Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated The Prodigy (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Here we are, a turning point of sorts. I had said to myself that I would try to be less of a scaredy cat and see all the films at the cinema. I'm not at a point where I can happily say "it's a no from me". Horror and I mix fine if I can watch them at home in the daylight and I can shout at the characters when they do dumb things like go into basements and don't turn on lights.
I wasn't even halfway through the trailers when I realised that sitting in the pitch black where people can appear out of nowhere was not for me. I made a decision to not see Us at the cinema there and then, and the same would be true for Pet Semetary if it wasn't for the fact they announced an Unlimited Screening for it.
Anyway...
I didn't know exactly what this film when I went in, I'd read the smallest of synopsis and that was basically it. It wasn't until I was in the cinema that I realised what I'd got myself into but by that point I was there and that was the end of it, I was staying.
The basic outline of the story is one that I'm certain I've seen in a similar form on other things, but I can't for the life of me remember where. Potentially I'm thinking of things like Criminal Minds.
You know fairly early on where this film is going to take you, I think I jumped in the first minute, along with a couple in front of me.
The way they link the simultaneous events at the beginning if very well done, the timing and the visuals line up perfectly. We then get fast-tracked through his early years and we see how special he is, and how he's just a smidge creepy.
The Prodigy has lots of classic tells from horror sprinkled through it, if I'd been at home I'd have been screaming at the screen. There are little tells everywhere but none of it spoils what's to come.
Overall the brought everything together extremely well to create something that was gripping and just a little scary to everyone around me... apart from the guy behind me who on more than one occasion laughed and gave me the urge to move seats.
The further in we get the more messed up things become for the characters, they're basically all screwed but none of them see it until it's too late. Miles becomes so creepy at one point that I'm assuming they decided that it was too much for the young actor to do. There's a cutaway to his eyes as he's talking but it sounds rather like a voice-over that's unlike the rest of the audio in the film.
At some point I gave up hope for... everything, and just wished someone would do the right thing and do away with him. Had I been watching this at home and shouting at the screen, someone might have listened and saved everyone a lot of heartbreak.
The Prodigy knows how to draw you in. We see Miles hypnotised with a metronome and the sequence makes you want to lean towards the screen for what you know is going to be something important. The constantly moving camera in time with the ticking worked so well.
If you look up Jackson Robert Scott on IMDb you get a delightfully cute picture, but even if I were his own mother I'd be suspicious about having him in the house after seeing this film. He seems to have found a little creepy niche with this and It, and he's pretty good at it. There's something about his mannerisms that don't feel quite right, but had he nailed that then I don't think I'd have ever slept again.
Taylor Shilling works well as Miles' mother, her reactions all help you get that sense of danger she feels and as her emotions ramp up so do ours. I'm not sure that the love of my child would have kept me on board for that long though.
There were mixed offerings from the rest of the cast, not that I'm sure that matters a great deal when the key part of the film is almost entirely focused on Miles and the visuals around that. I particularly like that they consistently show you the two sides of Miles. We see it on the movie posters as well as in the film with effective use of light and dark.
The Prodigy is almost right up my alley, it's basically a Criminal Minds storyline without the FBI, and a little supernatural something thrown in. It probably would have got higher marks from me had it not take every opportunity to make the audience jump. This film also teaches us a very important lesson, when a friendly dog hates a child you should trust its instincts.
What you should do
This is a very good thriller and if you don't mind jumping a bit every now and then it's well worth a watch. I think it's probably worth watching twice, knowing what I know now I'd like to see it again to put the pieces back together.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I will have the puppy from the beginning of the film, everything else can stay very very far away.
I wasn't even halfway through the trailers when I realised that sitting in the pitch black where people can appear out of nowhere was not for me. I made a decision to not see Us at the cinema there and then, and the same would be true for Pet Semetary if it wasn't for the fact they announced an Unlimited Screening for it.
Anyway...
I didn't know exactly what this film when I went in, I'd read the smallest of synopsis and that was basically it. It wasn't until I was in the cinema that I realised what I'd got myself into but by that point I was there and that was the end of it, I was staying.
The basic outline of the story is one that I'm certain I've seen in a similar form on other things, but I can't for the life of me remember where. Potentially I'm thinking of things like Criminal Minds.
You know fairly early on where this film is going to take you, I think I jumped in the first minute, along with a couple in front of me.
The way they link the simultaneous events at the beginning if very well done, the timing and the visuals line up perfectly. We then get fast-tracked through his early years and we see how special he is, and how he's just a smidge creepy.
The Prodigy has lots of classic tells from horror sprinkled through it, if I'd been at home I'd have been screaming at the screen. There are little tells everywhere but none of it spoils what's to come.
Overall the brought everything together extremely well to create something that was gripping and just a little scary to everyone around me... apart from the guy behind me who on more than one occasion laughed and gave me the urge to move seats.
The further in we get the more messed up things become for the characters, they're basically all screwed but none of them see it until it's too late. Miles becomes so creepy at one point that I'm assuming they decided that it was too much for the young actor to do. There's a cutaway to his eyes as he's talking but it sounds rather like a voice-over that's unlike the rest of the audio in the film.
At some point I gave up hope for... everything, and just wished someone would do the right thing and do away with him. Had I been watching this at home and shouting at the screen, someone might have listened and saved everyone a lot of heartbreak.
The Prodigy knows how to draw you in. We see Miles hypnotised with a metronome and the sequence makes you want to lean towards the screen for what you know is going to be something important. The constantly moving camera in time with the ticking worked so well.
If you look up Jackson Robert Scott on IMDb you get a delightfully cute picture, but even if I were his own mother I'd be suspicious about having him in the house after seeing this film. He seems to have found a little creepy niche with this and It, and he's pretty good at it. There's something about his mannerisms that don't feel quite right, but had he nailed that then I don't think I'd have ever slept again.
Taylor Shilling works well as Miles' mother, her reactions all help you get that sense of danger she feels and as her emotions ramp up so do ours. I'm not sure that the love of my child would have kept me on board for that long though.
There were mixed offerings from the rest of the cast, not that I'm sure that matters a great deal when the key part of the film is almost entirely focused on Miles and the visuals around that. I particularly like that they consistently show you the two sides of Miles. We see it on the movie posters as well as in the film with effective use of light and dark.
The Prodigy is almost right up my alley, it's basically a Criminal Minds storyline without the FBI, and a little supernatural something thrown in. It probably would have got higher marks from me had it not take every opportunity to make the audience jump. This film also teaches us a very important lesson, when a friendly dog hates a child you should trust its instincts.
What you should do
This is a very good thriller and if you don't mind jumping a bit every now and then it's well worth a watch. I think it's probably worth watching twice, knowing what I know now I'd like to see it again to put the pieces back together.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I will have the puppy from the beginning of the film, everything else can stay very very far away.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Breaking In (2018) (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Get In.
Into every life a little rain must fall. Some fairly pervasive advertising drove me into the cinema to see this one… often a sign that the distributors think it has legs. And from its quirky opening titles (with a COMPLETELY expected shock denouement!) I started to think it did have something. The beginning is in fact VERY similar to the introductory scene of “Get Out” in its randomness, and for one brief moment I wondered if the film was trying to parody that indie classic from last year… with only some studio lawyers getting in the way of them really calling it “Get In”. (“No, no, no… ‘Get’ is copyrighted… you’ll have to use some other word!”).
But no. It turns out that this is a pretty below-average B-movie after all,
The plot is pretty derivative of the “family in dire peril” variety made famous by the “Taken” series. Not being able to persuade Liam Neeson to wear a dress in this “Times Up” era, the Neeson-actioner writer Ryan Engle (“The Commuter“, “Non-Stop“) switches the action to focus on stressed mother Shaun Russell (Gabrielle Union).
Shaun has come to deepest Wisconsin with her two kids, Jasmine (Ajiona Alexus) and Glover (Seth Carr) to arrange the sale of her deceased father’s luxury home: a house absolutely brimming to the elegant rafters with security features. But unknown to them, there are already intruders in the house searching for something of value, and with Shaun locked outside the secure fortress home she will stop at nothing to break in and bring her children safely home.
The sad thing about this one is that the fairly unknown cast actually do a pretty good job. The chief villain Eddie, played by Billy Burke, channels an effectively ‘evil-quiet-Gary-Oldman” turn to good effect. His accomplices, the more sensitive Sam (Levi Meaden), luckless Peter (Mark Furze) and (particularly) the psychopathic Duncan (Richard Cabral) (can a psychopath really be called Duncan?) are broad caricatures, but never too broad to be totally awful.
Gabrielle Union kicks-ass effectively with her particular set of skills (see below), but particularly good is 22-year old Ajiona Alexus who has a great screen presence and deserves to be in much better films than this.
Where the film stumbles and goes crashing through its carbonite shutters is in the story and the screenplay’s dialogue.
The former is just bat-shit crazy, with so many ridiculous plot-holes and “yeah-but” moments that you lose count. For example, at one point the daughter is looking for her mobile phone WHICH IS IN THE ROOM and which would wrap the plot up in 10 minutes flat…. but then something else happens and they stop looking for it, never to be thought of again!
And what of those ‘particular set of skills’ that Shaun has? Oh, I forgot to say… she has none!! Or at least you assume not, since Shaun seems to have no back-story whatsoever, other than the fact that her daddy is very very rich and being investigated by the D/A. For what? Embezzlement? Tax evasion? Smartie-smuggling? Gun running? Perhaps he was a mafia overlord and Shaun was brought up with martial arts, gun and knife training to spy-school level? Perhaps none of the above, and she was just an obsessive watcher of Engle-scripted flicks? We will never know.
In addition, Shaun gets the proverbial crap kicked out of her on so many occasions, but there is no trip to casualty required. (Yes, I know Neeson and most other action heroes have the same implausible in-vulnerabilities, but it just seems so much less realistic when she is a not-particularly sporty or athletic woman).
And that dialogue… it’s just plain laughable in places. If Eddie doesn’t do his “Mamma hen will come back to save her chicks” speech once, he does it five times….
“Hey, James”… (James McTeigue, director, “V for Vendetta”)… says Burke, “Haven’t I said this line four times already”. “Sure”, says McTeigue, “I’m not sure where exactly I want to put it in the final cut yet, but only one of them will stay in. Don’t worry… I won’t make you look stupid to the cinema-going audience!!”
Every last thriller cliché is mined as the story grinds to an unmemorable and very flat conclusion.
Before wrapping up, I’d point out Another crime being committed in the music department. Australian composer Johnny Klimek’s action thriller score is actually quiet good, full of nice electronic riffs. But he really doesn’t know when to shut up. I remember an interview by John Williams on scoring the score to Hitchcock’s “Family Plot” where he recounted that Hitchcock taught him the value of a sudden absence of music at key moments. This film is too recent to learn the many lessons of “A Quiet Place“: but there are so many moments in this film where silence should have been golden. At one point the (what should be) heart-stopping sound effect of a creaking beam can barely be heard over Klimek’s pounding electronics.
So in summary, although it’s the award of ‘good acting attempt’ badges to sew onto the cast’s scout uniforms, my message to you dear reader re this one is “Get Out” of the cinema and enjoy the nice summer evenings instead!
But no. It turns out that this is a pretty below-average B-movie after all,
The plot is pretty derivative of the “family in dire peril” variety made famous by the “Taken” series. Not being able to persuade Liam Neeson to wear a dress in this “Times Up” era, the Neeson-actioner writer Ryan Engle (“The Commuter“, “Non-Stop“) switches the action to focus on stressed mother Shaun Russell (Gabrielle Union).
Shaun has come to deepest Wisconsin with her two kids, Jasmine (Ajiona Alexus) and Glover (Seth Carr) to arrange the sale of her deceased father’s luxury home: a house absolutely brimming to the elegant rafters with security features. But unknown to them, there are already intruders in the house searching for something of value, and with Shaun locked outside the secure fortress home she will stop at nothing to break in and bring her children safely home.
The sad thing about this one is that the fairly unknown cast actually do a pretty good job. The chief villain Eddie, played by Billy Burke, channels an effectively ‘evil-quiet-Gary-Oldman” turn to good effect. His accomplices, the more sensitive Sam (Levi Meaden), luckless Peter (Mark Furze) and (particularly) the psychopathic Duncan (Richard Cabral) (can a psychopath really be called Duncan?) are broad caricatures, but never too broad to be totally awful.
Gabrielle Union kicks-ass effectively with her particular set of skills (see below), but particularly good is 22-year old Ajiona Alexus who has a great screen presence and deserves to be in much better films than this.
Where the film stumbles and goes crashing through its carbonite shutters is in the story and the screenplay’s dialogue.
The former is just bat-shit crazy, with so many ridiculous plot-holes and “yeah-but” moments that you lose count. For example, at one point the daughter is looking for her mobile phone WHICH IS IN THE ROOM and which would wrap the plot up in 10 minutes flat…. but then something else happens and they stop looking for it, never to be thought of again!
And what of those ‘particular set of skills’ that Shaun has? Oh, I forgot to say… she has none!! Or at least you assume not, since Shaun seems to have no back-story whatsoever, other than the fact that her daddy is very very rich and being investigated by the D/A. For what? Embezzlement? Tax evasion? Smartie-smuggling? Gun running? Perhaps he was a mafia overlord and Shaun was brought up with martial arts, gun and knife training to spy-school level? Perhaps none of the above, and she was just an obsessive watcher of Engle-scripted flicks? We will never know.
In addition, Shaun gets the proverbial crap kicked out of her on so many occasions, but there is no trip to casualty required. (Yes, I know Neeson and most other action heroes have the same implausible in-vulnerabilities, but it just seems so much less realistic when she is a not-particularly sporty or athletic woman).
And that dialogue… it’s just plain laughable in places. If Eddie doesn’t do his “Mamma hen will come back to save her chicks” speech once, he does it five times….
“Hey, James”… (James McTeigue, director, “V for Vendetta”)… says Burke, “Haven’t I said this line four times already”. “Sure”, says McTeigue, “I’m not sure where exactly I want to put it in the final cut yet, but only one of them will stay in. Don’t worry… I won’t make you look stupid to the cinema-going audience!!”
Every last thriller cliché is mined as the story grinds to an unmemorable and very flat conclusion.
Before wrapping up, I’d point out Another crime being committed in the music department. Australian composer Johnny Klimek’s action thriller score is actually quiet good, full of nice electronic riffs. But he really doesn’t know when to shut up. I remember an interview by John Williams on scoring the score to Hitchcock’s “Family Plot” where he recounted that Hitchcock taught him the value of a sudden absence of music at key moments. This film is too recent to learn the many lessons of “A Quiet Place“: but there are so many moments in this film where silence should have been golden. At one point the (what should be) heart-stopping sound effect of a creaking beam can barely be heard over Klimek’s pounding electronics.
So in summary, although it’s the award of ‘good acting attempt’ badges to sew onto the cast’s scout uniforms, my message to you dear reader re this one is “Get Out” of the cinema and enjoy the nice summer evenings instead!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Downsizing (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tiny People, Big Mess.
From the trailer this film looked quirky, funny and interesting and has been on my “looking forward to” list for many months. Oh dear, what a let down.
Matt Damon (“The Martian“, “The Great Wall“, “Jason Bourne“) and Kristen Wiig (“mother!“, “Ghostbusters“) play Paul and Audrey Safranek. Paul is a laid-back and hardworking occupational therapist; Audrey has materialistic ambitions over and above their available finances. The two decide to “downsize” making use of a revolutionary Norwegian invention that reduces humans, and most other lifeforms, to a fraction of their normal size. This offers huge wealth to the normal American, since the cost of living in downsized form within the mini-estate called LeisureLand is tiny in comparison to “big folks”. But all does not go well in the transition (unlike the trailer, no spoilers here) and Paul needs to find a new purpose in life as bigger problems loom.
It’s clearly written to be a social satire, and there are some clever angles to be explored here: everyone publicly positions their downsizing based on ‘environmental issues’ and ‘saving the planet’, but most everyone’s real reason is the lifestyle benefits. Also lightly touched on, but never deeply explored, are the impacts that the downsizing initiative is having on the broader American economy and property markets, with the ‘big people’ questioning why small people should have the same rights and votes as them.
But the film never really gets into the meat of any of this. Worse than that, the movie never settles on what it is trying to be. I think we can write off “Sci-Fi” pretty early on. But is it a drama? A comedy? A love story? A socialist rant? An environmental cri de coeur? The film jumbles all these aspects together and treats each so halfheartedly that none of them get properly addressed.
Not only are the audience confused: none of the actors seem to be too sure why they’re there either. Damon – never Mr Personality – should have been able to develop some chemistry with the feisty and dynamic Ms Wiig, but even these early scenes plod along with you thinking “what a dull film”. Things perk up slightly at the LeisureLand sales fair, where Neil Patrick Harris (“Gone Girl“) and a naked Laura Dern (“Star Wars: The Last Jedi“) glibly try to sell a luxury doll’s house to the assembled crowd. American consumerism in miniature.
But post-downsizing the film crashes back to ‘Dullesville Arizona’ again, but with added depression, requiring Christophe Waltz (“Django Unchanined”, “Spectre“), as a dodgy Serbian entrepreneur Dusan Mirkovic, to over-act manically to try to add any sort of energy into the film (which he is only mildly successful at doing). There’s a rather bizarre supporting role from Udo Kier – looking for all the world like Terence Stamp – as Mirkovic’s ship-owning pal, and an almost cameo performance from Jason Sudeikis (“Colossal“).
Enter stage-left Thai-born Hong Chau as Ngoc Lan Tran, a Vietnamese cleaner. There’s a clever angle here: where “average American Joes” like Safranek can live like kings, but the poor still have to scrape by, living in ‘skyscraper Portacabins’, as the menial classes: there’s no escaping class structures, even when 5 inches tall. Chau sums up the uneven nature of the film, as she mostly plays her lines for laughs but then (in a spectacularly good bit of acting in the midst of, I have to say, some pretty poor hamming) bursts into uncontrollable tears.
Just when you think things are going to limp to a unmemorable close, the film ups and leaves LeisureLand to add a completely bizarre final act. (It’s pretty unusual in the UK for people to walk out of a cinema mid-film, but a couple did so at this point). This segment bears no relationship to the downsizing theme whatsoever, since all the players at this point could be full-sized. Aside from an amusing “50 shades of f**k” speech from Ngoc Lan Tran and a “massive explosion”, this story goes nowhere, says nothing (at least not to me) and merely irritates. Throw in a completely anti-climatic non-ending and I genuinely shared a “WTF look” with the stranger sat next to me!
This is all very strange, since this comes from Alexander Payne, who also directed and co-wrote “The Descendants”, one of the most impressive films of the decade. Jim Taylor co-writes (as he has co-written numerous other films with Payne).
I note that in this morning’s London Times that their film critic, Kevin Maher – someone who’s views I am generally pretty well aligned with – gave it 4 *’s out of 5. I can only assume that he either saw a completely different cut of the film, or he is a lot cleverer than I am and understood amazing sub-texts that completely passed me by! Maybe… but I have a sneaking suspicion that the general viewing public will more share my opinion on this than his.
I was tempted to give this just one star as it was such a disappointment to me, but the underlying concept is a good one: it is just one that has, in my humble opinion, been implemented in a bizarrely slipshod manner.
Definitely not recommended. Go and see “Coco” instead!
Matt Damon (“The Martian“, “The Great Wall“, “Jason Bourne“) and Kristen Wiig (“mother!“, “Ghostbusters“) play Paul and Audrey Safranek. Paul is a laid-back and hardworking occupational therapist; Audrey has materialistic ambitions over and above their available finances. The two decide to “downsize” making use of a revolutionary Norwegian invention that reduces humans, and most other lifeforms, to a fraction of their normal size. This offers huge wealth to the normal American, since the cost of living in downsized form within the mini-estate called LeisureLand is tiny in comparison to “big folks”. But all does not go well in the transition (unlike the trailer, no spoilers here) and Paul needs to find a new purpose in life as bigger problems loom.
It’s clearly written to be a social satire, and there are some clever angles to be explored here: everyone publicly positions their downsizing based on ‘environmental issues’ and ‘saving the planet’, but most everyone’s real reason is the lifestyle benefits. Also lightly touched on, but never deeply explored, are the impacts that the downsizing initiative is having on the broader American economy and property markets, with the ‘big people’ questioning why small people should have the same rights and votes as them.
But the film never really gets into the meat of any of this. Worse than that, the movie never settles on what it is trying to be. I think we can write off “Sci-Fi” pretty early on. But is it a drama? A comedy? A love story? A socialist rant? An environmental cri de coeur? The film jumbles all these aspects together and treats each so halfheartedly that none of them get properly addressed.
Not only are the audience confused: none of the actors seem to be too sure why they’re there either. Damon – never Mr Personality – should have been able to develop some chemistry with the feisty and dynamic Ms Wiig, but even these early scenes plod along with you thinking “what a dull film”. Things perk up slightly at the LeisureLand sales fair, where Neil Patrick Harris (“Gone Girl“) and a naked Laura Dern (“Star Wars: The Last Jedi“) glibly try to sell a luxury doll’s house to the assembled crowd. American consumerism in miniature.
But post-downsizing the film crashes back to ‘Dullesville Arizona’ again, but with added depression, requiring Christophe Waltz (“Django Unchanined”, “Spectre“), as a dodgy Serbian entrepreneur Dusan Mirkovic, to over-act manically to try to add any sort of energy into the film (which he is only mildly successful at doing). There’s a rather bizarre supporting role from Udo Kier – looking for all the world like Terence Stamp – as Mirkovic’s ship-owning pal, and an almost cameo performance from Jason Sudeikis (“Colossal“).
Enter stage-left Thai-born Hong Chau as Ngoc Lan Tran, a Vietnamese cleaner. There’s a clever angle here: where “average American Joes” like Safranek can live like kings, but the poor still have to scrape by, living in ‘skyscraper Portacabins’, as the menial classes: there’s no escaping class structures, even when 5 inches tall. Chau sums up the uneven nature of the film, as she mostly plays her lines for laughs but then (in a spectacularly good bit of acting in the midst of, I have to say, some pretty poor hamming) bursts into uncontrollable tears.
Just when you think things are going to limp to a unmemorable close, the film ups and leaves LeisureLand to add a completely bizarre final act. (It’s pretty unusual in the UK for people to walk out of a cinema mid-film, but a couple did so at this point). This segment bears no relationship to the downsizing theme whatsoever, since all the players at this point could be full-sized. Aside from an amusing “50 shades of f**k” speech from Ngoc Lan Tran and a “massive explosion”, this story goes nowhere, says nothing (at least not to me) and merely irritates. Throw in a completely anti-climatic non-ending and I genuinely shared a “WTF look” with the stranger sat next to me!
This is all very strange, since this comes from Alexander Payne, who also directed and co-wrote “The Descendants”, one of the most impressive films of the decade. Jim Taylor co-writes (as he has co-written numerous other films with Payne).
I note that in this morning’s London Times that their film critic, Kevin Maher – someone who’s views I am generally pretty well aligned with – gave it 4 *’s out of 5. I can only assume that he either saw a completely different cut of the film, or he is a lot cleverer than I am and understood amazing sub-texts that completely passed me by! Maybe… but I have a sneaking suspicion that the general viewing public will more share my opinion on this than his.
I was tempted to give this just one star as it was such a disappointment to me, but the underlying concept is a good one: it is just one that has, in my humble opinion, been implemented in a bizarrely slipshod manner.
Definitely not recommended. Go and see “Coco” instead!
Merissa (11839 KP) rated The Royal Marine (The Sin Bin #4) in Books
Nov 17, 2017
The Royal Marine (The Sin Bin #4) by Dahlia Donovan
The Royal Marine is the fourth book in The Sin Bin series, and it's time for Hamish's story. He has worked with Earp for a while now, and get set up on a blind date with Akash. Luckily (or unluckily) Akash is set up with Scottie on the same evening. Now we all know that Scottie is having major issues at the moment and, to be fair, acting like a jerk. So it comes as no surprise when Akash chooses to be with Hamish. Scottie is none too pleased about this, and continues to pop up throughout the book, with pleas and demands for Akash to go for a drink with him. During this time, Akash and Hamish are slowly getting to know each other. The spark is there, but it needs to be more than just sex. In between Akash's bakery and Hamish's work overseas, their relationship continues to move forward.
Now, I'm stopping right there, because I could go on. I could tell you about what a first class prize prat Scottie is, and how I think (hope) that I know who his match is. I could tell you how amazingly written the twins are, and how brilliant Akash is with them. I could tell you about the constant wit and banter, in amongst the danger, from Hamish, Earp, and the rest of the team. But seriously? Why would I do that? Why would I HAVE to do that? This is the fourth book in the series, and I would recommend that you read them in order for total enjoyment. So therefore, you know about Dahlia Donovan's writing style, her quick wit and sense of humour that comes across loud and clear in her writing. You know some of the previous characters and like/love the updates on their lives. So really, I don't have to tell you ANYTHING about this book, series, or author!
In case you haven't realised yet, I love Dahlia Donovan's books, her writing style, her characters, her charm. What I don't like is not having a mascara warning, and sobbing into my breakfast as I desperately try to finish The Royal Marine before I start work. Oh my, this book ripped my heart out. Did I get a happy ending? I'll leave that to you to read and find out.
I absolutely recommend this book, and the series, so GO READ IT! Now!
(And, no, I wasn't serious about the mascara warning before someone says it should be written on the cover somewhere!)
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Now, I'm stopping right there, because I could go on. I could tell you about what a first class prize prat Scottie is, and how I think (hope) that I know who his match is. I could tell you how amazingly written the twins are, and how brilliant Akash is with them. I could tell you about the constant wit and banter, in amongst the danger, from Hamish, Earp, and the rest of the team. But seriously? Why would I do that? Why would I HAVE to do that? This is the fourth book in the series, and I would recommend that you read them in order for total enjoyment. So therefore, you know about Dahlia Donovan's writing style, her quick wit and sense of humour that comes across loud and clear in her writing. You know some of the previous characters and like/love the updates on their lives. So really, I don't have to tell you ANYTHING about this book, series, or author!
In case you haven't realised yet, I love Dahlia Donovan's books, her writing style, her characters, her charm. What I don't like is not having a mascara warning, and sobbing into my breakfast as I desperately try to finish The Royal Marine before I start work. Oh my, this book ripped my heart out. Did I get a happy ending? I'll leave that to you to read and find out.
I absolutely recommend this book, and the series, so GO READ IT! Now!
(And, no, I wasn't serious about the mascara warning before someone says it should be written on the cover somewhere!)
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Lee (2222 KP) rated The House (2017) in Movies
Jul 14, 2017
Worst movie I've seen in a very, very long time
Usually when I review comedies I start off by complaining about how disappointing they tend to be these days. Sometimes they manage to prove me wrong (Bad Moms), sometimes they’re not quite as bad as I was expecting (Baywatch). The last time I was seriously annoyed about how bad a comedy was it was Office Christmas Party, but even then that managed to raise a laugh or two. The House though, well that goes way beyond that, taking it to a whole other level by having absolutely no laughs in it at all!
Will Ferrell is Scott, Amy Poehler is his wife Kate. When their daughter Alex gets into the university she wanted, they’re over the moon. Especially as the town runs some kind of scholarship program, paying for one lucky students education each year. This years lucky recipient is due to be Alex but when sleazy city councilman Bob decides to cancel the program in favour of building a huge pool for the town, Scott and Kate need to come up with another way of raising the money. Recently divorced neighbour Frank has a big empty house and between them they hit upon the idea of building a casino in his home, somewhere for the locals to come and spend all their money. Things go well for a while, then things get way out of hand. Cue the opportunity for some riotous, hilarious humour…
Only there’s none of that. It’s riotous, but this is just such a lazily written movie that the humour is non-existent. Featuring a date rape ‘gag’ within the first five minutes(?!) it just gets progressively worse from there. Pointless, nonsensical playground style bickering, name calling and random violence feature heavily throughout in a scatter-gun attempt at trying to raise a laugh. All of this ends up coming across as either poorly written, badly improvised, or both. Even the editing is a total disaster – in one scene Amy Poehler has a guy standing right behind her, cut to another camera and he’s gone, cut back and he’s there again, cut back and he’s gone!
The biggest disappointment about this is the complete waste of talent. Admittedly, Will Ferrell is on a downward spiral anyway since his Anchorman days and the brilliant Step Brothers, but you’d still expect more from him than this. One of my favourite TV shows, Parks and Recreation, stars Amy Poehler as the hilarious Leslie Knope, so I’d expect way more from her too. Even her movie roles haven’t been too bad so far. I guess it just proves that if you’ve got a seriously dud script on your hands, there isn’t really much that anyone can do to fix it. This isn’t just a bad comedy, it’s a bad, bad movie.
Will Ferrell is Scott, Amy Poehler is his wife Kate. When their daughter Alex gets into the university she wanted, they’re over the moon. Especially as the town runs some kind of scholarship program, paying for one lucky students education each year. This years lucky recipient is due to be Alex but when sleazy city councilman Bob decides to cancel the program in favour of building a huge pool for the town, Scott and Kate need to come up with another way of raising the money. Recently divorced neighbour Frank has a big empty house and between them they hit upon the idea of building a casino in his home, somewhere for the locals to come and spend all their money. Things go well for a while, then things get way out of hand. Cue the opportunity for some riotous, hilarious humour…
Only there’s none of that. It’s riotous, but this is just such a lazily written movie that the humour is non-existent. Featuring a date rape ‘gag’ within the first five minutes(?!) it just gets progressively worse from there. Pointless, nonsensical playground style bickering, name calling and random violence feature heavily throughout in a scatter-gun attempt at trying to raise a laugh. All of this ends up coming across as either poorly written, badly improvised, or both. Even the editing is a total disaster – in one scene Amy Poehler has a guy standing right behind her, cut to another camera and he’s gone, cut back and he’s there again, cut back and he’s gone!
The biggest disappointment about this is the complete waste of talent. Admittedly, Will Ferrell is on a downward spiral anyway since his Anchorman days and the brilliant Step Brothers, but you’d still expect more from him than this. One of my favourite TV shows, Parks and Recreation, stars Amy Poehler as the hilarious Leslie Knope, so I’d expect way more from her too. Even her movie roles haven’t been too bad so far. I guess it just proves that if you’ve got a seriously dud script on your hands, there isn’t really much that anyone can do to fix it. This isn’t just a bad comedy, it’s a bad, bad movie.
Haley Mathiot (9 KP) rated Jessica's Guide to Dating on the Dark Side (Jessica, #1) in Books
Apr 27, 2018
Jessica’s Guide to Dating on the Dark Side by Beth Fantaskey
Genre: YA Paranormal romance
ISBN: 9780547259406
Pub date: January 18th 2010 by Graphia (first published in hardback on February 1st 2009)
Rating: 5
Jessica was sure she was just your average teenager… until an ultra-hot European foreign exchange student shows up at school, stalks her, and then follows her home, insisting that they are both vampire royalty and must be married when she turns eighteen to ensure peace between their families… and Jessica is sure that Lucius, no matter how attractive, is absolutely insane. She manages to free herself of his grip… and then realizes that he’s all she ever wanted in the first place. But getting him back before he destroys her –or himself—will be quite a challenge. But Jessica is up to it. She has to be.
I absolutely loved Jessica’s Guide. It was funny, romantic, and entertaining the whole way through. I don’t know why I put off reading it so long.
The plot had great pacing, great twists, and great conflict. At one point I was tempted to flip to the end of the book just to make sure it all worked out at the end… because I wasn’t sure I could handle it if it didn’t.
I loved how Jessica’s and Lucius’s relationship wasn’t perfect. I saw this in Fantaskey’s other novel, Jekel Loves Hyde. Like Jill and Tristen, Jessica and Lucius certainly had their ups and downs… may I say more of the latter than the first. I dispise happyland syndrome in romances… and was pleased to find none whatsoever in Jessica’s Guide. Their romance was destiny and fate, the only question was how they’d get there in the end. And it was quite a rollercoaster. Their love was based on character more than actions, something that is sometimes hard to write well, and many authors fail miserably, but Fantaskey did a great job. For both Jessica and Lucius, there can never be anyone else.
The characters were great. I officially adore Lucius… passionate and mysterious and infuriating…we need more heroes like him… and Jessica was the kind of girl who would work hard for what she wanted, and sacrifice anything. I think we need more heroines like her, too! Jessica’s parents were both annoying and funny… I especially loved her mom.
The writing was fluid and descriptive, and easy to read. I demolished this one in about four hours.
Heart-pounding plot, characters to die for, and an epic romance, this one begs many re-reads.
Content/recommendation: some language, no sex. Ages 14+. This one is a perfect summer-read… or anytime read, really.
Genre: YA Paranormal romance
ISBN: 9780547259406
Pub date: January 18th 2010 by Graphia (first published in hardback on February 1st 2009)
Rating: 5
Jessica was sure she was just your average teenager… until an ultra-hot European foreign exchange student shows up at school, stalks her, and then follows her home, insisting that they are both vampire royalty and must be married when she turns eighteen to ensure peace between their families… and Jessica is sure that Lucius, no matter how attractive, is absolutely insane. She manages to free herself of his grip… and then realizes that he’s all she ever wanted in the first place. But getting him back before he destroys her –or himself—will be quite a challenge. But Jessica is up to it. She has to be.
I absolutely loved Jessica’s Guide. It was funny, romantic, and entertaining the whole way through. I don’t know why I put off reading it so long.
The plot had great pacing, great twists, and great conflict. At one point I was tempted to flip to the end of the book just to make sure it all worked out at the end… because I wasn’t sure I could handle it if it didn’t.
I loved how Jessica’s and Lucius’s relationship wasn’t perfect. I saw this in Fantaskey’s other novel, Jekel Loves Hyde. Like Jill and Tristen, Jessica and Lucius certainly had their ups and downs… may I say more of the latter than the first. I dispise happyland syndrome in romances… and was pleased to find none whatsoever in Jessica’s Guide. Their romance was destiny and fate, the only question was how they’d get there in the end. And it was quite a rollercoaster. Their love was based on character more than actions, something that is sometimes hard to write well, and many authors fail miserably, but Fantaskey did a great job. For both Jessica and Lucius, there can never be anyone else.
The characters were great. I officially adore Lucius… passionate and mysterious and infuriating…we need more heroes like him… and Jessica was the kind of girl who would work hard for what she wanted, and sacrifice anything. I think we need more heroines like her, too! Jessica’s parents were both annoying and funny… I especially loved her mom.
The writing was fluid and descriptive, and easy to read. I demolished this one in about four hours.
Heart-pounding plot, characters to die for, and an epic romance, this one begs many re-reads.
Content/recommendation: some language, no sex. Ages 14+. This one is a perfect summer-read… or anytime read, really.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Secrets We Keep in Books
May 10, 2018
Kit Stitski is dead. He fell into the quarry during a party and drowned and ever since June no one has been able to come forward to say what really happened to him. Now that school has started, his mother is making a plea with the students to come forward with what they know. Was it just a tragic accident or did someone do something to Kit? Clementine was there, she spoke with Kit and sent him off to the bushes when he said he had to go to the bathroom. Ellie was there too, she is keeping Clementine's secret, but does she have a secret of her own? Jake was there, in fact, Kit followed him to the party. And Mac was there with Ellie, did he do something to Kit?
As a new school year starts, everyone is reflecting on the tragic night at the end of the previous school year. They've had the whole summer to think about it and now that school is back in session, Ms. Stitski wants answers and closure about what happened with her son. When she shows up for the first day of school, Jake, Clementine, Ellie, and Mac are all on edge because they feel they are responsible for Kit's death. They can't imagine that this was just an accident, something must of happened to him when he was out of their sight. But is that possible?
I really enjoyed this YA novel by Deb Loughead. I was a quick read that kept me engrossed the entire time. The author never really mentions where the story is set, and it could be any town in any country. Kids will be kids and will do what they want despite the rules set by their parents. None of the kids should have been at the quarry that night. It's a dangerous place and even more so when it is dark. Kit was mentally challenged, but loved by all in the school. The students recall happy moments with Kit that help his family to heal after this difficult situation. This is a story you could see in today's news stories. A tragic accident that took the life of an innocent person.
I think people of all ages will enjoy this book. I think it is especially important for youth to read. It has a message of honesty in the book. About being able to talk to your parents about the things that are going on in your world. The book has a strong family focus and includes diverse family structures that are seen today. I recommend this book for anyone who is looking for a good novel to read.
Thank you to NetGalley and Dundurn for the opportunity to review this book.
As a new school year starts, everyone is reflecting on the tragic night at the end of the previous school year. They've had the whole summer to think about it and now that school is back in session, Ms. Stitski wants answers and closure about what happened with her son. When she shows up for the first day of school, Jake, Clementine, Ellie, and Mac are all on edge because they feel they are responsible for Kit's death. They can't imagine that this was just an accident, something must of happened to him when he was out of their sight. But is that possible?
I really enjoyed this YA novel by Deb Loughead. I was a quick read that kept me engrossed the entire time. The author never really mentions where the story is set, and it could be any town in any country. Kids will be kids and will do what they want despite the rules set by their parents. None of the kids should have been at the quarry that night. It's a dangerous place and even more so when it is dark. Kit was mentally challenged, but loved by all in the school. The students recall happy moments with Kit that help his family to heal after this difficult situation. This is a story you could see in today's news stories. A tragic accident that took the life of an innocent person.
I think people of all ages will enjoy this book. I think it is especially important for youth to read. It has a message of honesty in the book. About being able to talk to your parents about the things that are going on in your world. The book has a strong family focus and includes diverse family structures that are seen today. I recommend this book for anyone who is looking for a good novel to read.
Thank you to NetGalley and Dundurn for the opportunity to review this book.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated In a Dark, Dark Wood in Books
May 10, 2018
Nora Shaw has been invited to her "friend" Clare Cavendish's hen weekend(a bachelorette party). But Nora and Clare haven't spoken to each other in ten years and if their mutual friend Nina wasn't attending, then Nora sure as hell wasn't going to go. Nora doesn't even know who Clare is marrying. Arriving a a house made completely of glass in the middle of the woods, with snow on the ground and no cell reception, Nora instantly regrets her decision to come. When disaster strikes, despite Flo(the maid of honor) trying to make this the best hen weekend ever, Nora tries hard to remember exactly what happened, but it's difficult. Will she be able to put the pieces together before she is charged with a serious crime?
This book was so hard to put down. Let's just say, you won't find me in the woods in a glass house anytime soon. Or meeting up with people I haven't talked to in a decade. I enjoy Ruth Ware's style of writing. I like how she starts the story from opposite ends and then it all comes together. It keeps you excited for what is about to come.
I would hate to be in Nora's shoes. I also don't think I would go to a hen weekend for someone I hadn't talked to in 10 years. Maybe if it was just a night out with a big group, I would consider it, but spending and entire weekend with people I barely know....I don't think so. You don't see the twists and turns that happen in the book coming at you and you will find it impossible to put this this book down. Nora Shaw is your typical 20-something. She has her career as a writer and a few close friends. When she gets the call to attend this hen weekend, she is at first skeptical. The only other person she will know besides the bride, is her friend Nina and they aren't necessarily the closest, although they are much closer than Nora and Clare.
Nora is also a serious runner. It helps her to clear her mind for her writing and when she arrives at the glass house, it helps her to calm her nerves before she sees Clare for the first time. The other guests all seem a little on edge as well and the host Flo, is just a mess. Determined to make the weekend "perfect" for Clare. Each character has their own effect on the outcome of this weekend, and none of their lives will be the same when it is over.
If you haven't read anything by Ruth Ware, I suggest you go out and grab one of her books immediately.
This book was so hard to put down. Let's just say, you won't find me in the woods in a glass house anytime soon. Or meeting up with people I haven't talked to in a decade. I enjoy Ruth Ware's style of writing. I like how she starts the story from opposite ends and then it all comes together. It keeps you excited for what is about to come.
I would hate to be in Nora's shoes. I also don't think I would go to a hen weekend for someone I hadn't talked to in 10 years. Maybe if it was just a night out with a big group, I would consider it, but spending and entire weekend with people I barely know....I don't think so. You don't see the twists and turns that happen in the book coming at you and you will find it impossible to put this this book down. Nora Shaw is your typical 20-something. She has her career as a writer and a few close friends. When she gets the call to attend this hen weekend, she is at first skeptical. The only other person she will know besides the bride, is her friend Nina and they aren't necessarily the closest, although they are much closer than Nora and Clare.
Nora is also a serious runner. It helps her to clear her mind for her writing and when she arrives at the glass house, it helps her to calm her nerves before she sees Clare for the first time. The other guests all seem a little on edge as well and the host Flo, is just a mess. Determined to make the weekend "perfect" for Clare. Each character has their own effect on the outcome of this weekend, and none of their lives will be the same when it is over.
If you haven't read anything by Ruth Ware, I suggest you go out and grab one of her books immediately.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Veiled Rose (Tales of Goldstone Wood, #2) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I am always a fan of fairy re-tellings, even if it is for a fairy tale I am not actually familiar with, as that of Rose Red. It took me awhile, but I also gathered that the book is a kind of Christian allegory, and parts remind me of Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan.
Rose Red is by far the most intriguing character, as her birth is shrouded in mystery, her friends are animals with voices, and she cloaks herself in veils and layers to hide even the smallest scrap of skin from any prying eyes - including her own. The shame she bears for her own appearance is so great that her very existence is surrounded by grand tales of monsters and demons told by all of the local villagers, yet she bears a strength much greater than she appears to possess and she has a kind of magic that allows her to walk the secret Paths and face down death in all its forms. Even at the end of the book, I could not fully grasp who or what she is.
Leo manages to find and befriend Rose Red in boyhood, but he has a burden of his own as Prince Lionheart of Southlands, destined to become King. Leo knows his responsibilities, but he secretly just wants a friend and to make people laugh as a court jester. These polar opposites manage to pull him across the world again and again as he struggles with the simple question, "What do you want?"
Many other characters litter the pages of the book, which was at times confusing as I attempted to deduce which creature or character was on the side of good or evil, such as the Dragon - which became apparent at its occupation of Southlands. As an allegory for Christianity, some characters were clear - such as the Prince, but others were murkier, such as the Lady.
The structure of the book itself was off-putting for me. The book is divided into five parts, with chapters in each part, but in between each part a vague sense of time has passed, so that the reader cannot pick up where the last chapter left off. At each break, I would get the feeling that the plot was picking up, only to be let down that the climactic moments have been glossed over. I also really disliked the ending. Certain things are expected of classic fairy tales, and none of this was included in the ending of this book. Perhaps the author was aiming for something more "realistic" or to simply get the reader to continue the series, but loose endings this big make me feel like I wasted my time reading the book, only to get no satisfaction at the finale.
Rose Red is by far the most intriguing character, as her birth is shrouded in mystery, her friends are animals with voices, and she cloaks herself in veils and layers to hide even the smallest scrap of skin from any prying eyes - including her own. The shame she bears for her own appearance is so great that her very existence is surrounded by grand tales of monsters and demons told by all of the local villagers, yet she bears a strength much greater than she appears to possess and she has a kind of magic that allows her to walk the secret Paths and face down death in all its forms. Even at the end of the book, I could not fully grasp who or what she is.
Leo manages to find and befriend Rose Red in boyhood, but he has a burden of his own as Prince Lionheart of Southlands, destined to become King. Leo knows his responsibilities, but he secretly just wants a friend and to make people laugh as a court jester. These polar opposites manage to pull him across the world again and again as he struggles with the simple question, "What do you want?"
Many other characters litter the pages of the book, which was at times confusing as I attempted to deduce which creature or character was on the side of good or evil, such as the Dragon - which became apparent at its occupation of Southlands. As an allegory for Christianity, some characters were clear - such as the Prince, but others were murkier, such as the Lady.
The structure of the book itself was off-putting for me. The book is divided into five parts, with chapters in each part, but in between each part a vague sense of time has passed, so that the reader cannot pick up where the last chapter left off. At each break, I would get the feeling that the plot was picking up, only to be let down that the climactic moments have been glossed over. I also really disliked the ending. Certain things are expected of classic fairy tales, and none of this was included in the ending of this book. Perhaps the author was aiming for something more "realistic" or to simply get the reader to continue the series, but loose endings this big make me feel like I wasted my time reading the book, only to get no satisfaction at the finale.
Debbiereadsbook (1126 KP) rated Homecoming (Men of Devotion #1) in Books
Mar 29, 2019
great read, loved it!
Homecoming, arch, 4 stars, male/male, romance, friends to lovers, military dudes, first time author
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
Jack returns home, after a botched mission leaves him 5 days in hell. He is bruised and broken. But coming home be the hardest thing he has done, especially when it brings him face to face with the only man he ever loved. The man who hates him for breaking his sister’s heart. The man in question, Dillon, doesn’t hate Jack as much as Jack thinks. When Dillon helps Jack with his PTSD, when Dillon’s touch makes Jack feel like he really DID come home, both men need to own their feelings for each other. But it takes Dillon’s sister to make Jack see.
I love reading about broken soldiers coming home, and this was no exception!
Jack is broken, inside and out, bones and mind. Five days in hell and he has been given six weeks of mandatory leave and for the first time in ten years, he goes home. Home to his mum and dying father. Home to the memories that are burned on his mind from the last time he was here. Home to where Dillon might be. He doesn’t know which is worse: facing Dillon, or NOT. I loved that Jack didn’t know! Dillon, though. He knows. He knows he wants to see Jack. Seeing the man who has held his heart for long in so much pain calls to him. He wants Jack, but he wants Jack to come to him. And when they do? It was beautiful! But Jack spoils it by running! Stoopid man thinks now he’s “got Dillon out his system” he’ll be able to lay it to rest. But Dillon is far more than a “get out of my system” kinda man, and it takes Dillon’s sister, and Jack’s mum, to make Jack see, to really SEE how much he cannot let Dillon go!
It’s only short, some 90 pages, but packs quite a punch. Both Jack and Dillon have their say, and in the third person. Each voice is clear and defined.
I read some reviews AFTER I read this, I don’t do it before. I made that mistake once and never again. Most of the reviews I found were from 2014, and not very good. I wonder has this been revised since. I found none of the problems that are mentioned! Also, I can’t find anything else by this author. So, given this is a FIRST-time author, I’ll say this is a very VERY good start.
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
Jack returns home, after a botched mission leaves him 5 days in hell. He is bruised and broken. But coming home be the hardest thing he has done, especially when it brings him face to face with the only man he ever loved. The man who hates him for breaking his sister’s heart. The man in question, Dillon, doesn’t hate Jack as much as Jack thinks. When Dillon helps Jack with his PTSD, when Dillon’s touch makes Jack feel like he really DID come home, both men need to own their feelings for each other. But it takes Dillon’s sister to make Jack see.
I love reading about broken soldiers coming home, and this was no exception!
Jack is broken, inside and out, bones and mind. Five days in hell and he has been given six weeks of mandatory leave and for the first time in ten years, he goes home. Home to his mum and dying father. Home to the memories that are burned on his mind from the last time he was here. Home to where Dillon might be. He doesn’t know which is worse: facing Dillon, or NOT. I loved that Jack didn’t know! Dillon, though. He knows. He knows he wants to see Jack. Seeing the man who has held his heart for long in so much pain calls to him. He wants Jack, but he wants Jack to come to him. And when they do? It was beautiful! But Jack spoils it by running! Stoopid man thinks now he’s “got Dillon out his system” he’ll be able to lay it to rest. But Dillon is far more than a “get out of my system” kinda man, and it takes Dillon’s sister, and Jack’s mum, to make Jack see, to really SEE how much he cannot let Dillon go!
It’s only short, some 90 pages, but packs quite a punch. Both Jack and Dillon have their say, and in the third person. Each voice is clear and defined.
I read some reviews AFTER I read this, I don’t do it before. I made that mistake once and never again. Most of the reviews I found were from 2014, and not very good. I wonder has this been revised since. I found none of the problems that are mentioned! Also, I can’t find anything else by this author. So, given this is a FIRST-time author, I’ll say this is a very VERY good start.
4 solid stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**