Search
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Insurgent (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A little soulless
There hasn’t been a better time to be part of the Young Adult revolution. From Stephanie Meyer’s underwhelming Twilight saga to Suzanne Collins’ superb Huger Games trilogy and everything in between, there is something about this genre that audiences love to read and to watch.
Coming a little late to the party is Veronica Roth’s Divergent franchise. After last year’s bland debut, a new director in the shape of Robert Schwentke (Flightplan, Tattoo) takes on the second film in the series, Insurgent, but can it finally bring something to the table?
Insurgent continues the story of a post-apocalyptic America that has been divided into ‘factions’ based on the personality traits of survivors. Being placed in a faction helps you live your life in accordance with the rules of the governing body of the time. However, having traits belonging to all five categories makes you a Divergent – a risk to peace in other words.
This action sequel follows Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) and Four Eaton (Theo James), two Divergents on the run from Kate Winslet’s domineering Jeanie Matthews as they try to find out the truth about who they are and what is really going on behind the scenes.
For the uninitiated, Insurgent is a tiresome process and requires some prior knowledge of the first film to truly understand what is going on. However, in comparison to its dull and overly long predecessor, there is much to enjoy here.
The obliterated city of Chicago is given much more room to breathe and the beautifully choreographed shots of well-known landmarks draped in moss and ferns are a stunning addition and look much more realistic than the computer-generated imagery used for the Capitol in the Hunger Games series.
Moreover, there are some great acting performances scattered throughout, Woodley really gets her teeth stuck into the lead role after her disappointing turn in Divergent and Theo James provides the eye candy in a Liam Hemsworth-esque characterisation.
However, it is in Kate Winslet and newcomer Naomi Watts’ performances that we really see something special.
Despite their lack of screen time, they command each sequence they are a part of and it’s a shame they’re not used more throughout the near 2 hour runtime.
Unfortunately comparisons to other YA adaptations are unavoidable. Put Insurgent up against its main rival The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and the odds simply aren’t in its favour. The sheer star power the latter film commands is enviable and despite Winslet and Watts’ excellent performances, it just isn’t quite enough.
It all feels a little hollow, a bit flat and non-descript as the audience is thrown from one mildly entertaining set piece to another, right up until the obligatory gasps as you realise it’s another year to pick up where that cliff-hanger left things.
In the end, Insurgent improves on its overly convoluted predecessor and is much better than anything the Twilight saga threw at us, but it pales in comparison to the treat of watching ‘The Girl on Fire’ strut her stuff.
Alas, sitting in the middle isn’t quite enough in this highly competitive genre and despite some stunning cinematography and great acting, Insurgent feels a little soulless.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/22/a-little-soulless-insurgent-review/
Coming a little late to the party is Veronica Roth’s Divergent franchise. After last year’s bland debut, a new director in the shape of Robert Schwentke (Flightplan, Tattoo) takes on the second film in the series, Insurgent, but can it finally bring something to the table?
Insurgent continues the story of a post-apocalyptic America that has been divided into ‘factions’ based on the personality traits of survivors. Being placed in a faction helps you live your life in accordance with the rules of the governing body of the time. However, having traits belonging to all five categories makes you a Divergent – a risk to peace in other words.
This action sequel follows Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) and Four Eaton (Theo James), two Divergents on the run from Kate Winslet’s domineering Jeanie Matthews as they try to find out the truth about who they are and what is really going on behind the scenes.
For the uninitiated, Insurgent is a tiresome process and requires some prior knowledge of the first film to truly understand what is going on. However, in comparison to its dull and overly long predecessor, there is much to enjoy here.
The obliterated city of Chicago is given much more room to breathe and the beautifully choreographed shots of well-known landmarks draped in moss and ferns are a stunning addition and look much more realistic than the computer-generated imagery used for the Capitol in the Hunger Games series.
Moreover, there are some great acting performances scattered throughout, Woodley really gets her teeth stuck into the lead role after her disappointing turn in Divergent and Theo James provides the eye candy in a Liam Hemsworth-esque characterisation.
However, it is in Kate Winslet and newcomer Naomi Watts’ performances that we really see something special.
Despite their lack of screen time, they command each sequence they are a part of and it’s a shame they’re not used more throughout the near 2 hour runtime.
Unfortunately comparisons to other YA adaptations are unavoidable. Put Insurgent up against its main rival The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and the odds simply aren’t in its favour. The sheer star power the latter film commands is enviable and despite Winslet and Watts’ excellent performances, it just isn’t quite enough.
It all feels a little hollow, a bit flat and non-descript as the audience is thrown from one mildly entertaining set piece to another, right up until the obligatory gasps as you realise it’s another year to pick up where that cliff-hanger left things.
In the end, Insurgent improves on its overly convoluted predecessor and is much better than anything the Twilight saga threw at us, but it pales in comparison to the treat of watching ‘The Girl on Fire’ strut her stuff.
Alas, sitting in the middle isn’t quite enough in this highly competitive genre and despite some stunning cinematography and great acting, Insurgent feels a little soulless.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/22/a-little-soulless-insurgent-review/
Dana (24 KP) rated Furthermore (Furthermore, #1) in Books
Mar 23, 2018
Okay, so I got this book as an ARC at Yallwest back in May, so I finally decided to read it because it comes out later this month!! This is my second book in the 10 books in 10 days challenge!!
I love that Tahereh Mafi wrote a middle grade book. I don't often read this age group, but because it was hers, I went for it and oh my goodness I was not disappointed. Even though it's a middle grade book, maybe even because of it, the story is able to get super deep and promotes the idea that you are enough as you are, no matter what you look like or what you have. I think that's super important for students during this time.
It is amazing how much one person's writing style is able to change based on the story they are telling. Tahereh, I feel, is very much a method writer in the fact that she really inhabits the characters and their worlds as she is writing them. I really appreciate that as a reader because it makes the stories more immersive and entertaining!!
I loved the nonsensicalness of the story. It is very reminiscent of Lewis Carrol's Alice in Wonderland, but it doesn't blatantly copy what he wrote. While they both have lands in which nonsense rules, they are still different beings.
Alice is so freaking sassy and I love it. The insults she throws throughout the story are hilarious, my favorite being "overgrown pineapple" because why not?
Also, the author asides are almost at a Lemony Snicket level of commentary. And the chapter breaks are so random, but I love them. There are so many interjections that are hilarious.
I love this adventure story so much! It focuses a lot of the growth of friendships and of the characters themselves which, again, is something I think middle grade readers need to see more of.
This book is actually very emotions as well! It shows a child's view of her parents and that everyone, even parents, can make mistakes and should be able to apologize for those mistakes. The characters are very well written and are amazingly deep. I haven't read many middle grade novels recently, but this one seems especially awesome. It shows people as having flaws and making bad decisions.
I recommend that everyone reads this at some point because it is just so freaking amazing and so quotable!!
I'm going to post some of my favorite quotes after this, so if you don't want to read them, stop here!!
"Love had made her fearless, wasn't it strange? It was so much easier to fight for another than it was to fight for oneself." (p144)
"'And his sentence was very long,' said Oliver.' 'Oh yes, it was made up of many words!'" (p231) (This one made me cackle)
"He never let her win, never let her convince him she was right. He fought harder for her than she ever fought for herself." (p250)
"This new Alice was confident and bold; she was articulate and passionate; she had become the kind of person who'd lived through hardship and survived with grace." (p382)
<b>"The simple truth was that Alice would always be different-but to be different was to be extraordinary, and to be extraordinary was an adventure. It no longer mattered how the world saw her; what mattered was how Alice saw herself." (p385)</b>
I love that Tahereh Mafi wrote a middle grade book. I don't often read this age group, but because it was hers, I went for it and oh my goodness I was not disappointed. Even though it's a middle grade book, maybe even because of it, the story is able to get super deep and promotes the idea that you are enough as you are, no matter what you look like or what you have. I think that's super important for students during this time.
It is amazing how much one person's writing style is able to change based on the story they are telling. Tahereh, I feel, is very much a method writer in the fact that she really inhabits the characters and their worlds as she is writing them. I really appreciate that as a reader because it makes the stories more immersive and entertaining!!
I loved the nonsensicalness of the story. It is very reminiscent of Lewis Carrol's Alice in Wonderland, but it doesn't blatantly copy what he wrote. While they both have lands in which nonsense rules, they are still different beings.
Alice is so freaking sassy and I love it. The insults she throws throughout the story are hilarious, my favorite being "overgrown pineapple" because why not?
Also, the author asides are almost at a Lemony Snicket level of commentary. And the chapter breaks are so random, but I love them. There are so many interjections that are hilarious.
I love this adventure story so much! It focuses a lot of the growth of friendships and of the characters themselves which, again, is something I think middle grade readers need to see more of.
This book is actually very emotions as well! It shows a child's view of her parents and that everyone, even parents, can make mistakes and should be able to apologize for those mistakes. The characters are very well written and are amazingly deep. I haven't read many middle grade novels recently, but this one seems especially awesome. It shows people as having flaws and making bad decisions.
I recommend that everyone reads this at some point because it is just so freaking amazing and so quotable!!
I'm going to post some of my favorite quotes after this, so if you don't want to read them, stop here!!
"Love had made her fearless, wasn't it strange? It was so much easier to fight for another than it was to fight for oneself." (p144)
"'And his sentence was very long,' said Oliver.' 'Oh yes, it was made up of many words!'" (p231) (This one made me cackle)
"He never let her win, never let her convince him she was right. He fought harder for her than she ever fought for herself." (p250)
"This new Alice was confident and bold; she was articulate and passionate; she had become the kind of person who'd lived through hardship and survived with grace." (p382)
<b>"The simple truth was that Alice would always be different-but to be different was to be extraordinary, and to be extraordinary was an adventure. It no longer mattered how the world saw her; what mattered was how Alice saw herself." (p385)</b>
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Iron Man (2008) in Movies
Jan 27, 2020
Where it all began
After becoming essentially bankrupt in the mid 90s, Marvel Comics ended up selling off the film rights of their properties to various film studios, resulting in a decade of new superhero franchises varying in quality, from X-Men, to Dardevil, Spider-Man to Hulk, Blade to Ghost Rider, and so on.
As such, none of these films we ever close to being part of a connected universe.
Along comes 2008, and Marvel Comics and Kevin Feige hit the scene with their first offering from Marvel Studios. A company determined to just that, with the properties they still have left.
Before 2008, Iron Man was a beloved character to the comic book faithful. A lot of casual moviegoers had no idea who he was, and Iron Man was essentially a B-list risk. And now, in 2020, that couldn't be further from the truth. The trifecta of Iron Man, Tony Stark, and Robert Downey Jr. are arguably the premier face of Marvel, and it's all thanks to this fantastic B-list risk.
Director Jon Favreau wastes no time in introducing us to Tony himself, and RDJ does a fine job of letting us know just how arrogant, clever and sarcastic the titular hero is. When everything goes wrong and Tony ends up captive in a terrorist environment, were given a pretty gritty origin story to how Iron Man came to be.
As Tony is quickly forced into a situation where his life becomes fragile, we see a slow burning but evident change in his behaviour, and RDJ does a great job in sweeping the audience up alongside him in his path to becoming the people's hero.
It's a simple and effective origin template that has definitely been borrowed again in other MCU projects (looking at you Dr Strange), but it's easy to see why.
Along side Downey Jr is the always charismatic Jeff Bridges. He plays Obadiah Stane, a villain who has close ties to the Stark family, and is an imposing presence throughout. His character sees him go full super villain, which honestly cheapens his otherwise great performance. Also, in the ensuing clash between Iron Man and Iron Monger, this is the first of many MCU films to do the whole 'villain-is-just-an-evil-version-of-the-hero' trope, which is fine here (let's not forget - first MCU film after all), but did become annoyingly predictable here and there.
Gwyneth Paltrow is Pepper Potts, and I suitably charming in the role, and still remains a fan favourite now.
We also have Terrance Howard as James Rhodes, the future War Machine. I enjoyed him here, and it's evident that he had good chemistry with RDJ. It's a shame that he didn't stay on for more films, but that's money for you I guess!
Considering this film is entering it's 12th year of existence, the CGI still holds up incredibly well. The classic red and gold Iron Man suit is striking and looks great. The action scenes are pretty thrilling and fun, something that Marvel Studios have excelled in since, and just to top it all off, the now infamous post credit scene sets up the conjoined Avengers franchise that we all know and love.
Iron Man is a solid first effort from Marvel Studios, and set the MCU running out the gates, whilst simultaneously setting up a new injection of quality into Marvel movies.
As such, none of these films we ever close to being part of a connected universe.
Along comes 2008, and Marvel Comics and Kevin Feige hit the scene with their first offering from Marvel Studios. A company determined to just that, with the properties they still have left.
Before 2008, Iron Man was a beloved character to the comic book faithful. A lot of casual moviegoers had no idea who he was, and Iron Man was essentially a B-list risk. And now, in 2020, that couldn't be further from the truth. The trifecta of Iron Man, Tony Stark, and Robert Downey Jr. are arguably the premier face of Marvel, and it's all thanks to this fantastic B-list risk.
Director Jon Favreau wastes no time in introducing us to Tony himself, and RDJ does a fine job of letting us know just how arrogant, clever and sarcastic the titular hero is. When everything goes wrong and Tony ends up captive in a terrorist environment, were given a pretty gritty origin story to how Iron Man came to be.
As Tony is quickly forced into a situation where his life becomes fragile, we see a slow burning but evident change in his behaviour, and RDJ does a great job in sweeping the audience up alongside him in his path to becoming the people's hero.
It's a simple and effective origin template that has definitely been borrowed again in other MCU projects (looking at you Dr Strange), but it's easy to see why.
Along side Downey Jr is the always charismatic Jeff Bridges. He plays Obadiah Stane, a villain who has close ties to the Stark family, and is an imposing presence throughout. His character sees him go full super villain, which honestly cheapens his otherwise great performance. Also, in the ensuing clash between Iron Man and Iron Monger, this is the first of many MCU films to do the whole 'villain-is-just-an-evil-version-of-the-hero' trope, which is fine here (let's not forget - first MCU film after all), but did become annoyingly predictable here and there.
Gwyneth Paltrow is Pepper Potts, and I suitably charming in the role, and still remains a fan favourite now.
We also have Terrance Howard as James Rhodes, the future War Machine. I enjoyed him here, and it's evident that he had good chemistry with RDJ. It's a shame that he didn't stay on for more films, but that's money for you I guess!
Considering this film is entering it's 12th year of existence, the CGI still holds up incredibly well. The classic red and gold Iron Man suit is striking and looks great. The action scenes are pretty thrilling and fun, something that Marvel Studios have excelled in since, and just to top it all off, the now infamous post credit scene sets up the conjoined Avengers franchise that we all know and love.
Iron Man is a solid first effort from Marvel Studios, and set the MCU running out the gates, whilst simultaneously setting up a new injection of quality into Marvel movies.
Black-Eyed Susans
8.6
Rate It
Book
**THE TOP 5 SUNDAY TIMES BESTSELLER** 'My book of the year so far. Breathtakingly, heart-stoppingly...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Circle (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Social Media involvement in political manipulation? Don’t be ridiculous!
Set in the near future “The Circle” tells a horror story of the social media age involving an omnipotent American corporate, pitched somewhere between being Facebook-like and Google-like (note, lawyers, I just said “like”!) Emma Watson (“Beauty and the Beast“) plays young intern Mae who, partly through the aid of family friend Annie (Karen Gillan, “Guardians of the Galaxy“, “Doctor Who”) but mostly through her own aptitude, lands a foothold job in customer services for the company. With the lush corporate campus fast becoming home, Mae is quickly singled out as having “executive potential” by the charismatic CEO Bailey (Tom Hanks, “Bridge of Spies“) and his more taciturn sidekick Stenton (US comedian Patton Oswalt).
Progressively brainwashed into believing the company’s intrusive snooping (a favourite motto is “Secrets are Lies”) is all for ‘the greater good’, Mae champions the cause until a tragedy rocks her world and her company beliefs to the core.
Whenever I watch a film I tend to form my own opinion first before checking out what the ‘general public’ on IMDB think. In this case, I must confess to being a bit surprised at our divergence of views: a lot of people clearly hated this movie whereas I confess that I found it very entertaining. Certainly with the alleged role of Russia in influencing elections around the world via social media, the film is most certainly topical! Many reviewers seemed quite upset that Watson’s character is such a ‘doormat’, in that her views are so easily manipulated by the corporate machine. But not every woman – as indeed every man – can or should be a Joan of Arc style role model in every film: why should they be?
I actually found her indoctrination into “the Circle way” as quite convincing, especially a creepy scene where two corporate lackies (Cho Smith and Amir Talai) say that they’re not checking up on Mae’s social life, but…. Watson enjoys extending her post-Potter repertoire well, but the talented John Boyega (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“) is completely wasted in his role as Ty; the Wozniak-like genious behind The Circle’s technology. The script gives him very little to do other than stand around and look grumpy.
A wasted John Boyega with Emma Watson.
The film is sad in being the last movie appearance of the great Bill Paxton (“Apollo 13”) who plays Mae’s sick father and who died of complications following heart surgery two months before the film’s release (the film is dedicated “For Bill”). Tragically, Mae’s mother in the film, actress Glenn Headly (“Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”) also died suddenly at the age of 62, also due to heart problems, a couple of months after the film’s release. It’s surprising the film doesn’t have a “curse of The Circle” tag on it.
The film was directed by James Ponsoldt, who also wrote the screenplay with novel-writer Dave Eggers (“Away We Go”). I particularly liked the on-screen use of captioning (posts) which was reminiscent to me of last year’s “Nerve“, a B-movie film I rated highly that also had a string social media theme.
While the ending of the film is a bit twee – a movie definition of “being hoisted by your own petard” – it’s overall a thought provoking piece sufficiently close to the truth as to where society is going to raise the hairs on your neck.
Progressively brainwashed into believing the company’s intrusive snooping (a favourite motto is “Secrets are Lies”) is all for ‘the greater good’, Mae champions the cause until a tragedy rocks her world and her company beliefs to the core.
Whenever I watch a film I tend to form my own opinion first before checking out what the ‘general public’ on IMDB think. In this case, I must confess to being a bit surprised at our divergence of views: a lot of people clearly hated this movie whereas I confess that I found it very entertaining. Certainly with the alleged role of Russia in influencing elections around the world via social media, the film is most certainly topical! Many reviewers seemed quite upset that Watson’s character is such a ‘doormat’, in that her views are so easily manipulated by the corporate machine. But not every woman – as indeed every man – can or should be a Joan of Arc style role model in every film: why should they be?
I actually found her indoctrination into “the Circle way” as quite convincing, especially a creepy scene where two corporate lackies (Cho Smith and Amir Talai) say that they’re not checking up on Mae’s social life, but…. Watson enjoys extending her post-Potter repertoire well, but the talented John Boyega (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“) is completely wasted in his role as Ty; the Wozniak-like genious behind The Circle’s technology. The script gives him very little to do other than stand around and look grumpy.
A wasted John Boyega with Emma Watson.
The film is sad in being the last movie appearance of the great Bill Paxton (“Apollo 13”) who plays Mae’s sick father and who died of complications following heart surgery two months before the film’s release (the film is dedicated “For Bill”). Tragically, Mae’s mother in the film, actress Glenn Headly (“Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”) also died suddenly at the age of 62, also due to heart problems, a couple of months after the film’s release. It’s surprising the film doesn’t have a “curse of The Circle” tag on it.
The film was directed by James Ponsoldt, who also wrote the screenplay with novel-writer Dave Eggers (“Away We Go”). I particularly liked the on-screen use of captioning (posts) which was reminiscent to me of last year’s “Nerve“, a B-movie film I rated highly that also had a string social media theme.
While the ending of the film is a bit twee – a movie definition of “being hoisted by your own petard” – it’s overall a thought provoking piece sufficiently close to the truth as to where society is going to raise the hairs on your neck.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Fences (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
The Last Post.
In “Fences” Denzel Washington plays Troy – a bitter, self-centred and selfish man in his mid-fifties who loves the sound of his own voice. They say “empty vessels make the most noise” and here is a case in point. Set in the early fifties, race plays a strong card in every aspect of life, and Troy feels betrayed by a failed baseball career that – in his eyes at least – looked over his skills to the colour of his skin. But Troy is also a stubborn cuss, and refuses to acknowledge that even in the 50’s “The times they are a changing’”. His cussedness puts him on a collision course with his teenage son Cory (Jovan Adepo), given his aspirations for a college football scholarship, and his mother (Viola Davis, “The Help”) tries to keep the peace between the two of them.
This is a film primarily about resistance to change. All those changes in the outside world are on the ‘other side of the fence’ that Troy habitually tries to finish but never seems to put his mind to. Fences keep things out; but they also keep things in, and Troy is in a cocoon of his own making. He justifies his actions as a ‘family provider’ with lengthy speeches but ultimately they deliver hollow words and assertions that don’t stand up to scrutiny.
This is a pressure cooker of family life that is primed to blow, and a revelation (which I didn’t see coming) sets that fuse alight.
This is a film worth watching for the acting performances of Denzel Washington and (particularly) Viola Davis, winner of the Best Supporting Actress BAFTA and a strong contender for the Oscar. Both give assured performances, although Troy is such an instantly dis-likable and pitiable character that I could feel my emotions influencing my judgement about his performance.
But this is also a strong ensemble cast, with Mykelti Williamson (famously appearing as Bubba of the ‘Bubba Gump Shrimp Factory’ fame) being effective as Troy’s disabled brother and English-born Jovan Adepo being particularly impressive in an extremely assured feature debut.
However, the Broadway roots of the piece are highly visible with 98% of the film set either in the back yard, in the house, or on the front steps (the set could clearly rotate!). For such a claustrophobic topic, this is perhaps apt. But as a feature film I longed for the action to go elsewhere. The film version of the story – with a few tweaks to the screenplay – has lots of opportunities for this, but these are never taken. This makes the whole piece feel ‘worthy but dull’. In particular, anyone looking for a useful tutorial on fence building needs to look elsewhere!
As for the recent “Moonlight” there is also excessive use of the “N” word and other outdated racial references that have the potential to offend.
Good luck to Viola Davis and Denzel Washington (who also directed this) for their Best Supporting Actress and Best Actor Oscars nominations. But “Best Film” Oscar? No, I don’t think so. In truth this is a film that I will struggle to remember or get excited about in a month’s time and it will not be on my re-watch list.
This is a film primarily about resistance to change. All those changes in the outside world are on the ‘other side of the fence’ that Troy habitually tries to finish but never seems to put his mind to. Fences keep things out; but they also keep things in, and Troy is in a cocoon of his own making. He justifies his actions as a ‘family provider’ with lengthy speeches but ultimately they deliver hollow words and assertions that don’t stand up to scrutiny.
This is a pressure cooker of family life that is primed to blow, and a revelation (which I didn’t see coming) sets that fuse alight.
This is a film worth watching for the acting performances of Denzel Washington and (particularly) Viola Davis, winner of the Best Supporting Actress BAFTA and a strong contender for the Oscar. Both give assured performances, although Troy is such an instantly dis-likable and pitiable character that I could feel my emotions influencing my judgement about his performance.
But this is also a strong ensemble cast, with Mykelti Williamson (famously appearing as Bubba of the ‘Bubba Gump Shrimp Factory’ fame) being effective as Troy’s disabled brother and English-born Jovan Adepo being particularly impressive in an extremely assured feature debut.
However, the Broadway roots of the piece are highly visible with 98% of the film set either in the back yard, in the house, or on the front steps (the set could clearly rotate!). For such a claustrophobic topic, this is perhaps apt. But as a feature film I longed for the action to go elsewhere. The film version of the story – with a few tweaks to the screenplay – has lots of opportunities for this, but these are never taken. This makes the whole piece feel ‘worthy but dull’. In particular, anyone looking for a useful tutorial on fence building needs to look elsewhere!
As for the recent “Moonlight” there is also excessive use of the “N” word and other outdated racial references that have the potential to offend.
Good luck to Viola Davis and Denzel Washington (who also directed this) for their Best Supporting Actress and Best Actor Oscars nominations. But “Best Film” Oscar? No, I don’t think so. In truth this is a film that I will struggle to remember or get excited about in a month’s time and it will not be on my re-watch list.
Darren (1599 KP) rated 2001 Maniacs (2005) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 2001 Maniacs starts as three history students Anderson (Gillespie), Nelson (Edrington) and Cory (Carey) failing through college before spring breaks gives them a chance to party some more. When the three friends meet fellow travellers including two hot girls Joey (Malcolm), Kat (Heekin) and Ricky (Gross) they arrange to meet back up on the beach and we continue our adventure with our three friends who find Pleasant Valley.
When the six find themselves being welcomed by the Mayor Buckman (Englund) for a celebration they decide to stay. As the strangers spend more time in the town they start to go missing before learning the truth about the people in the town. Who will make it out alive.
2001 Maniacs is one of those horrors that came out at the perfect time, it was the time when gore and nudity were big in the industry and this does everything needed. The story is pretty simple, strangers arrive in town and welcomed only to learn not everything is as it seems. Sure this is easy to watch but it is also important that nothing becomes over-complicated too.
Actor Review
Robert Englund: Mayor Buckman is the man running Pleasant Valley, he is from a time where the south was still in control meaning he only accepts white people in his town. It isn’t long till we learn his motives as the man who welcomes guests with arms wide open. Robert is always going to be a good lead for a film like this.mayr
Lin Shaye: Granny Boone is the host where the guests are staying. She is welcoming throughout the stay trying to make sure all the women look extra pretty. Lin is good in this role where we get to see the added quirky character.
Giuseppe Andrews: Harper is the charming man of the local town that seduces the women who come to town before finding his own way to kill them. Giuseppe is good in this role as you believe he will be calm and crazy in the same side.
Jay Gillespie: Anderson is the nice guy of the three friends travelling who meets the beautiful Joey where he sees a potential new girlfriend, when he learns what is going on he must try to survive. Jay is solid in this role but it could easily be any of the friends.
Support Cast: 2001 Maniacs has a supporting cast which is mostly the victims but also most of the women end up having to do some sort of nudity.
Director Review: Tim Sullivan – Tim gives us a film that reaches all the special effects levels and is filled with all the gore and nudity fitting the genre.
Comedy: 2001 Maniacs has a few good one liners when it comes to the kills.
Horror: 2001 Maniacs is gored filled for all of the kills but isn’t suspense filled.
Settings: 2001 Maniacs keeps most of the film in this small town showing how this is more of a tradition rather than mistake.
Special Effects: 2001 Maniacs has great effects when it comes to the kills which is important for the film.
Suggestion: 2001 Maniacs is one for the horror fans out there to sit down and watch. (Horror Fans Watch)
Best Part: The kills.
Worst Part: No suspense.
Kill Of The Film: Got Milk.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: Has one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $3 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 27 Minutes
Tagline: The south will rise again!
Overall: Enjoyable horror that pushes the boundaries on kills.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/10/08/movie-reviews-101-midnight-halloween-horror-2001-maniacs-2005/
When the six find themselves being welcomed by the Mayor Buckman (Englund) for a celebration they decide to stay. As the strangers spend more time in the town they start to go missing before learning the truth about the people in the town. Who will make it out alive.
2001 Maniacs is one of those horrors that came out at the perfect time, it was the time when gore and nudity were big in the industry and this does everything needed. The story is pretty simple, strangers arrive in town and welcomed only to learn not everything is as it seems. Sure this is easy to watch but it is also important that nothing becomes over-complicated too.
Actor Review
Robert Englund: Mayor Buckman is the man running Pleasant Valley, he is from a time where the south was still in control meaning he only accepts white people in his town. It isn’t long till we learn his motives as the man who welcomes guests with arms wide open. Robert is always going to be a good lead for a film like this.mayr
Lin Shaye: Granny Boone is the host where the guests are staying. She is welcoming throughout the stay trying to make sure all the women look extra pretty. Lin is good in this role where we get to see the added quirky character.
Giuseppe Andrews: Harper is the charming man of the local town that seduces the women who come to town before finding his own way to kill them. Giuseppe is good in this role as you believe he will be calm and crazy in the same side.
Jay Gillespie: Anderson is the nice guy of the three friends travelling who meets the beautiful Joey where he sees a potential new girlfriend, when he learns what is going on he must try to survive. Jay is solid in this role but it could easily be any of the friends.
Support Cast: 2001 Maniacs has a supporting cast which is mostly the victims but also most of the women end up having to do some sort of nudity.
Director Review: Tim Sullivan – Tim gives us a film that reaches all the special effects levels and is filled with all the gore and nudity fitting the genre.
Comedy: 2001 Maniacs has a few good one liners when it comes to the kills.
Horror: 2001 Maniacs is gored filled for all of the kills but isn’t suspense filled.
Settings: 2001 Maniacs keeps most of the film in this small town showing how this is more of a tradition rather than mistake.
Special Effects: 2001 Maniacs has great effects when it comes to the kills which is important for the film.
Suggestion: 2001 Maniacs is one for the horror fans out there to sit down and watch. (Horror Fans Watch)
Best Part: The kills.
Worst Part: No suspense.
Kill Of The Film: Got Milk.
Believability: No
Chances of Tears: No
Chances of Sequel: Has one.
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Budget: $3 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 27 Minutes
Tagline: The south will rise again!
Overall: Enjoyable horror that pushes the boundaries on kills.
https://moviesreview101.com/2016/10/08/movie-reviews-101-midnight-halloween-horror-2001-maniacs-2005/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Get Smart (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In the post Cold-War era the focus on national security has changed from focusing on Eastern Block adversaries to terror cells and state sponsored terrorism. For the agents of the ultra secret agency Control, the demise of their arch nemesis KAOS was the signal that they had ceased to be important in the world of today and had shut down when in truth they just went further into a cloak of secrecy and continued their mission.
In the new movie “Get Smart” audiences are given a new interpretation of the classic Mel Brooks/Buck Henry series that started Don Adams and Barbra Feldon as a pair of secret agents tasked with saving the world.
This time out Steve Carell and Anne Hathaway star Maxwell Smart and Agent 99 as they are forced to work with one another following a devastating attack on Control headquarters which results in the exposure of their operatives worldwide.
With no agents having the required anonymity needed to perform covert missions, the Chief of Control (Alan Arkin), is forced to promote eager intelligence analyst Smart to the ranks of field agent and pairs him with Agent 99 who is still able to maintain her guise thanks to some prep work she had done for a prior assignment.
To say that 99 is not thrilled to be paired with Smart would be an understatement, as she sees the eager Smart to be an unproven liability and one that would likely cause the failure of the mission and kill both of them.
Since the ultra suave Agent 23 (Dwayne Johnson), is unable to work in the field, Smart and Agent 99 are forced to work with one another as they head off to Russia to get to the bottom of the weapons threat and hopefully follow the trail to the ultimate threat, Siegfried (Terrance Stamp), who is the brains behind an all new wave of terror that only Agent 99 and Smart can stop.
The film starts out slowly, but eventually finds its rhythm and does a decent job of blending comedy and action. Hathaway and Carell do a great job with the material as both roles require a degree of physicality that they have not shown in previous works.
The laughs on the film are constant, but they are off the more dumb humor comedy as nobody will mistake this film as a piece of high comedy. Which is not to say this is a bad thing as Carell is very likeable as Smart and while he portrays the character differently than did the late Don Adams; he maintains the goofy competence that his character requires as despite being a goofball, he does get the job done in the end.
The fine supporting work by Arkin and Johnson as well as a good amount of cameos lead to the fun of the film.
It is important to note that this is not a retelling of the original series that ran from 1965-1970 but a completely new interpretation of the series which has been updated to reflect the modern setting yet contains plenty of winks to the show that inspired it.
While many of the series catch phrases seem out of place in the film, I found myself enjoying the new film despite being a fan of the original series.
Some have leveled criticism that the film has traded locker room humor, stupid comedy, and FX for the wit and inventiveness that made the original series so popular.
I found myself enjoying the new version of the film and enjoyed the performances of the characters and while not side splittingly funny, there were more than enough chuckles along the way to keep me entertained.
Here is hoping 86 and 99 will be back on the big screen for future missions.
In the new movie “Get Smart” audiences are given a new interpretation of the classic Mel Brooks/Buck Henry series that started Don Adams and Barbra Feldon as a pair of secret agents tasked with saving the world.
This time out Steve Carell and Anne Hathaway star Maxwell Smart and Agent 99 as they are forced to work with one another following a devastating attack on Control headquarters which results in the exposure of their operatives worldwide.
With no agents having the required anonymity needed to perform covert missions, the Chief of Control (Alan Arkin), is forced to promote eager intelligence analyst Smart to the ranks of field agent and pairs him with Agent 99 who is still able to maintain her guise thanks to some prep work she had done for a prior assignment.
To say that 99 is not thrilled to be paired with Smart would be an understatement, as she sees the eager Smart to be an unproven liability and one that would likely cause the failure of the mission and kill both of them.
Since the ultra suave Agent 23 (Dwayne Johnson), is unable to work in the field, Smart and Agent 99 are forced to work with one another as they head off to Russia to get to the bottom of the weapons threat and hopefully follow the trail to the ultimate threat, Siegfried (Terrance Stamp), who is the brains behind an all new wave of terror that only Agent 99 and Smart can stop.
The film starts out slowly, but eventually finds its rhythm and does a decent job of blending comedy and action. Hathaway and Carell do a great job with the material as both roles require a degree of physicality that they have not shown in previous works.
The laughs on the film are constant, but they are off the more dumb humor comedy as nobody will mistake this film as a piece of high comedy. Which is not to say this is a bad thing as Carell is very likeable as Smart and while he portrays the character differently than did the late Don Adams; he maintains the goofy competence that his character requires as despite being a goofball, he does get the job done in the end.
The fine supporting work by Arkin and Johnson as well as a good amount of cameos lead to the fun of the film.
It is important to note that this is not a retelling of the original series that ran from 1965-1970 but a completely new interpretation of the series which has been updated to reflect the modern setting yet contains plenty of winks to the show that inspired it.
While many of the series catch phrases seem out of place in the film, I found myself enjoying the new film despite being a fan of the original series.
Some have leveled criticism that the film has traded locker room humor, stupid comedy, and FX for the wit and inventiveness that made the original series so popular.
I found myself enjoying the new version of the film and enjoyed the performances of the characters and while not side splittingly funny, there were more than enough chuckles along the way to keep me entertained.
Here is hoping 86 and 99 will be back on the big screen for future missions.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Cruel Beauty in Books
Jan 23, 2020
I'm a sucker for fairy tales. I love retellings, myths, anything that's a complete spin from a well-known tale. I'm curious as to what authors come up with – problem is, Sleeping Beauty and Snow White needs a major upgrade or I might mentally blow a gasket one day. I promise it won't be pretty. No rants involved. Maybe a post about diversity in fairy tales instead (don't you take that post idea if no one's come up with it before o_o).
Well, Cruel Beauty is the cruel version of our beloved Disney characters. At least, that's what I thought at the very end. It's also got mythology, in which some I researched and learned new things (verification purposes). About time I'm not staring at what I learned in middle school/early high school over and over again.
Truth is, I enjoyed the concept of Cruel Beauty, but I didn't really enjoy the story... not too much. What originally caught my attention was the very fact that "Belle" is destined to marry the "Beast" ever since she was young due to a bargain her father made (reminds me of another story I can't think of currently). What I thought was even more interesting is how Rosamund Hodge bases the novel on ancient civilizations and mythology, particularly Pandora's box. Actually, I thought it was genius. I also think I've spoken too much about the book with those two words.
What started to lose my attention was this particular sentence... when Nyx – "Belle" of the story – is first married to the Gentle Lord – "Beast" of the story – and makes her entrance into his castle.
<blockquote>“I’m here!” I shouted. “Your bride! Congratulations on your marriage!”</blockquote>
I was like, really? THAT'S how you would make your entrance inside a demon's castle? Me, I would actually start plotting ways OUT of the castle, ways to avoid the Gentle Lord, etc. etc. NOT announcing, "Oh hey! I'm here! Come and feast on me!" *waves big sign*
And the Gentle Lord, no matter how much I like his humor, made a very unimpressive entrance.
<blockquote>In one moment I realized that what tickled my neck was a tuft of black hair, the blankets were a warm body, and the Gentle Lord was draped over me like a lazy cat, his head resting on my shoulder.</blockquote>
His reason?
<blockquote>“I got so bored waiting that I fell asleep too."</blockquote>
And...
<blockquote>“You were a good pillow."</blockquote>
DUDE. Sleeping on your bride when you first meet her even though you're now married? What an impressive husband you make. He could have slept next to her and not on top of her. You know, if a stranger – homeless or not – slept on top of me, I may kick said person's butt until they get off and call it self defense. I suppose some are now worried about my future. I'm completely surprised Nyx didn't mention that he was heavy, sleeping on top of her like that. Instead, this is her response shortly after:
<blockquote>“I’m sorry ,” I said, staring at the floor. “I just, my father made me promise to bring a knife, and— and—” I stuttered, acutely aware that I was half-naked in front of him. “I’m your wife! I burn for your touch! I thirst for your love!”</blockquote>
No offense, but that was so cheesy, it was bleeping hilarious. It's really obvious later from the Gentle Lord's constant mocking that Nyx should just act like herself and not the way her family wants her to act, but Nyx is completely oblivious.
Nyx, in a nutshell, is just the darker version of Belle. The semi-evil twin of Belle I may say, and it's no wonder she's named after the Greek goddess of the Night.
<blockquote>But I was a girl who had broken her sister’s heart and— for a moment— liked it. I had left somebody in torment and liked it.</blockquote>
Rosamund Hodge also implies that Nyx is well... a bit indecisive. In a conflict is more accurate. She wants to please her family – to fit in and meet up to her father's expectations even though he prefers her sister Astraia. Yet at the same time, she doesn't want to kill Ignite or whatever the Gentle Lord calls himself (the book was an e-loan and I'm basing this review off of my notes because I'm too lazy to jump on the hold list yet again) because she's in love with him. I suppose it makes sense in a way, since she wants to go with her emotions yet she's been trained her entire life to kill this one evil guy who isn't actually evil...
<blockquote>“Of course he’s evil and unforgivable.” My voice felt like it was coming from the far end of a long tunnel. “But he is the only reason I ever honored Mother with a clean heart. And if I hadn’t learnt to be kind with him, I would never have come back to beg your forgiveness and choose you over him. So gloat all you want— you deserve to watch us both suffer— but don’t you dare say I will ever be free of him. Every kindness I show you, all the rest of your life, that’s because of him. And no matter how many times I betray him, I will love him still.” </blockquote>
I mean, Nyx is living with the Gentle Lord. She could have just made her decision to live with him always and never guess his name, right?
Cruel Beauty, as much as I like the entire idea behind it, is not one of those fairy tales I find very impressive. It's very much one of those books that I roll my eyes at, especially at how the romance played out (just because I never dated a soul doesn't mean I can't tell).
------------------------
Original Rating: 3.5 out of 5
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/09/review-cruel-beauty-by-rosamund-hodge.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
Well, Cruel Beauty is the cruel version of our beloved Disney characters. At least, that's what I thought at the very end. It's also got mythology, in which some I researched and learned new things (verification purposes). About time I'm not staring at what I learned in middle school/early high school over and over again.
Truth is, I enjoyed the concept of Cruel Beauty, but I didn't really enjoy the story... not too much. What originally caught my attention was the very fact that "Belle" is destined to marry the "Beast" ever since she was young due to a bargain her father made (reminds me of another story I can't think of currently). What I thought was even more interesting is how Rosamund Hodge bases the novel on ancient civilizations and mythology, particularly Pandora's box. Actually, I thought it was genius. I also think I've spoken too much about the book with those two words.
What started to lose my attention was this particular sentence... when Nyx – "Belle" of the story – is first married to the Gentle Lord – "Beast" of the story – and makes her entrance into his castle.
<blockquote>“I’m here!” I shouted. “Your bride! Congratulations on your marriage!”</blockquote>
I was like, really? THAT'S how you would make your entrance inside a demon's castle? Me, I would actually start plotting ways OUT of the castle, ways to avoid the Gentle Lord, etc. etc. NOT announcing, "Oh hey! I'm here! Come and feast on me!" *waves big sign*
And the Gentle Lord, no matter how much I like his humor, made a very unimpressive entrance.
<blockquote>In one moment I realized that what tickled my neck was a tuft of black hair, the blankets were a warm body, and the Gentle Lord was draped over me like a lazy cat, his head resting on my shoulder.</blockquote>
His reason?
<blockquote>“I got so bored waiting that I fell asleep too."</blockquote>
And...
<blockquote>“You were a good pillow."</blockquote>
DUDE. Sleeping on your bride when you first meet her even though you're now married? What an impressive husband you make. He could have slept next to her and not on top of her. You know, if a stranger – homeless or not – slept on top of me, I may kick said person's butt until they get off and call it self defense. I suppose some are now worried about my future. I'm completely surprised Nyx didn't mention that he was heavy, sleeping on top of her like that. Instead, this is her response shortly after:
<blockquote>“I’m sorry ,” I said, staring at the floor. “I just, my father made me promise to bring a knife, and— and—” I stuttered, acutely aware that I was half-naked in front of him. “I’m your wife! I burn for your touch! I thirst for your love!”</blockquote>
No offense, but that was so cheesy, it was bleeping hilarious. It's really obvious later from the Gentle Lord's constant mocking that Nyx should just act like herself and not the way her family wants her to act, but Nyx is completely oblivious.
Nyx, in a nutshell, is just the darker version of Belle. The semi-evil twin of Belle I may say, and it's no wonder she's named after the Greek goddess of the Night.
<blockquote>But I was a girl who had broken her sister’s heart and— for a moment— liked it. I had left somebody in torment and liked it.</blockquote>
Rosamund Hodge also implies that Nyx is well... a bit indecisive. In a conflict is more accurate. She wants to please her family – to fit in and meet up to her father's expectations even though he prefers her sister Astraia. Yet at the same time, she doesn't want to kill Ignite or whatever the Gentle Lord calls himself (the book was an e-loan and I'm basing this review off of my notes because I'm too lazy to jump on the hold list yet again) because she's in love with him. I suppose it makes sense in a way, since she wants to go with her emotions yet she's been trained her entire life to kill this one evil guy who isn't actually evil...
<blockquote>“Of course he’s evil and unforgivable.” My voice felt like it was coming from the far end of a long tunnel. “But he is the only reason I ever honored Mother with a clean heart. And if I hadn’t learnt to be kind with him, I would never have come back to beg your forgiveness and choose you over him. So gloat all you want— you deserve to watch us both suffer— but don’t you dare say I will ever be free of him. Every kindness I show you, all the rest of your life, that’s because of him. And no matter how many times I betray him, I will love him still.” </blockquote>
I mean, Nyx is living with the Gentle Lord. She could have just made her decision to live with him always and never guess his name, right?
Cruel Beauty, as much as I like the entire idea behind it, is not one of those fairy tales I find very impressive. It's very much one of those books that I roll my eyes at, especially at how the romance played out (just because I never dated a soul doesn't mean I can't tell).
------------------------
Original Rating: 3.5 out of 5
Original Review posted at <a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/2014/09/review-cruel-beauty-by-rosamund-hodge.html">Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<a href="http://bookwyrming-thoughts.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cG5gfBqJVzk/VA5BIojjZ9I/AAAAAAAAD1g/7srLUfpAGEU/s1600/banner.png"; /></a>
KittyMiku (138 KP) rated What I've Done in Books
May 23, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
As with the previous books in the Morgan Dane series, we are able to see the romance grow between Lance and Morgan, have the suspense of the case and the ever lying danger that awaits our characters as they investigate for the truth. I found that it was enjoyable to see some more of Sharp's past as well. After all, he is the one character you don't see a whole lot about and to have a case that gives you some insight to the man behind a lot of support to Morgan and Lance is always a bonus. I enjoyed how characters in the book, though creepy, gave off how some people think and act in times of chaos. To see how everything plays out when you have psychopaths and innocents involved is always interesting.
In this particular book, I enjoyed how technology, though doesn't always help, was used to manipulate people's images and how some people react. Though, Haley, the woman being convicted for murder, was ill and traumatized, I enjoyed the strength she was given to protect herself and those who are close to her. To watch her struggle through discovering the guy she liked to be dead, while she slept and have no recollection how it happened, was truly heart wrenching. Then to watch her have nightmares about it because she couldn't remember what happened was able to show how post-traumatic stress disorder can affect after a traumatic event, made it harder but kept you wondering if her nightmares were memories resurfacing in an unpleasant way. With so many potential suspects coming and going in the book, you can't help but to continuously wonder what is causing the nightmares and if they are memories or not. It definitely kept you question until the very end.
It was also made clear how easy it is to cause people to doubt someone's skill or distort their image through social media. I thoroughly enjoyed, seeing this aspect. After all, though it isn't nice or even ethical, it happens all the time to people who do what they are good, and sometimes bad, at for a living. Though meme's and gifs are made to amuse and create laughter and joy, too often is it used to hurt someone without a whole lot of people truly understanding the whole meaning behind it. To have something aimed at Morgan, to make a threat and humiliate her, caused me to get angry. I enjoyed it in the aspect it raises the issue of gifs and memes being used to hurt and humiliate other, rather than spread joy. This particular piece, though not extremely important, had indeed stuck with me through out the whole book, I couldn't shake the feeling that it happens to us all at some point, even if we never see it. It had also brought up how hard it was to contain something once it goes viral. To track down the source can be impossible when everyone is sharing it on their social medias.
To get away with a crime doesn't mean to repeat it, but it you are never caught, wouldn't you be tempted to do it again? That was a question raised about some characters in this book. The crime doesn't have to illegal to be a crime. Disrespecting people's privacy, trust, and tampering with drinks are just a few crimes that aren't always caught, or even punishable. However, What I've Done, highlighted how people who may have gotten away with a crime once (whether punishable or not), they often feel they can repeat it and never get caught. Even though we all know eventually you will get caught, it was quite nice to see it highlighted in the fictional world as well. It was just a nice surprise that some of the characters thought and felt that way.
However, my absolute favorite thing was the ending. This I will not even attempt to spoil, but I will say that this ending left me wanting so much more. I expect the next book to give us some juicy information about our favorite characters, Lance, Sharp, and Morgan. I do look forward to it. I would definitely rate this book 5 stars out of 5 stars. It was entertaining, highlighted things that not everyone pay attention to, and kept me turning the pages.
In this particular book, I enjoyed how technology, though doesn't always help, was used to manipulate people's images and how some people react. Though, Haley, the woman being convicted for murder, was ill and traumatized, I enjoyed the strength she was given to protect herself and those who are close to her. To watch her struggle through discovering the guy she liked to be dead, while she slept and have no recollection how it happened, was truly heart wrenching. Then to watch her have nightmares about it because she couldn't remember what happened was able to show how post-traumatic stress disorder can affect after a traumatic event, made it harder but kept you wondering if her nightmares were memories resurfacing in an unpleasant way. With so many potential suspects coming and going in the book, you can't help but to continuously wonder what is causing the nightmares and if they are memories or not. It definitely kept you question until the very end.
It was also made clear how easy it is to cause people to doubt someone's skill or distort their image through social media. I thoroughly enjoyed, seeing this aspect. After all, though it isn't nice or even ethical, it happens all the time to people who do what they are good, and sometimes bad, at for a living. Though meme's and gifs are made to amuse and create laughter and joy, too often is it used to hurt someone without a whole lot of people truly understanding the whole meaning behind it. To have something aimed at Morgan, to make a threat and humiliate her, caused me to get angry. I enjoyed it in the aspect it raises the issue of gifs and memes being used to hurt and humiliate other, rather than spread joy. This particular piece, though not extremely important, had indeed stuck with me through out the whole book, I couldn't shake the feeling that it happens to us all at some point, even if we never see it. It had also brought up how hard it was to contain something once it goes viral. To track down the source can be impossible when everyone is sharing it on their social medias.
To get away with a crime doesn't mean to repeat it, but it you are never caught, wouldn't you be tempted to do it again? That was a question raised about some characters in this book. The crime doesn't have to illegal to be a crime. Disrespecting people's privacy, trust, and tampering with drinks are just a few crimes that aren't always caught, or even punishable. However, What I've Done, highlighted how people who may have gotten away with a crime once (whether punishable or not), they often feel they can repeat it and never get caught. Even though we all know eventually you will get caught, it was quite nice to see it highlighted in the fictional world as well. It was just a nice surprise that some of the characters thought and felt that way.
However, my absolute favorite thing was the ending. This I will not even attempt to spoil, but I will say that this ending left me wanting so much more. I expect the next book to give us some juicy information about our favorite characters, Lance, Sharp, and Morgan. I do look forward to it. I would definitely rate this book 5 stars out of 5 stars. It was entertaining, highlighted things that not everyone pay attention to, and kept me turning the pages.