Search
Search results
The Silver Gun
7.0
Rate It
Book
New York City, 1936. In the midst of the Great Depression, the Big Apple is defiantly striving...
The Pawful Truth
8.0
Rate It
Book
In addition to his library duties and his role as doting grandad, Charlie has enrolled in an early...
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2332 KP) rated U Is for Undertow (Kinsey Millhone, #21) in Books
Feb 19, 2022
Is There a Clue Underground?
When Matthew Sutton comes into Kinsey Millhone’s office one afternoon, he comes with a tale about two men he’d seen burring something in the woods twenty-one years earlier. As a six-year-old, he believed their story that they were pirates digging for treasure, but after seeing an article about a kidnapping that took place about the same time, Matthew is certain there is a connection. The catch? He doesn’t know where he was at the time. With very little to go on, Kinsey agrees to take the case. Will she find anything?
This is an excellent book in the series. While we know more than Kinsey does for most of the book, watching Kinsey figure things out keeps the pages turning. We spent time in the past as well as Kinsey’s present of 1988 to fully understand how things played out, and it always works. Kinsey is a fun main character, and a recurring series storyline comes back into play in this book, allowing for some growth for her. The rest of the cast are just as strong. I knew going in that this book would have more content than I typically get in the cozies I read, but there was some stuff in the final quarter of the book that could have been trimmed without it impacting anything. Still, overall, fans of this long running series will be happy with this book.
This is an excellent book in the series. While we know more than Kinsey does for most of the book, watching Kinsey figure things out keeps the pages turning. We spent time in the past as well as Kinsey’s present of 1988 to fully understand how things played out, and it always works. Kinsey is a fun main character, and a recurring series storyline comes back into play in this book, allowing for some growth for her. The rest of the cast are just as strong. I knew going in that this book would have more content than I typically get in the cozies I read, but there was some stuff in the final quarter of the book that could have been trimmed without it impacting anything. Still, overall, fans of this long running series will be happy with this book.
Sticky-Fingered Books
Book
It isn’t every day that you find a body at your kids’ school. Unless you’re Jolie Gentil. Then...
mystery cozy mystery bookbuzz
Operation 235
Book
Set in the summer of 1939, Operation 235 pits the United States against Nazi Germany, as the two...
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2332 KP) rated The Lies We Live in Books
Apr 9, 2025
Betty Must Uncover the Truth for Her New Client
Business is booming for PI Betty Ahern, and September 1943 finds her opening her own office. She’s also taken on a new case. Her client is worried that her younger brother, a teenager, is up to something shady if not illegal. And when a dead body turns up, Betty realizes the stakes have been raised. Meanwhile, the stakes are also raised in her personal life when her fiancé, Tom, returns from the front in Africa. He’s been injured, and his return to civilian life is anything but easy. Can Betty solve the case and figure out how to navigate Tom being back?
As a fan of the series, I’ve been waiting to meet Tom, and I was happy to see that happen here. His return really forced Betty to mature, and I enjoyed seeing that character growth. Meanwhile, the mystery was also compelling. Between the two, I was engrossed in the book. The story does touch on race relations of the era, but without taking over the book. I also enjoyed that aspect of things. As usual, Betty narrates with some slang from the time, but I enjoyed it. There’s a smattering of foul language, but as long as you know that going in, you’ll be fine. To best appreciate this book, you’ll want to back up to the start of the series. Fans will be very satisfied with what we get here.
As a fan of the series, I’ve been waiting to meet Tom, and I was happy to see that happen here. His return really forced Betty to mature, and I enjoyed seeing that character growth. Meanwhile, the mystery was also compelling. Between the two, I was engrossed in the book. The story does touch on race relations of the era, but without taking over the book. I also enjoyed that aspect of things. As usual, Betty narrates with some slang from the time, but I enjoyed it. There’s a smattering of foul language, but as long as you know that going in, you’ll be fine. To best appreciate this book, you’ll want to back up to the start of the series. Fans will be very satisfied with what we get here.
Europe travel guide and offline map London subway Paris metro maps Rome airport transport, Barcelona city guide, Amsterdam traffic & sightseeing information trip advisor, lonely travel planet
Travel and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Europe Travel Newsstand app offers travel guides and up-to-date seasonal information for your...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated 2012 (2009) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Roland Emmerich does big budget disaster flicks as well as Dairylea does cheese. However, some of his most recent attempts to dominate the box office have been panned by viewers and critics alike, who say that he has become too reliant on special effects.
Unfortunately, those critics better look away now, as his new film is the biggest yet.
2012 takes place, well, in 2012 for the most part and features an array of big Hollywood names attracted none the less by the huge box office forecasts for the film. The premise is simple; here comes the end of the world and god should we run!
With a reported budget of over $200m which is more than Michael Bay spent on his worldwide smash Transformers: Revenge of the fallen, Emmerich was certainly able to splash out on some eye popping CGI.
2012 reads like The Day After Tomorrow on a steroid, which is no bad thing, but that film had some hideously underdeveloped characters and lacked the depth needed to allow viewers to share compassion for the people who had been affected by the global crisis.
Thankfully it seems that Emmerich has learnt his lesson here and has provided us with a back-story and it comes in many different forms. Thandie Newton and Danny Glover play president’s daughter and president respectively, a great deal of emotion has gone into writing these two characters and their on-screen scenes together, albeit a small amount, are wonderful.
John Cusack and Amanda Peet play divorced parents Jackson and Kate, only united by the love they share for their two young children and predictably later on in the film, a few deeper emotions. Unfortunately these two share no chemistry together and their on-screen scenes are flawed as a result.
2012 doesn’t have a huge deal of character development but it does improve on what was seen in The Day After Tomorrow and more recently, 10,000BC, with a deeper understanding of the characters. It ultimately succeeds in making the viewers share compassion for even the heartless characters in the film.
Moving on to the saving grace of all disaster films; the special effects, fans of major cities being destroyed are going to be pleased here with some eye-watering action pieces really showing why perhaps Emmerich overshadows even Michael Bay and has become the king of destroying anything that can be destroyed. There are a few questionable scenes, which look rather less than realistic, but this is a small point that doesn’t need to be taken into account.
Whilst all this may seem excellent, it all feels familiar, it’s all been seen and done before, so in reality 2012 adds nothing new to the genre which is unfortunate because it really is an excellent film.
Overall, 2012 is a mouth-watering treat in cinema engineering, apart from some lapses in scientific accuracy and some shaky special effects; it surpasses The Day After Tomorrow and similar disaster films by sheer depth. On the downside it adds nothing new to the formula, but if you want sheer popcorn fodder then please, look no further.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/2012-2009/
Unfortunately, those critics better look away now, as his new film is the biggest yet.
2012 takes place, well, in 2012 for the most part and features an array of big Hollywood names attracted none the less by the huge box office forecasts for the film. The premise is simple; here comes the end of the world and god should we run!
With a reported budget of over $200m which is more than Michael Bay spent on his worldwide smash Transformers: Revenge of the fallen, Emmerich was certainly able to splash out on some eye popping CGI.
2012 reads like The Day After Tomorrow on a steroid, which is no bad thing, but that film had some hideously underdeveloped characters and lacked the depth needed to allow viewers to share compassion for the people who had been affected by the global crisis.
Thankfully it seems that Emmerich has learnt his lesson here and has provided us with a back-story and it comes in many different forms. Thandie Newton and Danny Glover play president’s daughter and president respectively, a great deal of emotion has gone into writing these two characters and their on-screen scenes together, albeit a small amount, are wonderful.
John Cusack and Amanda Peet play divorced parents Jackson and Kate, only united by the love they share for their two young children and predictably later on in the film, a few deeper emotions. Unfortunately these two share no chemistry together and their on-screen scenes are flawed as a result.
2012 doesn’t have a huge deal of character development but it does improve on what was seen in The Day After Tomorrow and more recently, 10,000BC, with a deeper understanding of the characters. It ultimately succeeds in making the viewers share compassion for even the heartless characters in the film.
Moving on to the saving grace of all disaster films; the special effects, fans of major cities being destroyed are going to be pleased here with some eye-watering action pieces really showing why perhaps Emmerich overshadows even Michael Bay and has become the king of destroying anything that can be destroyed. There are a few questionable scenes, which look rather less than realistic, but this is a small point that doesn’t need to be taken into account.
Whilst all this may seem excellent, it all feels familiar, it’s all been seen and done before, so in reality 2012 adds nothing new to the genre which is unfortunate because it really is an excellent film.
Overall, 2012 is a mouth-watering treat in cinema engineering, apart from some lapses in scientific accuracy and some shaky special effects; it surpasses The Day After Tomorrow and similar disaster films by sheer depth. On the downside it adds nothing new to the formula, but if you want sheer popcorn fodder then please, look no further.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/2012-2009/