In a rapid series of events, Will and Sylvia must contend with Raymond, criminals, and a series of unsavory characters to regain their lost time before it is to late so they can implement their master plan to truly make a difference.
The film has some great social commentary and a great cast but is hindered by trying to be too many things. It works well as a science fiction film with elements of action and romance. Sadly the film goes off course by having Will and Sylvia act as a modern day Robin Hood duo taking on the powers-that-be to save the downtrodden masses. While it is a noble effort it derailed the momentum of the story as much of the tension and mystery of the story was lost. If one is wanted by thugs and the authorities, I would think that knocking over one high profile time bank after another would not be the way to keep a low profile.
That being said, despite the flaws, the film works and I found myself thinking about the characters and the setting they lived in days after the I screened the film. I had been concerned that the film would be nothing more than a knockoff of “Logan’s Run” but thankfully the film had enough new content to keep it fresh and interesting. In many ways, “In Time” is science fiction at its best as it allows for timely social commentary and provides a disturbing look at many age old debates on society’s endless quests for wealth, power, and youth.
As the film opens, we are introduced to Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a man who is three years past twenty five who lives at home with his mother (Olivia Wilde). Will starts each day with barely enough time on his clock for another day, so he dutifully heads off to work each day to earn more time. As does his mother and everyone he knows since workers are paid at the end of their shifts by having more time added to their accounts. Many need to work daily in order to see the next day. To stop working is to die and since everything from food to rent and clothing is paid for in time from an individual’s account, they often have to make the choice between a transaction or more hours of life.
One evening after work, Will encounters a man named Henry (Matt Bomer), with over 100 years remaining on his clock and cautions the man that in this area he is likely to attract thieves. Will’s warnings go unheeded and soon a group of thugs arrive forcing Will to whisk the man away to safety. During their night in hiding, the man tells Will that after living for over a century, he is tired of the way the system is and how the rich can live forever while the working poor suffer just to live another day.
Will awakens the next morning to find the man gone and that his clock has now been credited the 100 years. Will locates the man just in time to watch him time out with a smile as he watches the sun rise. Flush with new wealth, Will plans to move his mother out of the slums and into a better life but when tragedy strikes, Will decides to move to where the wealth is as to take them for all he can.
Will soon finds himself in a high stakes card game at a casino and in a desperate move finds himself wealthier than he ever imagined. His actions impress very wealthy banking magnet Philippie Weiss (Vincent Kartheiser), who introduces him to his daughter Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried). Will and Sylvia hit it off as she is intrigued by someone who came into money rather than being born with it and imagines what life would be like with some excitement.
Will and Sylvia soon have their worlds turned upside down when Will is suspected in the death of Henry and find themselves on the run from a Timekeeper named Raymond (Cillian Murphy), who wants to bring Will to justice. In a rapid series of events, Will and Sylvia must contend with Raymond, criminals, and a series of unsavory characters to regain their lost time before it is to late so they can implement their master plan to truly make a difference.
The film has some great social commentary and a great cast but is hindered by trying to be too many things. It works well as a science fiction film with elements of action and romance. Sadly the film goes off course by having Will and Sylvia act as a modern day Robin Hood duo taking on the powers-that-be to save the downtrodden masses. While it is a noble effort it derailed the momentum of the story as much of the tension and mystery of the story was lost. If one is wanted by thugs and the authorities, I would think that knocking over one high profile time bank after another would not be the way to keep a low profile.
That being said, despite the flaws, the film works and I found myself thinking about the characters and the setting they lived in days after the I screened the film. I had been concerned that the film would be nothing more than a knockoff of “Logan’s Run” but thankfully the film had enough new content to keep it fresh and interesting. In many ways, “In Time” is science fiction at its best as it allows for timely social commentary and provides a disturbing look at many age old debates on society’s endless quests for wealth, power, and youth.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Yes, I'm a scared cat and bailed out on the Unlimited Screening of this. Those of you on Twitter know that I prefer my horrors to be brightly lit with ample opportunity to scream at the idiots on the screen who are quite clearly going to get themselves killed. That being said, I did decide to see it after reading some general comments after the screening. I believe the phrase I used was "Suck it up, Emma. You can do this."
Pet Sematary is obviously a remake but as I understand it they've made a fair few tweaks to give viewers something a bit different. The premise is still the same though.
After the Creeds move into their new home they discover that the woods on their property are home to a pet cemetery that has quite a local tradition. When their cat, Church, dies on the road outside their house the neighbour overs to help Louis find a spot to bury him. Jud realises that Ellie will be devastated at the loss and leads Louis out to a remote and unusual spot to bury Church. What he doesn't tell him is that Church won't stay buried for long.
Jason Clarke is getting some great screen time this year what with The Aftermath and Serenity (which I hope to catch sometime soon). I liked how he managed to play the sceptic in this, he's a man of science which has a set of rules but the longer he spends in their new surrounds the more he becomes changed by them. He's also a great contrast with his wife and watching them trying to explain death to their daughter was captured in a very interesting way.
Amy Seimetz as Rachel felt a little underwhelming as a character, the backstory she has is odd on its own but having it pop up sporadically through the film felt confusing. I don't know whether it's the same storyline as was in the book but something a little less bizarre felt like it would have worked better and left you with less unanswered questions.
John Lithgow is always a favourite of mine and this performance was no exception. Sort of like the old man shovelling snow in Home Alone he comes across as scary until you realise he's not so bad after all. I'm intrigued by his character though, Jud should surely be much less friendly and changed because of his experiences with the woods, and yet he's fairly normal. The only thing that I was a little disappointed with was that his backstory was very obvious... and to be honest given all the trouble he's had you'd think he'd be a little more cautious.
Our little leading lady certainly has a flair for the demonic and I actually found her to be a much better offering after her unfortunate incident. From what I understand it's her little brother that dies in the original, but in my head I can't see that working very well. They do try and bring him into the story with a slightly supernatural ability to see the dead but it felt a little forced and perhaps it would have been better to just bypass it completely.
If you read my reviews every so often I'm sure you're aware of my dislike for cameras that move erratically. I was aware that we felt to be constantly on the move and it made for a challenging watch. Pet Sematary also featured my least favourite of all the shots, the overhead pan that sets off my motion sickness. Opening the film with a sweeping shot of the forest nearly had me passed out on the floor, and to my joy we also get a brief reprise of this towards the end.
Apart from the camera work that wasn't to my liking there wasn't a lot that I found out of place with the production itself apart from one moment that jumped out at me. When that monstrous little bastard of a cat lured Ellie out into the road we get what is a surprisingly well thought out scene, I was onboard and engrossed and then there were some terrible digital effects involving the truck that stuck out like a sore thumb.
Stephen King and I have a very patchy history with adaptations. I often feel like he writes a fantastic story and then realises he hasn't worked out how to end it and just goe "Boom! Aliens!" I'm looking hard at Under The Dome here, nearly 40 hours of my life... for aliens! Needless to say I was quite pleased that there was some "reasonable" explanation for everything that was happening. Not a single alien in sight and the ending wrapped with a nice ominous vibe that made me glad they hadn't gone with a happily ever after scenario.
Apart from the camera work and the cheap ass jumping scares this wasn't such a bad film. If you ignore the things that don't make sense, like why are parents letting their creepy children give their dead pets a procession through another person's property... or why does the "pet sematary" actually have nothing to do with the resurrections... or why do they walk through about five miles of Star Wars-esque forest and swamp to a random mountain to do the ritual... yeah, if you ignore those things it isn't too bad.
What you should do
It's not a bad horror to watch and if you aren't a big ol' chicken like me then you might want to see it on the big screen.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
What I would like is something very specific, like genie wish specific, I want Church... but I want him in his curly looking death state... without the death. No smell, no blood, no guts, no demonic hell beast, just the regular cat type of hell beast.
Pet Sematary is obviously a remake but as I understand it they've made a fair few tweaks to give viewers something a bit different. The premise is still the same though.
After the Creeds move into their new home they discover that the woods on their property are home to a pet cemetery that has quite a local tradition. When their cat, Church, dies on the road outside their house the neighbour overs to help Louis find a spot to bury him. Jud realises that Ellie will be devastated at the loss and leads Louis out to a remote and unusual spot to bury Church. What he doesn't tell him is that Church won't stay buried for long.
Jason Clarke is getting some great screen time this year what with The Aftermath and Serenity (which I hope to catch sometime soon). I liked how he managed to play the sceptic in this, he's a man of science which has a set of rules but the longer he spends in their new surrounds the more he becomes changed by them. He's also a great contrast with his wife and watching them trying to explain death to their daughter was captured in a very interesting way.
Amy Seimetz as Rachel felt a little underwhelming as a character, the backstory she has is odd on its own but having it pop up sporadically through the film felt confusing. I don't know whether it's the same storyline as was in the book but something a little less bizarre felt like it would have worked better and left you with less unanswered questions.
John Lithgow is always a favourite of mine and this performance was no exception. Sort of like the old man shovelling snow in Home Alone he comes across as scary until you realise he's not so bad after all. I'm intrigued by his character though, Jud should surely be much less friendly and changed because of his experiences with the woods, and yet he's fairly normal. The only thing that I was a little disappointed with was that his backstory was very obvious... and to be honest given all the trouble he's had you'd think he'd be a little more cautious.
Our little leading lady certainly has a flair for the demonic and I actually found her to be a much better offering after her unfortunate incident. From what I understand it's her little brother that dies in the original, but in my head I can't see that working very well. They do try and bring him into the story with a slightly supernatural ability to see the dead but it felt a little forced and perhaps it would have been better to just bypass it completely.
If you read my reviews every so often I'm sure you're aware of my dislike for cameras that move erratically. I was aware that we felt to be constantly on the move and it made for a challenging watch. Pet Sematary also featured my least favourite of all the shots, the overhead pan that sets off my motion sickness. Opening the film with a sweeping shot of the forest nearly had me passed out on the floor, and to my joy we also get a brief reprise of this towards the end.
Apart from the camera work that wasn't to my liking there wasn't a lot that I found out of place with the production itself apart from one moment that jumped out at me. When that monstrous little bastard of a cat lured Ellie out into the road we get what is a surprisingly well thought out scene, I was onboard and engrossed and then there were some terrible digital effects involving the truck that stuck out like a sore thumb.
Stephen King and I have a very patchy history with adaptations. I often feel like he writes a fantastic story and then realises he hasn't worked out how to end it and just goe "Boom! Aliens!" I'm looking hard at Under The Dome here, nearly 40 hours of my life... for aliens! Needless to say I was quite pleased that there was some "reasonable" explanation for everything that was happening. Not a single alien in sight and the ending wrapped with a nice ominous vibe that made me glad they hadn't gone with a happily ever after scenario.
Apart from the camera work and the cheap ass jumping scares this wasn't such a bad film. If you ignore the things that don't make sense, like why are parents letting their creepy children give their dead pets a procession through another person's property... or why does the "pet sematary" actually have nothing to do with the resurrections... or why do they walk through about five miles of Star Wars-esque forest and swamp to a random mountain to do the ritual... yeah, if you ignore those things it isn't too bad.
What you should do
It's not a bad horror to watch and if you aren't a big ol' chicken like me then you might want to see it on the big screen.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
What I would like is something very specific, like genie wish specific, I want Church... but I want him in his curly looking death state... without the death. No smell, no blood, no guts, no demonic hell beast, just the regular cat type of hell beast.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Dark Roads in Books
Aug 12, 2021
A dark and unsettling mystery
For years, the nearly five hundred mile stretch of Cold Creek Highway has been infamous as a place where young women go missing. Drivers, hitch hikers, and more. But their abductor has never been found. Hailey McBride lives in Cold Creek. Her father recently died in a car accident, leaving her to live with her aunt and her controlling police officer husband, Vaughn. Vaughn watches Hailey's every move, bullying and terrorizing her, keeping her from seeing her best friend, Jonny and her new love interest, Amber. Using what her dad taught her about the local land, Hailey plans her escape to the mountains. With Jonny's help, the idea is that everyone will think she was another victim of the highway killer. A year after Hailey disappears, Beth Chevalier arrives in town, desperate for closure after her sister Amber's murder. Beth's life is in shambles after Amber's death, and she starts to look into what happened. But Beth's search puts her in danger--and starts to reveal the truth about what happened to Hailey.
"I had to get out of this house, and this town."
This is a dark and often stressful book. It's told from two perspectives, Hailey and Beth. I was quite attached to Hailey, who is suffering at the hands of Vaughn, the stereotypical power-hungry small-town cop. He embodies the part of the sinister bad guy. Because he seems to control the entire town (no one will even give Hailey a job, since Vaughn doesn't want her to have one), her only choice is to go live in a shack in the mountains and basically let everyone think she's dead. The book shifts from menacing to survival-in-the-woods story and then we flip to Beth's perspective, where she's a struggling wannabe law student who arrives in Cold Creek to figure out who killed her sister (who was Hailey's love interest).
If it seems like a lot and a bit confusing, it is. I liked this book, but it did seem like it had multiple personalities. I found it tense at times (add to the fact that Hailey had a dog in the wilderness--I cannot handle books where something might happen to an animal) and other times a bit slow. Vaughn is our clear bad guy--Hailey even discovers some of his many terrible traits and crimes. But if that's true, then why are we reading? Just to catch him? At times, the book catches us off kilter, guessing and wondering. At other times, it falls a bit flat when the whole premise doesn't really seem to work. Who is our protagonist and what is the end goal?
Overall, this is an often dark and quite atmospheric book. It's creepy and twisty and sometimes heartbreaking. Is it worth reading? Yes. But I'm not sure if it ever lives up to its true potential.
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
"I had to get out of this house, and this town."
This is a dark and often stressful book. It's told from two perspectives, Hailey and Beth. I was quite attached to Hailey, who is suffering at the hands of Vaughn, the stereotypical power-hungry small-town cop. He embodies the part of the sinister bad guy. Because he seems to control the entire town (no one will even give Hailey a job, since Vaughn doesn't want her to have one), her only choice is to go live in a shack in the mountains and basically let everyone think she's dead. The book shifts from menacing to survival-in-the-woods story and then we flip to Beth's perspective, where she's a struggling wannabe law student who arrives in Cold Creek to figure out who killed her sister (who was Hailey's love interest).
If it seems like a lot and a bit confusing, it is. I liked this book, but it did seem like it had multiple personalities. I found it tense at times (add to the fact that Hailey had a dog in the wilderness--I cannot handle books where something might happen to an animal) and other times a bit slow. Vaughn is our clear bad guy--Hailey even discovers some of his many terrible traits and crimes. But if that's true, then why are we reading? Just to catch him? At times, the book catches us off kilter, guessing and wondering. At other times, it falls a bit flat when the whole premise doesn't really seem to work. Who is our protagonist and what is the end goal?
Overall, this is an often dark and quite atmospheric book. It's creepy and twisty and sometimes heartbreaking. Is it worth reading? Yes. But I'm not sure if it ever lives up to its true potential.
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Water Babies in Books
Oct 9, 2017
Worryingly Controversial
This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
This year (2017), Calla Editions are printing a new hardback version of the original 1863 children’s classic The Water Babies written by the Anglican clergyman, Charles Kingsley (1819-75). Subtitled “A Fairytale for a land-baby” the book was intended for Kingsley’s youngest son and therefore was targeted at a juvenile demographic. However, as a result of the 1800’s vernacular and particularly deep themes, it has become more appropriate for older readers. With full-colour illustrations by Jessie Wilcox Smith (1863-1935) from the height of the golden age of illustration, this edition promises to be a collector’s item.
Charles Kingsley, the founder of England’s Christian Socialist movement, was exceedingly interested in the plight of the working class, particularly of the abuse and protection of children. This is reflected in his story about Tom, the ten-year-old London chimney sweep, who suffers ill-treatment at the hands of his employer. Tom, who has known nothing but the sooty streets of London, is embarrassed after scaring a beautiful young girl with his grimy appearance. Running away through a countryside he is unfamiliar with, Tom dives into a river to wash, however, falls asleep in the water.
On awakening, Tom discovers he has been transformed into a water baby; he can live and breathe amongst all the fishes and other mystical water creatures. Forgetting his horrible past, Tom is soon frolicking with the characters he meets, teasing and provoking unsuspecting individuals. But the fairies in charge of water babies are determined to teach him many lessons about truth, mercy, justice and courage.
The Water Babies is a morality fable with fairy-tale-like qualities. It educates young readers about the consequences of their actions but also enlightens them about the cruelty of some adults. Kingsley often talks to the reader (in this instance his son), drawing them into the story and making the scenarios as relatable as possible. The magical underwater setting is merely a veil to hide the lessons Kingsley is attempting to preach.
For the adult reader, Kingsley has a much more political message. Written at the time of political and scientific advancement, particularly in respect to the concept of natural selection, Kingsley attempts to ridicule the ideas of thinkers such as Charles Darwin by producing a satirical narrative. He suggests that scientists are fools who use unnecessarily long and foreign terms, evidenced by his use of the made-up subject of Necrobioneopalæonthydrochthonanthropopithekology. He also goes as far as to mock the majority of adults and appears to be completely anti-Irish people.
In some instances, Charles Kingsley goes too far in his satire, resulting in something that would not be accepted by publishers today. In order for Tom to be the hero of the story, adults need to be viewed as less than good – people who need to be punished for their discourteous treatment of children, which in this instance, they are, and quite graphically. But the most controversial theme explored is death. The more naïve may not cotton on to the fact that Tom falling asleep in the river equates to drowning, yet that is exactly what happened. Only through death can one become a water baby. To make matters slightly more alarming, Kingsley does not see this death as a bad thing; he describes Tom’s new life as something far better than life on earth – coming from a clergyman this is understandable – which suggests that death is better than living for an abused child.
Despite these controversies, Kingsley’s prose is humorous and entertaining - far more mind-boggling than you may initially expect. With characters named Mrs Bedonebyasyoudid and Professor Ptthmllnsprts, there is plenty to make readers laugh. Some of the hilarities may go above the heads of children since the jargon is no longer used in today’s society, however, adults will be able to appreciate the comical aspect.
Over 150 years old, The Water Babies has remained a classic. It reveals the political, scientific and social situations of the mid-1800s, yet it contains wisdom that is still relevant today. As Kingsley’s daughter Rose says in the introduction, “What a fine thing it is to love truth, mercy, justice, courage, and all things noble and of good report.” No matter how peculiar this novel is, it says a lot about the virtues of our character.
This year (2017), Calla Editions are printing a new hardback version of the original 1863 children’s classic The Water Babies written by the Anglican clergyman, Charles Kingsley (1819-75). Subtitled “A Fairytale for a land-baby” the book was intended for Kingsley’s youngest son and therefore was targeted at a juvenile demographic. However, as a result of the 1800’s vernacular and particularly deep themes, it has become more appropriate for older readers. With full-colour illustrations by Jessie Wilcox Smith (1863-1935) from the height of the golden age of illustration, this edition promises to be a collector’s item.
Charles Kingsley, the founder of England’s Christian Socialist movement, was exceedingly interested in the plight of the working class, particularly of the abuse and protection of children. This is reflected in his story about Tom, the ten-year-old London chimney sweep, who suffers ill-treatment at the hands of his employer. Tom, who has known nothing but the sooty streets of London, is embarrassed after scaring a beautiful young girl with his grimy appearance. Running away through a countryside he is unfamiliar with, Tom dives into a river to wash, however, falls asleep in the water.
On awakening, Tom discovers he has been transformed into a water baby; he can live and breathe amongst all the fishes and other mystical water creatures. Forgetting his horrible past, Tom is soon frolicking with the characters he meets, teasing and provoking unsuspecting individuals. But the fairies in charge of water babies are determined to teach him many lessons about truth, mercy, justice and courage.
The Water Babies is a morality fable with fairy-tale-like qualities. It educates young readers about the consequences of their actions but also enlightens them about the cruelty of some adults. Kingsley often talks to the reader (in this instance his son), drawing them into the story and making the scenarios as relatable as possible. The magical underwater setting is merely a veil to hide the lessons Kingsley is attempting to preach.
For the adult reader, Kingsley has a much more political message. Written at the time of political and scientific advancement, particularly in respect to the concept of natural selection, Kingsley attempts to ridicule the ideas of thinkers such as Charles Darwin by producing a satirical narrative. He suggests that scientists are fools who use unnecessarily long and foreign terms, evidenced by his use of the made-up subject of Necrobioneopalæonthydrochthonanthropopithekology. He also goes as far as to mock the majority of adults and appears to be completely anti-Irish people.
In some instances, Charles Kingsley goes too far in his satire, resulting in something that would not be accepted by publishers today. In order for Tom to be the hero of the story, adults need to be viewed as less than good – people who need to be punished for their discourteous treatment of children, which in this instance, they are, and quite graphically. But the most controversial theme explored is death. The more naïve may not cotton on to the fact that Tom falling asleep in the river equates to drowning, yet that is exactly what happened. Only through death can one become a water baby. To make matters slightly more alarming, Kingsley does not see this death as a bad thing; he describes Tom’s new life as something far better than life on earth – coming from a clergyman this is understandable – which suggests that death is better than living for an abused child.
Despite these controversies, Kingsley’s prose is humorous and entertaining - far more mind-boggling than you may initially expect. With characters named Mrs Bedonebyasyoudid and Professor Ptthmllnsprts, there is plenty to make readers laugh. Some of the hilarities may go above the heads of children since the jargon is no longer used in today’s society, however, adults will be able to appreciate the comical aspect.
Over 150 years old, The Water Babies has remained a classic. It reveals the political, scientific and social situations of the mid-1800s, yet it contains wisdom that is still relevant today. As Kingsley’s daughter Rose says in the introduction, “What a fine thing it is to love truth, mercy, justice, courage, and all things noble and of good report.” No matter how peculiar this novel is, it says a lot about the virtues of our character.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Water Babies in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
This year (2017), Calla Editions are printing a new hardback version of the original 1863 children’s classic <i>The Water Babies</i> written by the Anglican clergyman, Charles Kingsley (1819-75). Subtitled “<i>A Fairytale for a land-baby</i>” the book was intended for Kingsley’s youngest son and therefore was targeted at a juvenile demographic. However, as a result of the 1800’s vernacular and particularly deep themes, it has become more appropriate for older readers. With full-colour illustrations by Jessie Wilcox Smith (1863-1935) from the height of the golden age of illustration, this edition promises to be a collector’s item.
Charles Kingsley, the founder of England’s Christian Socialist movement, was exceedingly interested in the plight of the working class, particularly of the abuse and protection of children. This is reflected in his story about Tom, the ten-year-old London chimney sweep, who suffers ill-treatment at the hands of his employer. Tom, who has known nothing but the sooty streets of London, is embarrassed after scaring a beautiful young girl with his grimy appearance. Running away through a countryside he is unfamiliar with, Tom dives into a river to wash, however, falls asleep in the water.
On awakening, Tom discovers he has been transformed into a water baby; he can live and breathe amongst all the fishes and other mystical water creatures. Forgetting his horrible past, Tom is soon frolicking with the characters he meets, teasing and provoking unsuspecting individuals. But the fairies in charge of water babies are determined to teach him many lessons about truth, mercy, justice and courage.
<i>The Water Babies</i> is a morality fable with fairy-tale-like qualities. It educates young readers about the consequences of their actions but also enlightens them about the cruelty of some adults. Kingsley often talks to the reader (in this instance his son), drawing them into the story and making the scenarios as relatable as possible. The magical underwater setting is merely a veil to hide the lessons Kingsley is attempting to preach.
For the adult reader, Kingsley has a much more political message. Written at the time of political and scientific advancement, particularly in respect to the concept of natural selection, Kingsley attempts to ridicule the ideas of thinkers such as Charles Darwin by producing a satirical narrative. He suggests that scientists are fools who use unnecessarily long and foreign terms, evidenced by his use of the made-up subject of <i>Necrobioneopalæonthydrochthonanthropopithekology</i>. He also goes as far as to mock the majority of adults and appears to be completely anti-Irish people.
In some instances, Charles Kingsley goes too far in his satire, resulting in something that would not be accepted by publishers today. In order for Tom to be the hero of the story, adults need to be viewed as less than good – people who need to be punished for their discourteous treatment of children, which in this instance, they are, and quite graphically. But the most controversial theme explored is death. The more naïve may not cotton on to the fact that Tom falling asleep in the river equates to drowning, yet that is exactly what happened. Only through death can one become a water baby. To make matters slightly more alarming, Kingsley does not see this death as a bad thing; he describes Tom’s new life as something far better than life on earth – coming from a clergyman this is understandable – which suggests that death is better than living for an abused child.
Despite these controversies, Kingsley’s prose is humorous and entertaining - far more mind-boggling than you may initially expect. With characters named Mrs Bedonebyasyoudid and Professor Ptthmllnsprts, there is plenty to make readers laugh. Some of the hilarities may go above the heads of children since the jargon is no longer used in today’s society, however, adults will be able to appreciate the comical aspect.
Over 150 years old, <i>The Water Babies</i> has remained a classic. It reveals the political, scientific and social situations of the mid-1800s, yet it contains wisdom that is still relevant today. As Kingsley’s daughter Rose says in the introduction, “What a fine thing it is to love truth, mercy, justice, courage, and all things noble and of good report.” No matter how peculiar this novel is, it says a lot about the virtues of our character.
This year (2017), Calla Editions are printing a new hardback version of the original 1863 children’s classic <i>The Water Babies</i> written by the Anglican clergyman, Charles Kingsley (1819-75). Subtitled “<i>A Fairytale for a land-baby</i>” the book was intended for Kingsley’s youngest son and therefore was targeted at a juvenile demographic. However, as a result of the 1800’s vernacular and particularly deep themes, it has become more appropriate for older readers. With full-colour illustrations by Jessie Wilcox Smith (1863-1935) from the height of the golden age of illustration, this edition promises to be a collector’s item.
Charles Kingsley, the founder of England’s Christian Socialist movement, was exceedingly interested in the plight of the working class, particularly of the abuse and protection of children. This is reflected in his story about Tom, the ten-year-old London chimney sweep, who suffers ill-treatment at the hands of his employer. Tom, who has known nothing but the sooty streets of London, is embarrassed after scaring a beautiful young girl with his grimy appearance. Running away through a countryside he is unfamiliar with, Tom dives into a river to wash, however, falls asleep in the water.
On awakening, Tom discovers he has been transformed into a water baby; he can live and breathe amongst all the fishes and other mystical water creatures. Forgetting his horrible past, Tom is soon frolicking with the characters he meets, teasing and provoking unsuspecting individuals. But the fairies in charge of water babies are determined to teach him many lessons about truth, mercy, justice and courage.
<i>The Water Babies</i> is a morality fable with fairy-tale-like qualities. It educates young readers about the consequences of their actions but also enlightens them about the cruelty of some adults. Kingsley often talks to the reader (in this instance his son), drawing them into the story and making the scenarios as relatable as possible. The magical underwater setting is merely a veil to hide the lessons Kingsley is attempting to preach.
For the adult reader, Kingsley has a much more political message. Written at the time of political and scientific advancement, particularly in respect to the concept of natural selection, Kingsley attempts to ridicule the ideas of thinkers such as Charles Darwin by producing a satirical narrative. He suggests that scientists are fools who use unnecessarily long and foreign terms, evidenced by his use of the made-up subject of <i>Necrobioneopalæonthydrochthonanthropopithekology</i>. He also goes as far as to mock the majority of adults and appears to be completely anti-Irish people.
In some instances, Charles Kingsley goes too far in his satire, resulting in something that would not be accepted by publishers today. In order for Tom to be the hero of the story, adults need to be viewed as less than good – people who need to be punished for their discourteous treatment of children, which in this instance, they are, and quite graphically. But the most controversial theme explored is death. The more naïve may not cotton on to the fact that Tom falling asleep in the river equates to drowning, yet that is exactly what happened. Only through death can one become a water baby. To make matters slightly more alarming, Kingsley does not see this death as a bad thing; he describes Tom’s new life as something far better than life on earth – coming from a clergyman this is understandable – which suggests that death is better than living for an abused child.
Despite these controversies, Kingsley’s prose is humorous and entertaining - far more mind-boggling than you may initially expect. With characters named Mrs Bedonebyasyoudid and Professor Ptthmllnsprts, there is plenty to make readers laugh. Some of the hilarities may go above the heads of children since the jargon is no longer used in today’s society, however, adults will be able to appreciate the comical aspect.
Over 150 years old, <i>The Water Babies</i> has remained a classic. It reveals the political, scientific and social situations of the mid-1800s, yet it contains wisdom that is still relevant today. As Kingsley’s daughter Rose says in the introduction, “What a fine thing it is to love truth, mercy, justice, courage, and all things noble and of good report.” No matter how peculiar this novel is, it says a lot about the virtues of our character.
Rich, detailed, but strange narrative style at times!
I was sooo keen to read this - especially after watching the TV series, which I completely loved. For the most part, I wasn't disappointed. It's such a novel way of exploring Henry VIII's relationship with Anne Boleyn, not to mention the complex divorce proceedings that preceded it - through the eyes of Thomas Cromwell, the man partially responsible for orchestrating the whole thing.
Immediately, I was struck by Hilary Mantel's remarkable ability to capture life of that time - making it seem strangely familiar, despite the fact it was hundreds of years ago. She made it all seem so real, largely due to her richness of detail, not to mention expert knowledge of the era. The little notes of humour throughout are what really bring it to life - so often, history is treated with utmost seriousness, yet Mantel is absolutely correct - I'm sure people were cracking jokes and saying silly things in the Tudor era too!
The relationships were likewise beautifully illustrated, and the death of Cromwell's wife, genuinely moving. For me, this was one of the most impressive moments of the book, as Mantel captures grief so powerfully and yet so simply.
One thing I did find strange though - the way Mantel uses pronouns throughout the book. I pondered for ages about why it jarred on me every so often, and I think it's because the 3rd person narrative is so intimate, it almost feels like a 1st person in places. Then, when she uses 'he' again, rather than 'I', it is momentarily confusing. I found myself wondering what the book would have been like had she just told it in first person through Cromwell's eyes - my personal belief is that it might have worked better.
Also, although the richness of the detail was spectacular, there were times when I felt that it held up the narrative slightly. I appreciate her desire to capture every moment of these tumultuous historic events, but at times, I did find them a wee bit boring.
However, for the most part, I was really into this book, and loved the character of Cromwell to bits. A man from a humble background, unfailingly pragmatic and clever - fabulous stuff!
Immediately, I was struck by Hilary Mantel's remarkable ability to capture life of that time - making it seem strangely familiar, despite the fact it was hundreds of years ago. She made it all seem so real, largely due to her richness of detail, not to mention expert knowledge of the era. The little notes of humour throughout are what really bring it to life - so often, history is treated with utmost seriousness, yet Mantel is absolutely correct - I'm sure people were cracking jokes and saying silly things in the Tudor era too!
The relationships were likewise beautifully illustrated, and the death of Cromwell's wife, genuinely moving. For me, this was one of the most impressive moments of the book, as Mantel captures grief so powerfully and yet so simply.
One thing I did find strange though - the way Mantel uses pronouns throughout the book. I pondered for ages about why it jarred on me every so often, and I think it's because the 3rd person narrative is so intimate, it almost feels like a 1st person in places. Then, when she uses 'he' again, rather than 'I', it is momentarily confusing. I found myself wondering what the book would have been like had she just told it in first person through Cromwell's eyes - my personal belief is that it might have worked better.
Also, although the richness of the detail was spectacular, there were times when I felt that it held up the narrative slightly. I appreciate her desire to capture every moment of these tumultuous historic events, but at times, I did find them a wee bit boring.
However, for the most part, I was really into this book, and loved the character of Cromwell to bits. A man from a humble background, unfailingly pragmatic and clever - fabulous stuff!
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Identicals in Books
May 10, 2018
Tabitha and Harper Frost are identical twins. Their parents divorced when they were 14 years old, and the twins were split between the parents(like the Parent Trap). Tabitha goes with their mother to Nantucket and Harper goes with their father to Martha's Vineyard. Even though these 2 islands are only a few miles away, they might as well be thousands. After this separation the girls grew farther and farther apart until they stopped speaking all together. When their father, Billy, dies, will it be enough to bring Tabitha and Harper back together as the sisters they once were, or will this drive them even farther apart?
Elin Hilderbrand has put together another enjoyable novel. My travels have never brought me further north than upstate New York, but she paints a picture of the New England coastline as a place I have to visit.
I don't know what it's like to be a twin, but I do have a sister. I think it would be impossible to go years without speaking to or seeing my sister. What happened between Tabitha and Harper that they couldn't work out their differences? Will the death of their father prove to them that whatever it was can be fixed?
For me, I didn't really connect with either of these characters. The person I connected most with was Ainsley, Tabitha's 15 year old daughter. At the beginning of the book, she is struggling through life as all girls at that age do. Trying to find out who you are, who your friends should be, which cliques to be a part of. Ainsley is trying to figure out her place in her world and trying to find her way through that with a parent who is pretty much hands-off.
Harper is also struggling through some things at the start of the book. But unfortunately, this is nothing new for Harper. She always seems to find herself on the wrong side of trouble.
Tabitha as well is going through a tough situation. As the head of her mother's clothing empire, trying to keep the store afloat as well as raise a teenage daughter and have a social life, it's a lot on one person.
Will these three ladies be able to put their differences aside, pull up their big girl panties, and work everything out so that they all will be able to coexist and thrive?
Elin Hilderbrand has put together another enjoyable novel. My travels have never brought me further north than upstate New York, but she paints a picture of the New England coastline as a place I have to visit.
I don't know what it's like to be a twin, but I do have a sister. I think it would be impossible to go years without speaking to or seeing my sister. What happened between Tabitha and Harper that they couldn't work out their differences? Will the death of their father prove to them that whatever it was can be fixed?
For me, I didn't really connect with either of these characters. The person I connected most with was Ainsley, Tabitha's 15 year old daughter. At the beginning of the book, she is struggling through life as all girls at that age do. Trying to find out who you are, who your friends should be, which cliques to be a part of. Ainsley is trying to figure out her place in her world and trying to find her way through that with a parent who is pretty much hands-off.
Harper is also struggling through some things at the start of the book. But unfortunately, this is nothing new for Harper. She always seems to find herself on the wrong side of trouble.
Tabitha as well is going through a tough situation. As the head of her mother's clothing empire, trying to keep the store afloat as well as raise a teenage daughter and have a social life, it's a lot on one person.
Will these three ladies be able to put their differences aside, pull up their big girl panties, and work everything out so that they all will be able to coexist and thrive?
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated IA: Union (IA #3) in Books
Nov 15, 2019
With great power comes great responsibility. That's particularly true of Naz, a boy who has been given amazing mental and physical abilities thanks the the unorthodox, controversial and groundbreaking training given by his genius father.
Initially keen to use his powers to find and punish those responsible for his sister's death, he soon doubts both his motives and abilities. Together with his best friend Harvis they plot to be removed from the prestigious International Academy and return to their former friends - and enemies - at Union High School in the Exclave.
Things start to settle down for both of them and Naz is able to rekindle his relationship with the equally mysterious D, but just as daily life starts to get comfortable, his world is turned upside down, his abilities making him, and those around him, the subject of unwanted attention. Despite his reluctance he must face danger and use his powers to save them.
There are so many good things about not only this third instalment of the IA series but the series as a whole. The first is Naz, a very well developed character who is believable despite his incredible powers. His very human self-doubt and reluctance to be anything other than just one of the crowd make him a very interesting hero. In this book in particular it is up to others like Harvis or D to actually persuade him that he needs to do the right thing and help him along.
The school setting is also a very big plus, with all of the good and bad parts of school life present. The first half of the book spends time building up the description of Union as well as showing at, at the end of the day, Naz is just a teenage boy with all of the troubles and insecurities that can bring.
What is impressive is that even here in the third book both the reader and Naz are still discovering exactly what his abilities and past mean. Like a carefully constructed onion each book has removed layer after layer, revealing conspiracies and conflicting motives of those around Naz.
Each book goes from strength to strength (as does Naz). There really aren't many 'young adult' books that engage and involve as well as the IA series. It is something very special indeed.
Initially keen to use his powers to find and punish those responsible for his sister's death, he soon doubts both his motives and abilities. Together with his best friend Harvis they plot to be removed from the prestigious International Academy and return to their former friends - and enemies - at Union High School in the Exclave.
Things start to settle down for both of them and Naz is able to rekindle his relationship with the equally mysterious D, but just as daily life starts to get comfortable, his world is turned upside down, his abilities making him, and those around him, the subject of unwanted attention. Despite his reluctance he must face danger and use his powers to save them.
There are so many good things about not only this third instalment of the IA series but the series as a whole. The first is Naz, a very well developed character who is believable despite his incredible powers. His very human self-doubt and reluctance to be anything other than just one of the crowd make him a very interesting hero. In this book in particular it is up to others like Harvis or D to actually persuade him that he needs to do the right thing and help him along.
The school setting is also a very big plus, with all of the good and bad parts of school life present. The first half of the book spends time building up the description of Union as well as showing at, at the end of the day, Naz is just a teenage boy with all of the troubles and insecurities that can bring.
What is impressive is that even here in the third book both the reader and Naz are still discovering exactly what his abilities and past mean. Like a carefully constructed onion each book has removed layer after layer, revealing conspiracies and conflicting motives of those around Naz.
Each book goes from strength to strength (as does Naz). There really aren't many 'young adult' books that engage and involve as well as the IA series. It is something very special indeed.
The Demon Crown: Sigma Force Book 13
8.0
Rate It
Book
“Bone-chilling.” –Publishers Weekly (Starred Review) “One of the best in the series.”...
thriller
A Circle of Firelight
Book
The execution is for the most part charming and clever, with lively dialogue, easy pacing, and...