Search

Search only in certain items:

Immortal (The Awakening Series #2)
Immortal (The Awakening Series #2)
Dean Murray | 2015 | Romance, Science Fiction/Fantasy, Young Adult (YA)
10
10.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
So what happens when you start reading a book and find out that not only does it involve insta-love but also love triangles - both of which you hate?! You carry on reading, that's what! Because by the time you realised, you were already hooked into the story and there wasn't a snowball's chance in hell of putting it down until it was finished. That's what happens when you read a book by Dean Murray.

Immortal is the second book in The Awakening Series and continues exactly where Reborn finished. You find out that Kyle and Selene were actually together WAY before Jace and Selene were. So how does Kyle fit into the scenario? I was fully prepared to dislike Kyle, after all, Jace and Selene were the ones that needed to be together, right? The trouble is I couldn't actually dislike him. You will have to read the book yourself to understand why but trust me, he's not a straightforward "villain".

There are quiet times when Selene (and you) find pieces out of the puzzle and there are also times of action, fighting and battles. Then there are the emotional times that you become invested in.

This story continues to be intriguing and complex with plot twists and turns that keep you on your toes. It was completely un-put-down-able and I loved every moment. Even though this book deals with tropes that I usually find irritating, the way Immortal has been written makes it a pleasure to read. Highly recommended to all fans of Young Adult, Contemporary Paranormal.
 
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
 
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
March 5, 2015
  
Little Women (2019)
Little Women (2019)
2019 | Drama
A Worthy Adaptation
There have been many adaptations of Louisa May Alcott's 19th Century Classic novel LITTLE WOMEN following the adventures, loves and losses of the 4 March sisters - Jo, Meg, Amy and Beth.. My favorite is the Orono High School's production of the musical version of LITTLE WOMEN (starring my daughter as Jo), but coming in a close second is the 1933 version with Katherine Hepburn starring as Jo (the quintessential Jo, in my book). So was there really a need for ANOTHER version of this?

Well...yes...and...no.

As adapted and directed by Greta Gerwig, this version of LITTLE WOMEN stars Saoirse Ronan as Jo, Emma Watson as Meg, Florence Pugh as Amy and Eliza Scanlen as Beth and has a strong "2019" female empowerment vibe to it (this is intended to be a compliment). I've seen this called a "Little Women for the #metoo era" and I think this is misguided branding - for it does disservice to the #metoo movement - and to this film.

Ronan - as expected - was Oscar nominated for her strong, independent turn as the strong and independent Jo. This is a perfect marriage of performer and material (almost as good as the Hepburn turn) and Ronan lands this character strongly (and correctly) at every turn. Timothee Chalamet matches her beat for beat as her erstwhile love, Laurie. This is the 2nd time that these two have played opposite each other (LADYBIRD was the other time) and there is a strong chemistry between these two - I look forward to many, many more pairings of Ronan and Chalamet in the future.

Famously (or maybe, it's infamously) Greta Gerwig did NOT receive and Oscar nomination for her Direction - and I think that is a shame (there are at least 2 nominated Directors that I would take off the list in favor of her). Because she adapted the screen play (a piece of work that she WAS Oscar nominated for - and will win in an effort to make up for the Directing snub), her Direction is sure-handed and strong throughout. She has a very good feel for the material and knows what she wants to do throughout, to interesting results.

This is because Gerwig chooses to focus much of this version on the relationship between Jo and Amy - a relationship that gets short shrift in most of the other adaptations. By casting Florence Pugh (also Oscar nominated) in the Amy role, Gerwig has a strong antagonist to Ronan's protagonist - with shades of both being grey. Neither character (or performance) is black and white they are both interacting with each other as realistic sisters would, both taking turns being "in the right"....and "the wrong".

Because of the focus on the Jo and Amy characters, the other 2 sisters - Meg and (especially) Beth - get short changed and even though both Watson and Scanlen are "game", they have precious little to do. The same goes with Meryl Streep (Aunt March), Laura Dern (Marmie), Tracy Letts (who seems to be in EVERYTHING right now) and Bob Odenkirk (of all people). They are all strong - and earnest - in their limited time on screen, but NONE of them have that much to do. Only Chris Cooper shines brightly in his small, supporting role.

I have to admit that because I've seen this story many, many times, I found my mind wandering a bit - especially at the beginning. But by the time Ronan/Chalamet/Pugh started working off of each other, the film - and my interest - rose.

So...is another version of LITTLE WOMEN necessary? I'd say no. But...if this version of LITTLE WOMEN is the one that the Little Women of today see - and can identify with - then I say "bring it on."

Letter Grade: A-

8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)