Search
When we Were Young and Brave
9.0
Rate It
Book
Their motto was to be prepared, but nothing could prepare them for war. . . The New York Times...
historical literary women fiction
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Last Dickens in Books
Nov 18, 2019
I will hold my hand up to two things at the start of this review. Firstly I am drawn to fiction based on other fiction, and secondly I'm not a big Dickens fan. For various reasons I just don't find him an interesting read.
However I can't deny his impact as a novelist at a time when reading as a past time was only just reaching the masses. And so this book looked intriguing.
Primarily set immediately after the death of the famous author, having completed exactly half of the installments of his latest book - The Mystery of Edwin Drood - James Osgood, the junior partner in his American publishers is sent to England to try to track down any other parts of the manuscript.
However dark forces are afoot; there are two murders related to the Dickens papers in short order and Osgood is attacked on the ship to England. Clearly someone does not want any more of Drood to be published.
Pearl has taken one of the greatest literary mysteries of all (there really are no clues about how Drood was supposed to conclude) and wrapped it in another fictional conundrum. He has clearly researched all of the details very well and uses real people - including Osgood and Dickens himself- along with fictional characters to tell the story. This gives the plot a certain solidity because so much of it is based in reality, with the fabricated parts showing through the cracks.
The narrative moves between 1870 and Osgood's quest, to India at the same time where Frank Dickens (son of Charles) is investigating drug smuggling and to 1868 when Dickens is performing a reading tour of America.
The plot is more-or-less highly plausible, just some coincidental points that require a little suspension of disbelief. The writing is excellent throughout, highly descriptive and particularly good at capturing the personalities of the characters (as would be expected given how carefully this has been researched). There are several action scenes at the book progresses and these are handled well. The villains are unmasked in classical style, gloating with our heroes apparently doomed only for the tables to be turned.
Honestly I was expecting this to be reasonably interesting, highlighting aspects of Dickens' life and death with a little light murder mystery thrown in. In the end I would call this nothing less than a triumph and will definitely be looking to read more of Pearl's work.
It's still not tempted me to read any Dickens, though...
However I can't deny his impact as a novelist at a time when reading as a past time was only just reaching the masses. And so this book looked intriguing.
Primarily set immediately after the death of the famous author, having completed exactly half of the installments of his latest book - The Mystery of Edwin Drood - James Osgood, the junior partner in his American publishers is sent to England to try to track down any other parts of the manuscript.
However dark forces are afoot; there are two murders related to the Dickens papers in short order and Osgood is attacked on the ship to England. Clearly someone does not want any more of Drood to be published.
Pearl has taken one of the greatest literary mysteries of all (there really are no clues about how Drood was supposed to conclude) and wrapped it in another fictional conundrum. He has clearly researched all of the details very well and uses real people - including Osgood and Dickens himself- along with fictional characters to tell the story. This gives the plot a certain solidity because so much of it is based in reality, with the fabricated parts showing through the cracks.
The narrative moves between 1870 and Osgood's quest, to India at the same time where Frank Dickens (son of Charles) is investigating drug smuggling and to 1868 when Dickens is performing a reading tour of America.
The plot is more-or-less highly plausible, just some coincidental points that require a little suspension of disbelief. The writing is excellent throughout, highly descriptive and particularly good at capturing the personalities of the characters (as would be expected given how carefully this has been researched). There are several action scenes at the book progresses and these are handled well. The villains are unmasked in classical style, gloating with our heroes apparently doomed only for the tables to be turned.
Honestly I was expecting this to be reasonably interesting, highlighting aspects of Dickens' life and death with a little light murder mystery thrown in. In the end I would call this nothing less than a triumph and will definitely be looking to read more of Pearl's work.
It's still not tempted me to read any Dickens, though...
Becs (244 KP) rated Of Mice and Men in Books
Oct 2, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, a (somewhat) great historical fiction novel. I was just appalled by how slow the middle of the book was. I was so excited to read this book, as I’ve heard such great things about it. When I started, it was a little bumpy but as I kept reading, the road just kept becoming almost unbearable to continue. The ending though, spot on and definitely kicked my attention back into place. In all aspects, Of Mice and Men deserves a solid four gold stars. Reasons why below.
Genre: Literary classic, historical fiction
Audience: I definitely recommend at least a high schooler or up to read it. As it’s a little controversial and a bit harder of a read for a younger crowd.
Difficulty Reading: I almost put this down to never pick up and read again. I was about a millimeter away from doing it. But I have a thing against never finishing a book or DNF. If I’m going to pick something up and start reading it, I HAVE TO finish it, something about having an unfinished book doesn’t sit right with me. So, the answer is yes. This was a bit more of a difficult read. Now that it’s finished, I’m glad I stuck through and read the rest of the novel.
Insights: John Steinbeck is a great author and writer. I’ve read a few of his other novels and have loved them. Of Mice and Men just does not compare to the others. Maybe it’s the way that the characters speak. Maybe it’s the topic. Maybe it’s just Steinbeck lost touch with his writing when creating Of Mice and Men. Who knows, apparently some think that this novel is a piece of art. I mean, it’s still being sold nationwide. That must mean it’s somewhat good, right?
Ah-Ha Moment: When I found out that Lennie has a bit of a mental handicap issue. (This honestly sounds so bad in writing but I’m not trying to be rude about people who are mentally handicapped. I use to work as a caretaker for them and I loved it.) To continue on. You typically don’t see this style of character in this novels era. It was refreshing and different from other literary classic novels.
***SPOILERS AHEAD***
Favorite Quotes: “Trouble with mice is you always kill ’em. ” – Honestly, this is a perfect short, one sentence summary of the novel. If you don’t want to read Of Mice and Men, what happens is: you have George and Lennie, always traveling together. Lennie is mentally handicapped and likes to pet soft things. He gets in trouble in Weed by touching a female’s dress and not letting go when she screams. They run and come to find work bucking barley. Here, Lennie kills a newborn pup then kills Curley’s wife. George shoots Lennie in the back of the head and the novel ends.
***END OF SPOILERS***
“Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don’t belong no place. They come to a ranch an’ work up a stake, and the first thing you know they’re poundin’ their tail on some other ranch. They ain’t got nothing to look ahead to.” – I mean, you’re not wrong George. Ranchhands are typically pretty lonely, especially in those olden days.
What will you gain: A love-hate relationship for this novel. Seriously. I love it so much I gave it four gold stars. But I hate it so much because man, it was a bit of a bore.
“Maybe ever’body in the whole damn world is scared of each other.”
Genre: Literary classic, historical fiction
Audience: I definitely recommend at least a high schooler or up to read it. As it’s a little controversial and a bit harder of a read for a younger crowd.
Difficulty Reading: I almost put this down to never pick up and read again. I was about a millimeter away from doing it. But I have a thing against never finishing a book or DNF. If I’m going to pick something up and start reading it, I HAVE TO finish it, something about having an unfinished book doesn’t sit right with me. So, the answer is yes. This was a bit more of a difficult read. Now that it’s finished, I’m glad I stuck through and read the rest of the novel.
Insights: John Steinbeck is a great author and writer. I’ve read a few of his other novels and have loved them. Of Mice and Men just does not compare to the others. Maybe it’s the way that the characters speak. Maybe it’s the topic. Maybe it’s just Steinbeck lost touch with his writing when creating Of Mice and Men. Who knows, apparently some think that this novel is a piece of art. I mean, it’s still being sold nationwide. That must mean it’s somewhat good, right?
Ah-Ha Moment: When I found out that Lennie has a bit of a mental handicap issue. (This honestly sounds so bad in writing but I’m not trying to be rude about people who are mentally handicapped. I use to work as a caretaker for them and I loved it.) To continue on. You typically don’t see this style of character in this novels era. It was refreshing and different from other literary classic novels.
***SPOILERS AHEAD***
Favorite Quotes: “Trouble with mice is you always kill ’em. ” – Honestly, this is a perfect short, one sentence summary of the novel. If you don’t want to read Of Mice and Men, what happens is: you have George and Lennie, always traveling together. Lennie is mentally handicapped and likes to pet soft things. He gets in trouble in Weed by touching a female’s dress and not letting go when she screams. They run and come to find work bucking barley. Here, Lennie kills a newborn pup then kills Curley’s wife. George shoots Lennie in the back of the head and the novel ends.
***END OF SPOILERS***
“Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don’t belong no place. They come to a ranch an’ work up a stake, and the first thing you know they’re poundin’ their tail on some other ranch. They ain’t got nothing to look ahead to.” – I mean, you’re not wrong George. Ranchhands are typically pretty lonely, especially in those olden days.
What will you gain: A love-hate relationship for this novel. Seriously. I love it so much I gave it four gold stars. But I hate it so much because man, it was a bit of a bore.
“Maybe ever’body in the whole damn world is scared of each other.”
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Total Recall (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Remaking classic films is always risky business. Mainly because there is a specific reason those movies are so well received – because they are the best of their time. Remakes are inherently risky because the filmmakers have a bar they have to at least reach, and they absolutely cannot tread the exact same ground as the original. They have to do something new, modern, or innovate. Or, at least they are expected to. When remakes work, they soar. When they don’t… Well, that’s another story. Paul Verhoeven’s “Total Recall” (1990) was an excellent science fiction monolith of its time. It stood out as a heartfelt science fiction story, one that was exceptionally aware of its own identity, design, and overall setting. It reflected the vary soul of its time – intentionally representational of culture at the time (late 80s and early 90s). If Len Wiseman’s remake, “Total Recall” (2012) is supposed to be a representation of contemporary culture in the same way as the original, then I fear our popular culture is too shallow for high minded science fiction. While not a bad movie – in fact, it is actually quite entertaining overall – it just does not feature the same soul and passion of the original film.
The premise follows the original in only a rough sense. Sometime in the future, the world has been left mostly uninhabitable due to a deadly chemical war across the globe. Humanity has been left to residing in the only remaining habitable landmasses – Western Europe and “The Colony”, the latter being modern-day Australia. Because air travel is now impossible, the only travel between the landmasses is through a massive elevator called “The Fall” that cuts through the center of the Earth. Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a factory worker who works in Europe but lives in “The Colony” with his wife, Lori (Kate Beckinstale). His chronic nightmares lead him to become interested in the “Rekall” service – a machine that can implant memories into customers. His interest will lead him on a wild journey with Melina (Jessica Biel) to learn about his true self as well as secrets of Cohaagen’s (Bryan Cranston) tyrannical administration.
The problems of the film really start with the premise. While I enjoy the creativity of something like “The Fall”, it is simply too ridiculous to take seriously. They deserve credit for coming up with a relatively unknown science fiction concept, but an elevator that travels through the center of the Earth? Peoples’ suspension of disbelief can only be pushed so far. It serves a practical purpose in the plot – to create the conflict between “The Colony” and the mainland and between the government and the Resistance. Yet, too much time is spent trying to introduce this concept and make it seem plausible than the film should. It honestly seems easier to just use the original film’s conflict between settings – Mars and Earth. I have to ask, what makes an elevator between two lands more contemporary of an idea than a conflict between colonial Mars and Earth. This is especially true considering recent news that a Mars colony might be seen in our lifetimes.
The other problems are more literary. Colin Farrell’s Douglas Quaid is portrayed very well throughout the film, and he manages to make the character satisfactory in the emotional portrayal of a man with a confused past and an insane situation. But even then, I have to say Arnold’s original portrayal seemed overall more human. The problem with Colin Farrell’s character is a mixture of performance and writing in his introduction. It is hard to believe him as someone so distraught over his nightmares that he absolutely feels compelled to go to Rekall. If they spent more time exploring his inner demons and how they are bringing his life down, then he would have been a much more compelling character. As it stands, he just goes through the motions of a protagonist. All of the other characters are the same way. Kate Beckinstale’s villainous Lori and Jessica Biel’s Melina are fairly shallow characters. They are not bad at their roles but that is all they, unfortunately, are: roles. Like Quaid, they just go through the motions, playing their part as clichéd character archetypes. Bryan Cranston is always awesome in any role, but in this he is not given much to work with. All he ends up being is just an evil tyrant with a megalomaniacal plot – with very little reason or background.
Those issues said, there are many things that do work. The pacing is good throughout, with no moments feeling awkward. The art design is exceptional, and there are no moments in the film that are boring to look at. To its credit, almost every scene is full of beautiful science-fiction design. The only complaint in this area is that some of the action scenes feel very cluttered due to the overall noise of The Colony’s design. The plot moves forward steadily, and it is overall simple to understand. That said, it is not without its own faults. The plot starts out great but becomes full of usual secret agent thriller clichés. Also, the plot becomes very campy, not to mention unbelievable, in its third act. The third act is also where there are the most plot holes – notable plot holes at that.
If you can shut your brain off for a couple hours, you can enjoy “Total Recall”. The film is pretty to look at and is absolutely packed with action sequences. All of the action sequences are well shot, well paced, and entertaining. The actors all do great with what they are given; but the problem is that they are not given much. They are all fairly flat characters, but are all satisfactory for the service of the plot – a plot that is well paced and understandable, but one that becomes campy, ridiculous, and peppered with notable plot holes. It is not as tightly written and directed to be a great secret agent thriller, and not as inspired to be a great science fiction story. The original was exceptional in its setting construction – pulling the audience into the amazingly designed Paul Verhoeven world. It was full of comedy and thrills, thought and design. As it stands, the moments that could really go far in establishing a passionate soul-filled, inspired world are instead spent on making quick references to those vary moments from the original. It could have established its own voice, its own heart and soul, but it just settles on being your clichéd average science fiction blockbuster.
The premise follows the original in only a rough sense. Sometime in the future, the world has been left mostly uninhabitable due to a deadly chemical war across the globe. Humanity has been left to residing in the only remaining habitable landmasses – Western Europe and “The Colony”, the latter being modern-day Australia. Because air travel is now impossible, the only travel between the landmasses is through a massive elevator called “The Fall” that cuts through the center of the Earth. Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a factory worker who works in Europe but lives in “The Colony” with his wife, Lori (Kate Beckinstale). His chronic nightmares lead him to become interested in the “Rekall” service – a machine that can implant memories into customers. His interest will lead him on a wild journey with Melina (Jessica Biel) to learn about his true self as well as secrets of Cohaagen’s (Bryan Cranston) tyrannical administration.
The problems of the film really start with the premise. While I enjoy the creativity of something like “The Fall”, it is simply too ridiculous to take seriously. They deserve credit for coming up with a relatively unknown science fiction concept, but an elevator that travels through the center of the Earth? Peoples’ suspension of disbelief can only be pushed so far. It serves a practical purpose in the plot – to create the conflict between “The Colony” and the mainland and between the government and the Resistance. Yet, too much time is spent trying to introduce this concept and make it seem plausible than the film should. It honestly seems easier to just use the original film’s conflict between settings – Mars and Earth. I have to ask, what makes an elevator between two lands more contemporary of an idea than a conflict between colonial Mars and Earth. This is especially true considering recent news that a Mars colony might be seen in our lifetimes.
The other problems are more literary. Colin Farrell’s Douglas Quaid is portrayed very well throughout the film, and he manages to make the character satisfactory in the emotional portrayal of a man with a confused past and an insane situation. But even then, I have to say Arnold’s original portrayal seemed overall more human. The problem with Colin Farrell’s character is a mixture of performance and writing in his introduction. It is hard to believe him as someone so distraught over his nightmares that he absolutely feels compelled to go to Rekall. If they spent more time exploring his inner demons and how they are bringing his life down, then he would have been a much more compelling character. As it stands, he just goes through the motions of a protagonist. All of the other characters are the same way. Kate Beckinstale’s villainous Lori and Jessica Biel’s Melina are fairly shallow characters. They are not bad at their roles but that is all they, unfortunately, are: roles. Like Quaid, they just go through the motions, playing their part as clichéd character archetypes. Bryan Cranston is always awesome in any role, but in this he is not given much to work with. All he ends up being is just an evil tyrant with a megalomaniacal plot – with very little reason or background.
Those issues said, there are many things that do work. The pacing is good throughout, with no moments feeling awkward. The art design is exceptional, and there are no moments in the film that are boring to look at. To its credit, almost every scene is full of beautiful science-fiction design. The only complaint in this area is that some of the action scenes feel very cluttered due to the overall noise of The Colony’s design. The plot moves forward steadily, and it is overall simple to understand. That said, it is not without its own faults. The plot starts out great but becomes full of usual secret agent thriller clichés. Also, the plot becomes very campy, not to mention unbelievable, in its third act. The third act is also where there are the most plot holes – notable plot holes at that.
If you can shut your brain off for a couple hours, you can enjoy “Total Recall”. The film is pretty to look at and is absolutely packed with action sequences. All of the action sequences are well shot, well paced, and entertaining. The actors all do great with what they are given; but the problem is that they are not given much. They are all fairly flat characters, but are all satisfactory for the service of the plot – a plot that is well paced and understandable, but one that becomes campy, ridiculous, and peppered with notable plot holes. It is not as tightly written and directed to be a great secret agent thriller, and not as inspired to be a great science fiction story. The original was exceptional in its setting construction – pulling the audience into the amazingly designed Paul Verhoeven world. It was full of comedy and thrills, thought and design. As it stands, the moments that could really go far in establishing a passionate soul-filled, inspired world are instead spent on making quick references to those vary moments from the original. It could have established its own voice, its own heart and soul, but it just settles on being your clichéd average science fiction blockbuster.
Just Send Me Word: A True Story of Love and Survival in the Gulag
Book
From Orlando Figes, international bestselling author of A People's Tragedy, Just Send Me Word is the...
Dinner Party: A Tragedy
Book
A MAJOR 2021 DEBUT FICTION LAUNCH, THIS REMARKABLE IRISH NOVEL ABOUT THE MESSINESS OF MODERN FAMILY...
A Hologram for the King
Book
New from Dave Eggers, National Book Award finalist A Hologram for the King. In a rising Saudi...
The Death of King Arthur: The Immortal Legend
2.0
Rate It
Book
A gripping retelling of the timeless epic of romance, enchantment and adventure, Peter Ackroyd's The...
Tainted Witness: Why We Doubt What Women Say About Their Lives
Book
In 1991, Anita Hill's testimony during Clarence Thomas's Senate confirmation hearing brought the...
