Search
Bong Mines Entertainment (15 KP) rated Something New - Single by Ollie Gabriel in Music
Jul 10, 2019
Ollie Gabriel is a talented soul singer and songwriter based in Los Angeles, California. Not too long ago, he released an adorable music video for his “Something New (From “Songland”)” single.
“We’re living in a world so fast. Not a lot of things that last. But there’s one thing that’s gon stay. I still got that old kind of loving. The kind that don’t leave, that don’t bend, that don’t break. I still got that old kinda loving.” – lyrics
‘Something New’ tells an evergreen tale of a young guy who cherishes an idealistic moment shared between him and his significant other.
While looking into her beautiful eyes, he reveals that his love for her will remain until they are old and grey. Therefore, they should close their eyes, take their time, and hang on to every second like it’s their last.
Later, he admits that a love like theirs doesn’t come around every day, so that’s why they should try something new and bring back that old thing again.
‘Something New’ contains a timeless love story and ear-welcoming vocals. Also, the lovable tune possesses lush instrumentation flavored with R&B and classic soul ingredients.
Ollie Gabriel, a Louisiana native, was introduced to the American public by way of NBC’s new groundbreaking series, entitled, Songland.
During the show, five songwriters competed and performed their original song for the chance to have it recorded by a celebrity artist.
Long-story-short, Gabriel performed and pitched his original song to John Legend, and the rest is history.
Ollie Gabriel’s inspirational debut single, “Running Man”, has over 22M streams online via Spotify.
He has performed around the world, televised to millions and to concert audiences of 40,000+ fans. Also, he’s a talented producer with over 500 sync placements in film and tv since 2009.
His music has been featured on Grey’s Anatomy, Ray Donovan, Shameless, and Deadliest Catch to name a few.
“In 2017, Ollie Gabriel married his longtime girlfriend who inspired the song he performed on NBC’s Songland.”
“We’re living in a world so fast. Not a lot of things that last. But there’s one thing that’s gon stay. I still got that old kind of loving. The kind that don’t leave, that don’t bend, that don’t break. I still got that old kinda loving.” – lyrics
‘Something New’ tells an evergreen tale of a young guy who cherishes an idealistic moment shared between him and his significant other.
While looking into her beautiful eyes, he reveals that his love for her will remain until they are old and grey. Therefore, they should close their eyes, take their time, and hang on to every second like it’s their last.
Later, he admits that a love like theirs doesn’t come around every day, so that’s why they should try something new and bring back that old thing again.
‘Something New’ contains a timeless love story and ear-welcoming vocals. Also, the lovable tune possesses lush instrumentation flavored with R&B and classic soul ingredients.
Ollie Gabriel, a Louisiana native, was introduced to the American public by way of NBC’s new groundbreaking series, entitled, Songland.
During the show, five songwriters competed and performed their original song for the chance to have it recorded by a celebrity artist.
Long-story-short, Gabriel performed and pitched his original song to John Legend, and the rest is history.
Ollie Gabriel’s inspirational debut single, “Running Man”, has over 22M streams online via Spotify.
He has performed around the world, televised to millions and to concert audiences of 40,000+ fans. Also, he’s a talented producer with over 500 sync placements in film and tv since 2009.
His music has been featured on Grey’s Anatomy, Ray Donovan, Shameless, and Deadliest Catch to name a few.
“In 2017, Ollie Gabriel married his longtime girlfriend who inspired the song he performed on NBC’s Songland.”
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Red State (2011) in Movies
Aug 23, 2019
Kevin Smith cult film
I had always meaned to watch this film since I'm a big Kevin Smith fan, but just had never gotten around to until now. If you go in thinking you will be watching Clerks or Chasing Amy you would be mistaken. Maybe more like his follow up movie, Tusk, than anything else.
It's kind of the story of three high school friends. One of them meets and lines up a "hook up" with a mysterious woman on a dating phone app so the hormone-filled teens race to score. Their initial meeting at the woman's trailer seems to be going well until the boys realize the woman has drugged their beers and the boys drop to the floor.
When they awaken, they realize they have been abducted, bound and gagged and are now going to have something bad happen to them courtesy of a crazy cult-like religious leader in front of his "flock" complete with women and children.
All doesn't go according to plan when the boys try and escape and then the feds show up outside to try and handle the situation. Tensions escalate quickly and the bullets start flying.
The movie started promising with kind of a Hostel meets Wicker Man vibe. I enjoyed the tension built as the teens try and assess their situation and figure a way out. You definitely quickly grow to hate the cult leader and his disciples as they do nasty things to others and blindly follow their leader to carry out his every order. I feel the movie falls apart in the last act.
Without giving anything away, the resolution wasn't satisfactory and a lot of things are explained at the end instead of being shown which was disappointing. Not sure if this was meant to be this way or they ran out of money and/or time so that's the way thing ended up.
Overall, I was entertained, but felt it lacked something to make the experience completely fulfilling.
It's kind of the story of three high school friends. One of them meets and lines up a "hook up" with a mysterious woman on a dating phone app so the hormone-filled teens race to score. Their initial meeting at the woman's trailer seems to be going well until the boys realize the woman has drugged their beers and the boys drop to the floor.
When they awaken, they realize they have been abducted, bound and gagged and are now going to have something bad happen to them courtesy of a crazy cult-like religious leader in front of his "flock" complete with women and children.
All doesn't go according to plan when the boys try and escape and then the feds show up outside to try and handle the situation. Tensions escalate quickly and the bullets start flying.
The movie started promising with kind of a Hostel meets Wicker Man vibe. I enjoyed the tension built as the teens try and assess their situation and figure a way out. You definitely quickly grow to hate the cult leader and his disciples as they do nasty things to others and blindly follow their leader to carry out his every order. I feel the movie falls apart in the last act.
Without giving anything away, the resolution wasn't satisfactory and a lot of things are explained at the end instead of being shown which was disappointing. Not sure if this was meant to be this way or they ran out of money and/or time so that's the way thing ended up.
Overall, I was entertained, but felt it lacked something to make the experience completely fulfilling.
Merissa (12058 KP) rated Centaur Rift (Warrior Hearts Academy #1) in Books
Nov 25, 2023
CENTAUR RIFT is the first book in the Warrior Hearts Academy series BUT it appears to be a spin-off of either one or two previous series, so it did feel as though you were dropped into the middle of the action to begin with. On the cover, there is a IV but I only saw that once I had the book on my Paperwhite, as it didn't show up clearly on the book cover online.
That being said, I quickly became invested in Riley, Marcus, Rafael, and Havoc. Riley is awesome. She grew up as a foster kid and has dealt with horrible situations. This allows her to understand when Marcus swings back and forth with his moods, instead of throwing her own temper tantrum - even if she wants to! Marcus - oh, man! This poor male has had so much taken away and given so much sh!t in return, he breaks my heart. Rafael - I could see his storyline a mile away but the fun was in waiting for him to find out. He has been tormented in ways he doesn't even know about yet. I want to get him out of there! And speaking of getting out, poor Havoc! I want to wrap him up in the warm fuzzies, even if he does grumble about it. These four are brilliant and I can't wait for them to meet up.
I was thankful for Riley's ignorance as it meant I got explanations about the world and the different species in it, along with her. I can't wait to find out more about her!
Although I started off wondering what I'd let myself in for, I was in for a thoroughly enjoyable ride through this story, and can't wait to read more. Definitely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* 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!
Nov 25, 2023
That being said, I quickly became invested in Riley, Marcus, Rafael, and Havoc. Riley is awesome. She grew up as a foster kid and has dealt with horrible situations. This allows her to understand when Marcus swings back and forth with his moods, instead of throwing her own temper tantrum - even if she wants to! Marcus - oh, man! This poor male has had so much taken away and given so much sh!t in return, he breaks my heart. Rafael - I could see his storyline a mile away but the fun was in waiting for him to find out. He has been tormented in ways he doesn't even know about yet. I want to get him out of there! And speaking of getting out, poor Havoc! I want to wrap him up in the warm fuzzies, even if he does grumble about it. These four are brilliant and I can't wait for them to meet up.
I was thankful for Riley's ignorance as it meant I got explanations about the world and the different species in it, along with her. I can't wait to find out more about her!
Although I started off wondering what I'd let myself in for, I was in for a thoroughly enjoyable ride through this story, and can't wait to read more. Definitely recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* 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!
Nov 25, 2023
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Saw (2004) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
One of the most impressive cinematic debuts in memory has arrived in theaters and showcases a very impressive writer/director team that seem poised for great things based on a very impressive debut.
The film is “Saw” and it is a triumph of suspense, horror, and drama that harkens back to the classic work of David Fincher, and dare I say Hitchcock, as it is a bold and daring film, that is a fresh and creative as it is innovative.
The film is written by and features Leigh Whannell, as Adam, a young man who awakens in a dark room in a bathtub filled with water. Although disoriented, Adam soon discovers he is not alone, as he shares the room with another man, Dr. Lawrence Gordon (Cary Elwes), who like him, is chained at the ankle and trapped in the room.
As bad as this is, there is a dead body in the middle of the room that underscores the peril of the situation. Adam and Lawrence eventually discover audio tapes and a player that indicate that they are being held as they do not appreciate the life that they have and as such, are going to lose it unless they can prove how much they want to live.
Lawrence is told via the taped instructions that if he does not kill Adam by 6:00, then his wife and daughter will be killed and clues are given to indicate where to look in the decrepit room. The fact that Adam and Lawrence are chained and have very limited mobility forces the two of them to work with one another, despite the mistrust Adam has towards Lawrence as he was the one they tape said had to be killed.
Lawrence begins to tell Adam that he thinks he knows who is behind their situation, as there has been a series of murders in the area and he was suspect. Through a series of flashbacks Lawrence informs Adam about the Jigsaw killer, who places victims in perilous situations but provides them with a way out, provided they are willing to take extreme measures to show how much they want to live. The bizarre and gruesome situations lead to the introduction of Detective David Tapp (Danny Glover), who is investigating the grizzly trail left by the killer. In many ways, “Saw” become two movies in one as we learn about the history of the crimes, and the investigation leading up to the present situation between Lawrence and Adam. The film also cleverly guises certain events keeping the audience guessing as to if they happened in the past or are occurring in the present adding to the mystery and suspense.
As the story unfolds we learn more about Adam that underscores the tension and allows new avenues for the story to unfold. I will not spoil the twists and turns of the story but suffice it to say, there are plenty of red herrings and plot twists that will keep the audience guessing and some very creative and shocking twists and turns that culminates in an ending that will become one of the most talked about in film history and is destined to carve a niche in horror history.
Director James Wan, who also created the story, has crafted a visually gripping and disturbing film with a very effective pace that shows ability and talent well beyond his years. The film is so masterfully shot and organized that it is hard to believe that this is his first film, as Dramas can often be the downfall of many directors as they are unable to draw tension out of the material.
The screenplay by Whanell is gripping and effective. The characters are defined well within the context of their situations as it is vital to the story that information about the characters is slowly released to the audience in order to create and maintain the tension.
“Saw” is a true wonder as instead of being a simple horror film, it is a deeply complex and disturbing film that showcases two talented individuals in a very impressive debut. The images and story of the film stay with you long after the film ends and like it or love it “Saw” is a well crafted film that is not only disturbing, but refreshingly original. My only issue with the film is that it did drag just a bit while leading up to the finale, but that being said, “Saw” is easily the best horror film in many years.
The film is “Saw” and it is a triumph of suspense, horror, and drama that harkens back to the classic work of David Fincher, and dare I say Hitchcock, as it is a bold and daring film, that is a fresh and creative as it is innovative.
The film is written by and features Leigh Whannell, as Adam, a young man who awakens in a dark room in a bathtub filled with water. Although disoriented, Adam soon discovers he is not alone, as he shares the room with another man, Dr. Lawrence Gordon (Cary Elwes), who like him, is chained at the ankle and trapped in the room.
As bad as this is, there is a dead body in the middle of the room that underscores the peril of the situation. Adam and Lawrence eventually discover audio tapes and a player that indicate that they are being held as they do not appreciate the life that they have and as such, are going to lose it unless they can prove how much they want to live.
Lawrence is told via the taped instructions that if he does not kill Adam by 6:00, then his wife and daughter will be killed and clues are given to indicate where to look in the decrepit room. The fact that Adam and Lawrence are chained and have very limited mobility forces the two of them to work with one another, despite the mistrust Adam has towards Lawrence as he was the one they tape said had to be killed.
Lawrence begins to tell Adam that he thinks he knows who is behind their situation, as there has been a series of murders in the area and he was suspect. Through a series of flashbacks Lawrence informs Adam about the Jigsaw killer, who places victims in perilous situations but provides them with a way out, provided they are willing to take extreme measures to show how much they want to live. The bizarre and gruesome situations lead to the introduction of Detective David Tapp (Danny Glover), who is investigating the grizzly trail left by the killer. In many ways, “Saw” become two movies in one as we learn about the history of the crimes, and the investigation leading up to the present situation between Lawrence and Adam. The film also cleverly guises certain events keeping the audience guessing as to if they happened in the past or are occurring in the present adding to the mystery and suspense.
As the story unfolds we learn more about Adam that underscores the tension and allows new avenues for the story to unfold. I will not spoil the twists and turns of the story but suffice it to say, there are plenty of red herrings and plot twists that will keep the audience guessing and some very creative and shocking twists and turns that culminates in an ending that will become one of the most talked about in film history and is destined to carve a niche in horror history.
Director James Wan, who also created the story, has crafted a visually gripping and disturbing film with a very effective pace that shows ability and talent well beyond his years. The film is so masterfully shot and organized that it is hard to believe that this is his first film, as Dramas can often be the downfall of many directors as they are unable to draw tension out of the material.
The screenplay by Whanell is gripping and effective. The characters are defined well within the context of their situations as it is vital to the story that information about the characters is slowly released to the audience in order to create and maintain the tension.
“Saw” is a true wonder as instead of being a simple horror film, it is a deeply complex and disturbing film that showcases two talented individuals in a very impressive debut. The images and story of the film stay with you long after the film ends and like it or love it “Saw” is a well crafted film that is not only disturbing, but refreshingly original. My only issue with the film is that it did drag just a bit while leading up to the finale, but that being said, “Saw” is easily the best horror film in many years.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Schitt's Creek in TV
Jan 22, 2021
This show was a little off my radar until it went ahead and won 9 Emmys earlier this year. I made a point of adding it to my watchlist, but remained largely unconvinced that it was going to be for me. Not based on anything solid, I just had a feeling.
One season in and I have to admit I find it very easy to watch (often in the background to doing something else) but am still a little on the fence. I can go an entire episode without raising a smile, but there have also been several moments that have had me rolling off my chair. My new instinct about it is that I am gonna need a lot more than the first season under my belt before I develop a true relationship with it. Maybe that was also the thinking of the Emmys, who mostly ignored it for 5 years and then threw everything at in retrospect once they realised it was ending and how fond they had become of it.
Eugene Levy and Maureen O’Hara, as the disfunctuonal parents of two grown up brats forced to slum it in a bumsville town once the family business goes bust, demonstrate terrific comic understanding and timing after years of practice in cringe comedy movies such as Best In Show. The fly on the wall style is not quite The Office, or Parks and Rec, but closest to Arrested Development – which I also struggled with at first, until the joke sunk in.
O’Hara especially, always teetering on the edge of wasted is a joy to watch; just naturally amusing and worth this kind of attention after a long and distinguished career. The kids also have their moments, the pan-sexual man-child David, played by Dan Levy, and the shallow vacuum that is Alexis, played by Annie Murphy, are deliberately annoying at first, but do become strangely endearing over time, a sign of great writing. Levy snr. is more the straight guy in the main, wallowing in pathos and his own ineffectual weaknesses as a father and husband, but also has some great moments here and there.
At this point I can’t honestly say if I will continue to the end, I’m just not that attached to it to face 5 more seasons for sure, but I may dip in from time to time. I do think it is worth a bigger audience than it already has stateside, I’m just not convinced a British / European audience really need it at this point in time, and if it has a time it is probably now or never, as its reference points are very of the moment, 2015-2020, before 2020 became something else entirely.
One season in and I have to admit I find it very easy to watch (often in the background to doing something else) but am still a little on the fence. I can go an entire episode without raising a smile, but there have also been several moments that have had me rolling off my chair. My new instinct about it is that I am gonna need a lot more than the first season under my belt before I develop a true relationship with it. Maybe that was also the thinking of the Emmys, who mostly ignored it for 5 years and then threw everything at in retrospect once they realised it was ending and how fond they had become of it.
Eugene Levy and Maureen O’Hara, as the disfunctuonal parents of two grown up brats forced to slum it in a bumsville town once the family business goes bust, demonstrate terrific comic understanding and timing after years of practice in cringe comedy movies such as Best In Show. The fly on the wall style is not quite The Office, or Parks and Rec, but closest to Arrested Development – which I also struggled with at first, until the joke sunk in.
O’Hara especially, always teetering on the edge of wasted is a joy to watch; just naturally amusing and worth this kind of attention after a long and distinguished career. The kids also have their moments, the pan-sexual man-child David, played by Dan Levy, and the shallow vacuum that is Alexis, played by Annie Murphy, are deliberately annoying at first, but do become strangely endearing over time, a sign of great writing. Levy snr. is more the straight guy in the main, wallowing in pathos and his own ineffectual weaknesses as a father and husband, but also has some great moments here and there.
At this point I can’t honestly say if I will continue to the end, I’m just not that attached to it to face 5 more seasons for sure, but I may dip in from time to time. I do think it is worth a bigger audience than it already has stateside, I’m just not convinced a British / European audience really need it at this point in time, and if it has a time it is probably now or never, as its reference points are very of the moment, 2015-2020, before 2020 became something else entirely.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Weekend at Bernie's (1989) in Movies
May 1, 2018
Could Have Been Better
Two friends show up at their boss Bernie's beachhouse for a weekend retreat only to find Bernie dead. To maintain innocence, they decide to go through with the weekend while hiding Bernie in plain sight for all to see.
Acting: 10
One of the highlights of the film. Terry Kiser owns the role of Bernie Lomax, playing a man you love to hate. There's never a point where you like this guy and of course that's the whole idea.
My personal favorite role came from Jonathan Silverman who plays Richard Parker--a play-by-the-rules kind of guy that just wants to do the right thing. His humor, similar to Cameron Frye in Ferris Bueller's Day Off shines most when his character is inserted into situations he desperately wants to get out of. I enjoyed watching how frantic he would get in certain scenes.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 5
Outside of Bernie and Richard, there weren't any characters that grabbed my interest. Larry (Andrew McCarthy) was written way too douchey which I'm guessing was for the purpose of being the balance to Richard. I hated Larry's character but not for the same reason I hated Bernie. Larry had zero redeeming qualities and his willingness to throw Richard under the bus at any given moment bugged the crap out of me. I get it, he's a jerk, but sheesh. A little overboard for my taste.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Not a whole lot of moments that stood out. I did like the contrast of how the lighting changed with them being in the city versus at the beach. Shots of Bernie doing various things (washing up on the beach, waterskiing) were shining points in an otherwise dull movie.
Conflict: 3
The preposterous premise eventually overwhelmed me. You've got two guys running around trying to show everyone this guy is still alive when I'm thinking the whole time, "What would be the harm in telling the truth?" One or two funny moments don't make up for the fact that the film probably should have ended twenty minutes in.
Genre: 4
Considering most of the jokes fell flat for me and this film is supposed to be a comedy, I don't think I need to expand further here.
Memorability: 7
In the few moments where the film was funny, it was really funny. When the hitman that killed Bernie originally kept finding him alive, I would crack up everytime he would have to kill Bernie again. It's memorable moments like these that make me think about the handful of tweaks they could have made to really push the film over the top.
Pace: 5
When a comedy isn't very funny, you better believe it's going to move at a slow pace. It wasn't unbearable, but I was definitely ready for the film to be over by the time it reached the end. Inconsistencies and bad comedic choices made for a very wavy pace.
Plot: 8
Love it or hate it, I can't deny that it's at least unique. And furthermore, if you were going to parade your boss around pretending he was alive, I imagine it probably would have gone the same way with one crazy antic happening after another. My subtraction of two came from this mere fact that I couldn't shake: Eventually, Bernie's going to smell. And it should have been all downhill from there.
Resolution: 6
Overall: 63
Glad I saw it once. No need to ever see it again. It's very much a bucket list film that I can now bury and erase from my memory.
Acting: 10
One of the highlights of the film. Terry Kiser owns the role of Bernie Lomax, playing a man you love to hate. There's never a point where you like this guy and of course that's the whole idea.
My personal favorite role came from Jonathan Silverman who plays Richard Parker--a play-by-the-rules kind of guy that just wants to do the right thing. His humor, similar to Cameron Frye in Ferris Bueller's Day Off shines most when his character is inserted into situations he desperately wants to get out of. I enjoyed watching how frantic he would get in certain scenes.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 5
Outside of Bernie and Richard, there weren't any characters that grabbed my interest. Larry (Andrew McCarthy) was written way too douchey which I'm guessing was for the purpose of being the balance to Richard. I hated Larry's character but not for the same reason I hated Bernie. Larry had zero redeeming qualities and his willingness to throw Richard under the bus at any given moment bugged the crap out of me. I get it, he's a jerk, but sheesh. A little overboard for my taste.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Not a whole lot of moments that stood out. I did like the contrast of how the lighting changed with them being in the city versus at the beach. Shots of Bernie doing various things (washing up on the beach, waterskiing) were shining points in an otherwise dull movie.
Conflict: 3
The preposterous premise eventually overwhelmed me. You've got two guys running around trying to show everyone this guy is still alive when I'm thinking the whole time, "What would be the harm in telling the truth?" One or two funny moments don't make up for the fact that the film probably should have ended twenty minutes in.
Genre: 4
Considering most of the jokes fell flat for me and this film is supposed to be a comedy, I don't think I need to expand further here.
Memorability: 7
In the few moments where the film was funny, it was really funny. When the hitman that killed Bernie originally kept finding him alive, I would crack up everytime he would have to kill Bernie again. It's memorable moments like these that make me think about the handful of tweaks they could have made to really push the film over the top.
Pace: 5
When a comedy isn't very funny, you better believe it's going to move at a slow pace. It wasn't unbearable, but I was definitely ready for the film to be over by the time it reached the end. Inconsistencies and bad comedic choices made for a very wavy pace.
Plot: 8
Love it or hate it, I can't deny that it's at least unique. And furthermore, if you were going to parade your boss around pretending he was alive, I imagine it probably would have gone the same way with one crazy antic happening after another. My subtraction of two came from this mere fact that I couldn't shake: Eventually, Bernie's going to smell. And it should have been all downhill from there.
Resolution: 6
Overall: 63
Glad I saw it once. No need to ever see it again. It's very much a bucket list film that I can now bury and erase from my memory.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Duchess Deal in Books
Jun 6, 2019
^^ Returning from the war, scarred Duke of Ashbury decides he needs an heir, but that would mean a wife and she’d have to look upon his beastly war wounds, which would never do. So when he sets his sights on the vicar’s daughter Emma Gladstone and proposes a marriage of convenience deal, he begins to put some rules into place to protect her (or maybe himself) from seeing his disfigured body.
^^ But Emma is no fool, and insists on some rules of her own. She can see that beneath the scars, bad temper and his awfully stubborn ways, he’s quite simply just a lonely man needing companionship, and no different to her. Surely beauty is only skin deep and there’s much more to him than outward appearances.
^^ Oh, what a lovely story this is. Yes, on the surface this is what I’d call a sweet romance; a poor girl meets rich Duke love story. But deep down, below the surface of the title and cover, I uncovered some hidden gems. It’s a story of two lost souls trying to make the best of what they feel they have left to offer.
^^ The Duke is a great character, and yes, he does have his faults, and I’m not talking his appearance, but can he really be blamed after what he’s been through? The war has left the Duke scarred, physically and mentally. He may be a hero on the battlefield, but with his scars on show he’s found himself to be rather intimidating to others; children scream, dogs howl, honestly, if no one can bear to look at him, how is he ever going to produce an heir?
^^ Then we meet Emma, wise before her years, and not a woman to be messed around. But if that’s so, why would Emma choose to go into a loveless marriage with a man who only wants her for an heir? He’s already made it totally clear they’ll never have to sleep in the same bed ever again after their child is born. What on earth could possibly be in it for her? Well, maybe deep down, Emma’s not so confident after all. Perhaps, this wealthy Duke may be her last chance to have a child, and gain some security into her life. After all, if her father said “No decent man would ever want you!” as he banished her from their house, then maybe there’s some truth to it?
^^ I found myself thinking this is very much a charming Beauty and the Beast story. The way Emma and Ash get to know each other is both realistic and so endearing. This has some cracking dialogue with several laugh out loud moments, which made this such an enjoyable, fast read. I can’t wait to read more like this from Mills and Boon.
^^ Oh and I nearly forgot. It’s got it’s sexy bits in it too, and they are totally fitting and in line with this time period. What did make me smile, (and I thought it was a nice touch) was how, at the beginning of the book, there is a lovely dedication from the author (also once a vicar’s daughter) thanking her dad for being nothing like her character Emma’s father. Tessa Dare also mentions which chapters her father should miss out when reading. Don’t you realise that these pages will be where everyone visits first? ?
Overall: This is a charming Beauty and the Beast story, about love, honesty and mistakingly becoming the Monster of Mayfair! (Hilarious).
^^ But Emma is no fool, and insists on some rules of her own. She can see that beneath the scars, bad temper and his awfully stubborn ways, he’s quite simply just a lonely man needing companionship, and no different to her. Surely beauty is only skin deep and there’s much more to him than outward appearances.
^^ Oh, what a lovely story this is. Yes, on the surface this is what I’d call a sweet romance; a poor girl meets rich Duke love story. But deep down, below the surface of the title and cover, I uncovered some hidden gems. It’s a story of two lost souls trying to make the best of what they feel they have left to offer.
^^ The Duke is a great character, and yes, he does have his faults, and I’m not talking his appearance, but can he really be blamed after what he’s been through? The war has left the Duke scarred, physically and mentally. He may be a hero on the battlefield, but with his scars on show he’s found himself to be rather intimidating to others; children scream, dogs howl, honestly, if no one can bear to look at him, how is he ever going to produce an heir?
^^ Then we meet Emma, wise before her years, and not a woman to be messed around. But if that’s so, why would Emma choose to go into a loveless marriage with a man who only wants her for an heir? He’s already made it totally clear they’ll never have to sleep in the same bed ever again after their child is born. What on earth could possibly be in it for her? Well, maybe deep down, Emma’s not so confident after all. Perhaps, this wealthy Duke may be her last chance to have a child, and gain some security into her life. After all, if her father said “No decent man would ever want you!” as he banished her from their house, then maybe there’s some truth to it?
^^ I found myself thinking this is very much a charming Beauty and the Beast story. The way Emma and Ash get to know each other is both realistic and so endearing. This has some cracking dialogue with several laugh out loud moments, which made this such an enjoyable, fast read. I can’t wait to read more like this from Mills and Boon.
^^ Oh and I nearly forgot. It’s got it’s sexy bits in it too, and they are totally fitting and in line with this time period. What did make me smile, (and I thought it was a nice touch) was how, at the beginning of the book, there is a lovely dedication from the author (also once a vicar’s daughter) thanking her dad for being nothing like her character Emma’s father. Tessa Dare also mentions which chapters her father should miss out when reading. Don’t you realise that these pages will be where everyone visits first? ?
Overall: This is a charming Beauty and the Beast story, about love, honesty and mistakingly becoming the Monster of Mayfair! (Hilarious).
Sass Perilla (36 KP) rated Frankenstein in Books
Aug 9, 2019
The plot and major themes. (1 more)
Further work it inspired.
Readable, but disjointed and repetitive in parts.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Fundamentally, the problem with this book is the narrator, Victor. He is thoroughly detestable. A selfish, cowardly, irresponsible, excuse ridden, narcissistic d****e-bag of the highest order. And unfortunately, it is Victor Frankenstein’s POV that we are forced into for the majority of the novel.
My hatred for and frustration with the self-pitying, feckless behaviour of the (pseudo)
protagonist made this an irritating read for me- and to an extent I think this was Shelley’s intention. Victor isn’t designed to be the likable, affable, morally “good” man fallen from grace he believes himself to be, and the horrific events that befall those around him are of his making.
However, this doesn’t make him any less grating! The "monster" (to me reminiscent of Caliban with his lyrical speech and enforced isolation, being neither man nor not man) is eloquent and persuasive when he asks his creator to account for his misdoings. So, you’ve got to ask yourself, if an infanticidal, demonic, bag of sew together corpses is actually more engaging than the main storyteller, is that storyteller really the
right character to be telling the story?
Now, with all that said, it is an important book. A work by a female author with strong female characters (albeit background characters) who was only nineteen when she wrote the initial draft. Very impressive. But, for me her youth is evident. When we teach secondary school pupils to write creatively, we often give them the ambiguous instruction “show don’t tell”, and for me the book is more of a list of horrible and horrific events told in a Chinese puzzle box style story within a story, rather than an engaging and “complete” narrative. It feels like she chooses to place focus on the wrong “bits”- for example the whole of chapter nineteen where Victor travels the British Isles, comments briefly on the local architecture of each town and city and
then repetitively reminds us that he couldn’t enjoy the surroundings because of his angst.
And I would have at least like to have seen some of the courtroom drama when Victor is tried for the death of Clerval...
So, I hate to be “that” gal, who poo-poos these fantastic works of fiction (we know they’re great because some clever-britches told us they were) but in all honesty, the novel ain’t that good, and I’ll maintain that stance no matter how clever the britches of the opposing schools of thought.
I think the continuing appeal is in it’s universal themes: parenting, nature versus
nurture; morality and scientific advancement- and the whole idea of stitching a creature out of
corpse-parts and electrocuting it to life is pretty darn cool. And there are some really effective
horror scenes, such as the vignette of Victor ripping apart project lady-monster (I kind wish she had a name- a working title- but given he can’t even be bothered to name monster number one I guess this was all too much to hope for).
It’s readable, but it’s value, for me at any rate, lies in the offshoots and creativity it has spawned, rather than the work itself.
My hatred for and frustration with the self-pitying, feckless behaviour of the (pseudo)
protagonist made this an irritating read for me- and to an extent I think this was Shelley’s intention. Victor isn’t designed to be the likable, affable, morally “good” man fallen from grace he believes himself to be, and the horrific events that befall those around him are of his making.
However, this doesn’t make him any less grating! The "monster" (to me reminiscent of Caliban with his lyrical speech and enforced isolation, being neither man nor not man) is eloquent and persuasive when he asks his creator to account for his misdoings. So, you’ve got to ask yourself, if an infanticidal, demonic, bag of sew together corpses is actually more engaging than the main storyteller, is that storyteller really the
right character to be telling the story?
Now, with all that said, it is an important book. A work by a female author with strong female characters (albeit background characters) who was only nineteen when she wrote the initial draft. Very impressive. But, for me her youth is evident. When we teach secondary school pupils to write creatively, we often give them the ambiguous instruction “show don’t tell”, and for me the book is more of a list of horrible and horrific events told in a Chinese puzzle box style story within a story, rather than an engaging and “complete” narrative. It feels like she chooses to place focus on the wrong “bits”- for example the whole of chapter nineteen where Victor travels the British Isles, comments briefly on the local architecture of each town and city and
then repetitively reminds us that he couldn’t enjoy the surroundings because of his angst.
And I would have at least like to have seen some of the courtroom drama when Victor is tried for the death of Clerval...
So, I hate to be “that” gal, who poo-poos these fantastic works of fiction (we know they’re great because some clever-britches told us they were) but in all honesty, the novel ain’t that good, and I’ll maintain that stance no matter how clever the britches of the opposing schools of thought.
I think the continuing appeal is in it’s universal themes: parenting, nature versus
nurture; morality and scientific advancement- and the whole idea of stitching a creature out of
corpse-parts and electrocuting it to life is pretty darn cool. And there are some really effective
horror scenes, such as the vignette of Victor ripping apart project lady-monster (I kind wish she had a name- a working title- but given he can’t even be bothered to name monster number one I guess this was all too much to hope for).
It’s readable, but it’s value, for me at any rate, lies in the offshoots and creativity it has spawned, rather than the work itself.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Beast: A Tale of Love and Revenge in Books
Jul 16, 2018
Almost ruined my childhood favorite
One of my favorite books while I was growing up was the Beauty and the Beast. I usually love retellings,as they show me a different side of the story that might be, that I have never considered before. This book, however, almost ruined it all for me. The only reason it didn't was because I wouldn't let one bad retelling to ruin my childhood favorite!
The story is about Lucie, who is a servant in Jean Leup's palace. Through Lucie's story, we see Jean Leup as a horrible person who only cares about money and the respect he received from his aristocratic community. He treats the servants badly and doesn't even bother to look at them.
Lucie likes the thought of him. He is a very handsome man, and all she dreams about is for him to notice her. And one day, he does. And something really bad happens. Jean Leup does something horrible to Lucie.
[SPOILER - PLEASE CONTINUE CAUTIOUSLY]
He rapes her. And not only that this scene was very disturbing, it was also three pages long, with broad descriptions and it made be cringe badly. It made me hate everything and this was the part where I almost quit on reading this book.
[SPOILER FINISHED - YOU CAN CONTINUE READING]
After this big spoiler scene, the first reaction Lucie has is to kill herself. I am aware that this was a huge trauma for her, and people react differently, but if the author gives me this as a solution to her problem, do I want to continue reading? Is this really the lesson she learns?
With a bit of help of magic and wisdom words, she decides that now she wants for Jean Leup to suffer, and she wants to be able to see this happen. Suddenly, wish becomes a reality and the next thing we know, she is a candle that can't move, and Jean Leup has turned into a Beast.
Do you get the Beauty and the Beast reference now? We see the story from the candle's point of view, who is Lucie.
Well - not really!
Because here's the twist - the Beast doesn't remember what happened before. He doesn't know he was Jean Leup. He doesn't know he was bad in the past. The Beast is good by default, and a bit sad that he's alone in a big castle. So I have to ask again - Where is the lesson? Where is the punishment? If he can't remember he was bad, he'll never learn why he is a Beast.
To continue and shorten the story - Lucie (the candle) can talk to the Beast through her mind. The Beauty (Rose) comes to the castle and the story goes on. Lucie decides that she is in love with the Beast, and I won't reveal the rest, in case you want to read the book and see for yourself.
Now - I know that the author's point wasn't the lesson that the Beast learns as in the original story. Her point was to tell the story of the Beast, and Lucie, and how this tale can have a different plot, and ending, and back story. But I really believe that this was the wrong way of saying it, and it didn't leave a clear message.
The writing was poor, and it went from one moment to another, leaving me there in the middle, wondering what happened. One scene begins, and another starts before anything is finished. It was disorientated, and I felt lost in the first 40 pages.
This is a no from me, and I will give it 2 stars because I managed to finish it.
Thanks to Candlewick Press for providing me with an ARC e-copy via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
The story is about Lucie, who is a servant in Jean Leup's palace. Through Lucie's story, we see Jean Leup as a horrible person who only cares about money and the respect he received from his aristocratic community. He treats the servants badly and doesn't even bother to look at them.
Lucie likes the thought of him. He is a very handsome man, and all she dreams about is for him to notice her. And one day, he does. And something really bad happens. Jean Leup does something horrible to Lucie.
[SPOILER - PLEASE CONTINUE CAUTIOUSLY]
He rapes her. And not only that this scene was very disturbing, it was also three pages long, with broad descriptions and it made be cringe badly. It made me hate everything and this was the part where I almost quit on reading this book.
[SPOILER FINISHED - YOU CAN CONTINUE READING]
After this big spoiler scene, the first reaction Lucie has is to kill herself. I am aware that this was a huge trauma for her, and people react differently, but if the author gives me this as a solution to her problem, do I want to continue reading? Is this really the lesson she learns?
With a bit of help of magic and wisdom words, she decides that now she wants for Jean Leup to suffer, and she wants to be able to see this happen. Suddenly, wish becomes a reality and the next thing we know, she is a candle that can't move, and Jean Leup has turned into a Beast.
Do you get the Beauty and the Beast reference now? We see the story from the candle's point of view, who is Lucie.
Well - not really!
Because here's the twist - the Beast doesn't remember what happened before. He doesn't know he was Jean Leup. He doesn't know he was bad in the past. The Beast is good by default, and a bit sad that he's alone in a big castle. So I have to ask again - Where is the lesson? Where is the punishment? If he can't remember he was bad, he'll never learn why he is a Beast.
To continue and shorten the story - Lucie (the candle) can talk to the Beast through her mind. The Beauty (Rose) comes to the castle and the story goes on. Lucie decides that she is in love with the Beast, and I won't reveal the rest, in case you want to read the book and see for yourself.
Now - I know that the author's point wasn't the lesson that the Beast learns as in the original story. Her point was to tell the story of the Beast, and Lucie, and how this tale can have a different plot, and ending, and back story. But I really believe that this was the wrong way of saying it, and it didn't leave a clear message.
The writing was poor, and it went from one moment to another, leaving me there in the middle, wondering what happened. One scene begins, and another starts before anything is finished. It was disorientated, and I felt lost in the first 40 pages.
This is a no from me, and I will give it 2 stars because I managed to finish it.
Thanks to Candlewick Press for providing me with an ARC e-copy via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.