Search
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Frozen 2: Dangerous Secrets: The Story of Iduna and Agnarr in Books
Dec 29, 2020
Dangerous Secrets is the greatly anticipated prequel to Frozen II which, for the first time in forever, shines the spotlight onto King Agnarr and Queen Iduna of Arendelle.
The 2019 film undoubtedly revealed some of these secrets, such as Iduna being Northuldra and saving Agnarr as a child as well as the two of them venturing to Ahtohallan to find the answers behind Elsa’s powers. Unfortunately, thanks to the film, we also know that they never completed their journey.
Cue Mari Mancusi who expertly bring the monarchs back to life through her writing and forms these little-known characters into best friends, young lovers and torn parents, always just trying to do the next right thing.
The back stories of Agnarr and Iduna are nothing short of brilliant: the reader meets both characters in the Enchanted Forest on the fateful day of the dam celebration and we experience the wonder of both worlds colliding, along with the following danger and confusion from a first-person perspective.
I thoroughly appreciated how Mari Mancusi didn’t have to explain what had happened between the Arendellian forces and the Northuldra: Mancusi knows that the reader already knows the true turn of events from the movie. All throughout Dangerous Secrets this “inside knowledge” is used beautifully: allowing us to experience events as our protagonists do, but without diluting the tension and excitement with explanations.
The reader grows up alongside the future King and Queen, seeing their friendship blossom and experiencing their respective heartbreaks and secrets. The Northuldra are widely believed to be enemies of Arendelle due to the King’s death and the rumours surrounding it. Iduna’s hardship of hiding her true identity is matched only by her grief of losing the only family she has ever known. Similarly, Agnarr has lost a father, his best friend General Matthias and now has to learn how to be a King. Even when they find solace in their friendship and the later romance that this grows into, Iduna is not royalty: their love is doomed from the start…isn’t it?
Regular readers of my reviews will know I loved Jen Calonita’s “Let it Go” but felt that towards the end the writing emulated the movie verbatim in places. I found Kamilla Benko’s “Forest of Shadows” interesting and unique but ultimately it tried too hard to insert different elements into the Frozen universe that we know and love.
In my opinion, Dangerous Secrets contains none of these criticisms.
Elements of the movie are included, of course they are! Agnarr and Iduna’s reading tree is taken straight out of Elsa’s/Ahtohallan’s ice memories; Oaken’s trading post and sauna is briefly mentioned as a rest stop during one of the couple’s adventures and the wonder of chocolate is something Elsa and Anna definitely inherited from their parents!
The difference with this novel is that any references to the movie are easter eggs: elements that we love to spot; they are not brash and in-your-face; they are subtle and add to the story rather than creating it entirely. For example, I loved the inclusion of Grand-Pabbie and the trolls. I also suspect we may have met Kristoff’s mother – perhaps opening the door to another book from Mari Mancusi?
Of course, Dangerous Secrets can only end with the fateful voyage made by the royal couple and, true to form, this made me cry my little heart out. I know from the author’s note that Mari Mancusi is a mother herself but I feel that I would have known this anyway through the sheer heartbreak she portrays through Iduna, and later Agnarr. From their first discovery of Elsa’s powers; to Anna’s accident; to acknowledging that they were endangering Elsa by asking her to “conceal, don’t feel” right up until the couple’s realisation that they will never see their daughters again: the writing is powerful, hard-hitting and, with Ahtohallan’s last gift, stunningly beautiful.
This is a five-star glimpse into the King and Queen of Arendelle and a must-read for any fan of Frozen.
Will Mancusi reveal the secret of the ice-gatherer woman’s identity next?
Only Ahtohallan knows.
The 2019 film undoubtedly revealed some of these secrets, such as Iduna being Northuldra and saving Agnarr as a child as well as the two of them venturing to Ahtohallan to find the answers behind Elsa’s powers. Unfortunately, thanks to the film, we also know that they never completed their journey.
Cue Mari Mancusi who expertly bring the monarchs back to life through her writing and forms these little-known characters into best friends, young lovers and torn parents, always just trying to do the next right thing.
The back stories of Agnarr and Iduna are nothing short of brilliant: the reader meets both characters in the Enchanted Forest on the fateful day of the dam celebration and we experience the wonder of both worlds colliding, along with the following danger and confusion from a first-person perspective.
I thoroughly appreciated how Mari Mancusi didn’t have to explain what had happened between the Arendellian forces and the Northuldra: Mancusi knows that the reader already knows the true turn of events from the movie. All throughout Dangerous Secrets this “inside knowledge” is used beautifully: allowing us to experience events as our protagonists do, but without diluting the tension and excitement with explanations.
The reader grows up alongside the future King and Queen, seeing their friendship blossom and experiencing their respective heartbreaks and secrets. The Northuldra are widely believed to be enemies of Arendelle due to the King’s death and the rumours surrounding it. Iduna’s hardship of hiding her true identity is matched only by her grief of losing the only family she has ever known. Similarly, Agnarr has lost a father, his best friend General Matthias and now has to learn how to be a King. Even when they find solace in their friendship and the later romance that this grows into, Iduna is not royalty: their love is doomed from the start…isn’t it?
Regular readers of my reviews will know I loved Jen Calonita’s “Let it Go” but felt that towards the end the writing emulated the movie verbatim in places. I found Kamilla Benko’s “Forest of Shadows” interesting and unique but ultimately it tried too hard to insert different elements into the Frozen universe that we know and love.
In my opinion, Dangerous Secrets contains none of these criticisms.
Elements of the movie are included, of course they are! Agnarr and Iduna’s reading tree is taken straight out of Elsa’s/Ahtohallan’s ice memories; Oaken’s trading post and sauna is briefly mentioned as a rest stop during one of the couple’s adventures and the wonder of chocolate is something Elsa and Anna definitely inherited from their parents!
The difference with this novel is that any references to the movie are easter eggs: elements that we love to spot; they are not brash and in-your-face; they are subtle and add to the story rather than creating it entirely. For example, I loved the inclusion of Grand-Pabbie and the trolls. I also suspect we may have met Kristoff’s mother – perhaps opening the door to another book from Mari Mancusi?
Of course, Dangerous Secrets can only end with the fateful voyage made by the royal couple and, true to form, this made me cry my little heart out. I know from the author’s note that Mari Mancusi is a mother herself but I feel that I would have known this anyway through the sheer heartbreak she portrays through Iduna, and later Agnarr. From their first discovery of Elsa’s powers; to Anna’s accident; to acknowledging that they were endangering Elsa by asking her to “conceal, don’t feel” right up until the couple’s realisation that they will never see their daughters again: the writing is powerful, hard-hitting and, with Ahtohallan’s last gift, stunningly beautiful.
This is a five-star glimpse into the King and Queen of Arendelle and a must-read for any fan of Frozen.
Will Mancusi reveal the secret of the ice-gatherer woman’s identity next?
Only Ahtohallan knows.
Terror by Night: the true story of the brutal texas murder that destroyed a family, restored one man’s faith, and shocked a nation.
by Terry Caffey with James H. Pence
Genre: True Crime, Christian, memoir
Rating: 5
My summary: Terry woke up one night and saw his daughter’s ex-boyfriend standing in front of him with a gun. Charlie shot him several times, killed his wife, then him and his friend brutally killed his two sons. They set the house on fire, thinking everyone was dead. Terry managed to escape by God’s life-preservation alone, and made the long trek through the woods to the neighbor’s house. All Terry wanted was to die and live in Heaven with his family. But he stayed alive through sheer will-power and God’s grace. He made it to the neighbor’s house, identified the killer, then colapsed, hoping never to wake up again.
He woke up.
and He has to live with what happened for the rest of his long life.
Terry suffers from suicidal thoughts and depression, overdoses on his drugs, and can’t sleep at night because of his fear.
But God can take any situation and turn it around… Terry went back to where his house was to have a heart-to-heart with God. Terry found something there that was preserved through weeks of rain and wind, and yet was still readable. It was a page from James Pence’s novel Blind Sight (though he didn’t know it at the time) and the first lines he read were these: “I couldn't understand why You would take my family and leave me to struggle along without them. And I guess I still don’t totally understand that part of it. But I do believe that You’re sovereign; You’re in control.” Terry eventually found out through some hard hunting that the character in the book who was speaking had lost his wife and children. It was as if that book was written about him.
Terry’s life changed drastically. He went into ministry, he got re-married… and he learned what unconditional love, forgiveness, and trusting God really meant.
Review: Terror by Night was an absolutely stunning book in every sense of the word. The awful things that happened to Terry, and how God restored him, are amazing. Terror by Night is like Job all over again. God took everything away from Terry—his family were dead and his house was charcoal. Terry suffered tremendously, but God restored him. God used him to restore other people. And God blessed him and gave back what he had taken away.
This book is a testimony of how God can take anything and turn it around for good, how everything that happens is His will, and how He is the one and only thing we can always trust.
A powerful message, an amazing testimony, a picture of forgiveness, uplifting, encouraging, and brutally beautiful, Terror by Night will stay with you for the rest of your life.
Content: 100% clean
Recommendation: I whole-heartedly recommend Terror by Night to everyone over the age of 14. Terror by Night is extremely emotional, several times I had to stop and put it down. There were also some disturbing images of how the children were killed. It would probably make you cry if you read it in one sitting. However, I still think everyone should read it.
by Terry Caffey with James H. Pence
Genre: True Crime, Christian, memoir
Rating: 5
My summary: Terry woke up one night and saw his daughter’s ex-boyfriend standing in front of him with a gun. Charlie shot him several times, killed his wife, then him and his friend brutally killed his two sons. They set the house on fire, thinking everyone was dead. Terry managed to escape by God’s life-preservation alone, and made the long trek through the woods to the neighbor’s house. All Terry wanted was to die and live in Heaven with his family. But he stayed alive through sheer will-power and God’s grace. He made it to the neighbor’s house, identified the killer, then colapsed, hoping never to wake up again.
He woke up.
and He has to live with what happened for the rest of his long life.
Terry suffers from suicidal thoughts and depression, overdoses on his drugs, and can’t sleep at night because of his fear.
But God can take any situation and turn it around… Terry went back to where his house was to have a heart-to-heart with God. Terry found something there that was preserved through weeks of rain and wind, and yet was still readable. It was a page from James Pence’s novel Blind Sight (though he didn’t know it at the time) and the first lines he read were these: “I couldn't understand why You would take my family and leave me to struggle along without them. And I guess I still don’t totally understand that part of it. But I do believe that You’re sovereign; You’re in control.” Terry eventually found out through some hard hunting that the character in the book who was speaking had lost his wife and children. It was as if that book was written about him.
Terry’s life changed drastically. He went into ministry, he got re-married… and he learned what unconditional love, forgiveness, and trusting God really meant.
Review: Terror by Night was an absolutely stunning book in every sense of the word. The awful things that happened to Terry, and how God restored him, are amazing. Terror by Night is like Job all over again. God took everything away from Terry—his family were dead and his house was charcoal. Terry suffered tremendously, but God restored him. God used him to restore other people. And God blessed him and gave back what he had taken away.
This book is a testimony of how God can take anything and turn it around for good, how everything that happens is His will, and how He is the one and only thing we can always trust.
A powerful message, an amazing testimony, a picture of forgiveness, uplifting, encouraging, and brutally beautiful, Terror by Night will stay with you for the rest of your life.
Content: 100% clean
Recommendation: I whole-heartedly recommend Terror by Night to everyone over the age of 14. Terror by Night is extremely emotional, several times I had to stop and put it down. There were also some disturbing images of how the children were killed. It would probably make you cry if you read it in one sitting. However, I still think everyone should read it.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Selma (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Set in 1965, the film follows the voting rights marches from Selma to Montgomery. During the time Black citizens had the legal right to vote, but there were countless strategies put into place to stop them from actually being able to use those voting rights.
The film does a good job of providing back story of what was happening that brought on the marches. It portrays the horrific brutality of a time when blatant hatred ripped through the soul of the nation.
During the Selma march, peaceful protestors dressed in their Sunday’s best were beaten (even killed) by local police. However, even the most hard to watch moments of violence were toned down in comparison to actual footage from the Selma march.
The visceral moments of raw emotion and terrible violence will give the audience chills
Martin Luther King, Jr. (David Oyelowo) would of course be a hard pair of shoes to fill as an actor. But somehow Oyelowo pulls it off with a passion that shows in his eyes. Even the ways in which Oyelowo delivers his speeches were powerful and moving, much in the way of the real MLK, Jr.
An intriguing part of the film is the attention given to MLK, Jr.’s wife, Coretta Scott King (Carmen Ejogo). She is a less talked about figure in history, but perhaps this will now change. She is shown to be a very strong and intelligent woman, who serves as the backbone to the King family. Her role as wife, mother, and political supporter are highlighted.
The cast selection is top notch, making the film very realistic.
Tom Wilkinson, who plays Lyndon B. Johnson, practically resurrects the late President. His physical appearance and vocals make the actor almost indistinguishable from the real LBJ. .
However, there is some controversy over the historical accuracy of certain aspects of the film. This especially is true in regards to the portrayal of LBJ.
He is portrayed as under pressure to pass legislation in favor of Black voters, but he himself comes off as a racist whose heart is not in the cause. This portrayal paints a picture of a dishonest man, wielding political power to save face. It is contradicting to the more well-known image of the LBJ who actually cared very much about civil rights and poverty.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is thought to be his most important piece of legislative work. It was certainly not just a mere political reaction to protestors, though they surely had a strong impact on making it happen.
No one can deny the power of MLK, Jr.’s work. It is a profound historical example of the possibility for political transformation through the will of the people.
Another point of question is whether or not it was JFK or LBJ who originally ordered the FBI surveillance of MLK, Jr. and those associated with him.
A slightly troubling aspect of the film is that it lacks showing any tinge of gender inequality, which was a pervasive part of that era. Also, it was hinted at that MLK, Jr. had infidelity issues. Personally, I had some question as to whether or not this was true, or if it was even a useful piece of information to include. Perhaps it was included to show a more human side to MLK, Jr.
All of these questions aside, “Selma” is an amazing and moving piece of work.
A finely crafted cinematic reflection of a deep and painful scar on American history, I give “Selma” 4.5 out of 5 stars.
The film does a good job of providing back story of what was happening that brought on the marches. It portrays the horrific brutality of a time when blatant hatred ripped through the soul of the nation.
During the Selma march, peaceful protestors dressed in their Sunday’s best were beaten (even killed) by local police. However, even the most hard to watch moments of violence were toned down in comparison to actual footage from the Selma march.
The visceral moments of raw emotion and terrible violence will give the audience chills
Martin Luther King, Jr. (David Oyelowo) would of course be a hard pair of shoes to fill as an actor. But somehow Oyelowo pulls it off with a passion that shows in his eyes. Even the ways in which Oyelowo delivers his speeches were powerful and moving, much in the way of the real MLK, Jr.
An intriguing part of the film is the attention given to MLK, Jr.’s wife, Coretta Scott King (Carmen Ejogo). She is a less talked about figure in history, but perhaps this will now change. She is shown to be a very strong and intelligent woman, who serves as the backbone to the King family. Her role as wife, mother, and political supporter are highlighted.
The cast selection is top notch, making the film very realistic.
Tom Wilkinson, who plays Lyndon B. Johnson, practically resurrects the late President. His physical appearance and vocals make the actor almost indistinguishable from the real LBJ. .
However, there is some controversy over the historical accuracy of certain aspects of the film. This especially is true in regards to the portrayal of LBJ.
He is portrayed as under pressure to pass legislation in favor of Black voters, but he himself comes off as a racist whose heart is not in the cause. This portrayal paints a picture of a dishonest man, wielding political power to save face. It is contradicting to the more well-known image of the LBJ who actually cared very much about civil rights and poverty.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is thought to be his most important piece of legislative work. It was certainly not just a mere political reaction to protestors, though they surely had a strong impact on making it happen.
No one can deny the power of MLK, Jr.’s work. It is a profound historical example of the possibility for political transformation through the will of the people.
Another point of question is whether or not it was JFK or LBJ who originally ordered the FBI surveillance of MLK, Jr. and those associated with him.
A slightly troubling aspect of the film is that it lacks showing any tinge of gender inequality, which was a pervasive part of that era. Also, it was hinted at that MLK, Jr. had infidelity issues. Personally, I had some question as to whether or not this was true, or if it was even a useful piece of information to include. Perhaps it was included to show a more human side to MLK, Jr.
All of these questions aside, “Selma” is an amazing and moving piece of work.
A finely crafted cinematic reflection of a deep and painful scar on American history, I give “Selma” 4.5 out of 5 stars.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Hamilton (2020) in Movies
Jul 5, 2020
Captures the power of being in "the room where it happens"
I'll just cut to the chase, the filmed version of the mega-hit stage musical HAMILTON (now streaming on Disney+) is terrific. If you are one of the few that have not seen this, check it out - you'll be glad you did.
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
I could go on and on about the Pulitzer-Prize winning show, the script, the music, the performances and/or the cross-cultural casting - all of which works to perfection, but what separates this film from the other hit Broadway shows that are converted to film is how well that the filmmakers were able to translate the power of being inside the theater during a live performance of this show.
Credit, of course, needs to go to the visionaries responsible for this show, creator/writer/star Lin-Manuel Miranda and Director Thomas Kail. They realized pretty early on (when the show was becoming the phenomenon that it has become) that they wanted to preserve this event for future generations, so started making plans to film the show - in High Def - with an audience and without an audience (for close-ups). In June 2016, about a month before the original cast started leaving the show (and right after the show won 11 Tony Awards), they spent $10 million to capture the show - with live audiences on Sunday and Tuesday and then spent the rest of Sunday night and all day Monday doing close-ups and crane shots to augment the action.
The results are outstanding. The wide-shots show the breadth of the production - showing the strong, Tony Award winning choreography by Andy Blankenbuehler, the unique, minimal and highly versatile set, the Tony Award winning costumes by Paul Tazewell and the Lighting Design that earned Howell Blinkley a Tony. All of these are showcased in this film - special note should be made about the Lighting that needed to be tweaked on the spot for the filming.
As for the close-ups, they showcase the wry smile and comedic delight that Tony winner Daveed Diggs shows in his roles as Lafayette/Jefferson, the power and sorrow of Tony Award winner Renee Elise Goldsberry - her spotlight number SATISFIED is as "perfect" a musical number as you will ever see. The powerful acting of Leslie Odom, Jr. as Aaron Burr (who won the Tony as Best Actor over Lin-Manuel's performance as Hamilton) as well as terrific supporting turns by the likes of Anthony Ramos (Lawrence/Phillip), Chris Jackson (showing real leadership as George Washington) and Okieriete Onaodwoan as Hercules Mulligan (one of my absolute favorite characters in this show)./James Madison.
Special note should be made to Jonathan Groff's portrayal of King George III - it is, basically, a cameo role, but he is filmed with such tight close-ups (showing spittle rolling down has chin as he sings) that marvelously juxtaposes King George's real emotions with that of the words he is speaking.
But, of course, the real star is Lin-Manuel Miranda - the genius creative force behind Hamilton. Interestingly enough, I thought his performance was the weakest of the lead cast (don't get me wrong, he was still excellent - just not "as excellent" as some of the others). His true vision, of course, was to tell the story of "the people of that era" as told by "the people of our era".
That is the true genius of Hamilton.
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars out of 10 (can I turn this up to 11)?
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Girl Who Stayed in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Zoe returns to her hometown of Sullivan's Island with one goal in mind: repair her childhood home and sell it, so she never has to come back. Her parents are dead, her brother doesn't want it, and her little sister, Hannah, disappeared from the Island when Hannah was eight and Zoe was ten. At the time, Hannah's friend, Gabi, insinuated that Zoe was responsible for Hannah's disappearance and while she knows it isn't true, Zoe has always felt confused and remorseful about her behavior during the time period when Hannah vanished. Even worse, she grew up under the doubt of her parents, especially her angry father, who seemed to believe Gabi, and with whom Zoe had a rough and rocky relationship as she aged.
This was an interesting book and I confess it had the misfortune of being read during a crazy time for me of illness and work: not its fault. Zoe is a tough character to crack at first, but she's also a victim of abuse, and her slowness to reveal herself--in the book and to others--makes sense. Crosby does a good job of displaying (versus telling) how Zoe's relationship with her parents has formed her into the adult she is today. What I enjoyed is that Zoe is a complicated individual with many layers. I've read too many books lately where a character had a bad childhood or suffered some form of abuse and that seems to be a reason to make them have only one character trait, which they must act upon, with no sign of reason. Zoe is nuanced, even if she takes some time to warm up to.
There are several scenes in the book that are nearly heartbreaking as you read. For instance, when Zoe finds a projector and a bunch of film belonging to her grandfather and manages to splice together enough film to capture a few moments of her late sister as a kid. As she describes the moment, it's powerful, and you can completely picture it. In another scene, she reminisces about how her mother "helped" her fix up Zoe's bathing suit before a first date--an event that ended poorly. This moment is not only formed so clearly, but says so much about how Zoe continued to relate to her Mom. It's very well-done.
The book spends most of its time focusing on Zoe's late second coming of age story (at nearly 40), with a few characters from Sullivan's Island thrown in, but there is a subplot to Hannah's disappearance that picks up pace near the end. The very end of the story felt a little rushed (though exciting). I'm still a bit torn about the actual ending--it sort of pissed me off--but I understand Crosby's choices.
In writing this review, I'd probably push my rating up to a 3.75 stars. It's a different book, and I enjoyed Zoe. I almost wish I could encounter her again.
I received an ARC of this book from Edelweiss - thank you! It is available for publication on 4/19/16. You can find a review this novel and many more at my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
This was an interesting book and I confess it had the misfortune of being read during a crazy time for me of illness and work: not its fault. Zoe is a tough character to crack at first, but she's also a victim of abuse, and her slowness to reveal herself--in the book and to others--makes sense. Crosby does a good job of displaying (versus telling) how Zoe's relationship with her parents has formed her into the adult she is today. What I enjoyed is that Zoe is a complicated individual with many layers. I've read too many books lately where a character had a bad childhood or suffered some form of abuse and that seems to be a reason to make them have only one character trait, which they must act upon, with no sign of reason. Zoe is nuanced, even if she takes some time to warm up to.
There are several scenes in the book that are nearly heartbreaking as you read. For instance, when Zoe finds a projector and a bunch of film belonging to her grandfather and manages to splice together enough film to capture a few moments of her late sister as a kid. As she describes the moment, it's powerful, and you can completely picture it. In another scene, she reminisces about how her mother "helped" her fix up Zoe's bathing suit before a first date--an event that ended poorly. This moment is not only formed so clearly, but says so much about how Zoe continued to relate to her Mom. It's very well-done.
The book spends most of its time focusing on Zoe's late second coming of age story (at nearly 40), with a few characters from Sullivan's Island thrown in, but there is a subplot to Hannah's disappearance that picks up pace near the end. The very end of the story felt a little rushed (though exciting). I'm still a bit torn about the actual ending--it sort of pissed me off--but I understand Crosby's choices.
In writing this review, I'd probably push my rating up to a 3.75 stars. It's a different book, and I enjoyed Zoe. I almost wish I could encounter her again.
I received an ARC of this book from Edelweiss - thank you! It is available for publication on 4/19/16. You can find a review this novel and many more at my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
Ross (3284 KP) rated Killer Dungeon (Euphoria Online Book 3) in Books
Jan 4, 2019
So much of the previous books is lost (3 more)
Sudden epic scope creep
Loose ends
deus ex machina abounds
I am (slightly) disappoint
I loved the first two books in this trilogy. The narrative was so detailed and descriptive that you truly lived the action along with the protagonist, you felt every blow, you were part of every strategy, you celebrated every unlikely victory. We knew we were in an epic online world that we hadn't explored yet but were happy with the dangerous little corner we knew inside out.
The book starts off with Chris, low-ranked newbie with a knack for strategy, being the new leader/castellan of Castle Winter, charged with defending, repairing and upgrading the castle, caring for its inhabitants, fending off the nearby army of the undead and still trying to discover the hidden treasure in the dungeon.
This change in his status obviously precipitated a change in focus for him, which is understandable - a castellan with all these responsibilities can't still go off exploring. But this started to feel like those boring aspects of games like the Witcher/Red Dead Redemption where you have to go shopping, play card games, train a horse, collect herbs etc and was relatively dull.
While a raft of super-strength gamers try to tackle the seemingly unbeatable Dungeon, Chris decides he needs to buy goods and services in-game with the help of the deus-ex style pot of money he suddenly inherits. He is taken to explore some of the online world in order to do so. This is where I started to lose interest, as the shopping and political aspects of the world and narrative now takes over, when all you want to do is get into that dungeon (you know, the one mentioned in the title of the book) with the rest of the true gamers.
In all the dungeon is just sort of solved. It just happens. We are treated to a re-telling of the action from some of those gamers but this was totally unsatisfactory. Three perilous rooms are in that dungeon and we get to see next to none of the action in solving them.
There is something of a race against time as Chris has a deadline looming to find the treasure hidden in the dungeon to deliver to the lord of the undead. This adds to the thrill somewhat but then the genre-required conspiracy starts to grow (the game was designed by the all-powerful AI to help save mankind from itself), and then the book loses a lot of its original charm for me.
I loved this trilogy, but can't help but feel Tucker had designed a massive world for the story to take place in, and suddenly realised two books in that he hadn't explored any of it (the first two books were very narrow in scope considering the size of the online world but did not suffer for that) and was nearing the end of the three books he had planned. In my view this story had at least another two or three books in it, I would have loved to have seen the dungeon rooms solved in the same detailed manner as the puzzles in the first two books, and would have liked a lot less metaphysical elephant-god mumbo jumbo. I can't help but feel Tucker realised he had set himself up with unsolvable situations and a character who couldn't really put himself in those positions.
In short: Great story, rushed ending ("sod it, say everyone else does the hard work and then an elephant god solves the unsolvable")
The book starts off with Chris, low-ranked newbie with a knack for strategy, being the new leader/castellan of Castle Winter, charged with defending, repairing and upgrading the castle, caring for its inhabitants, fending off the nearby army of the undead and still trying to discover the hidden treasure in the dungeon.
This change in his status obviously precipitated a change in focus for him, which is understandable - a castellan with all these responsibilities can't still go off exploring. But this started to feel like those boring aspects of games like the Witcher/Red Dead Redemption where you have to go shopping, play card games, train a horse, collect herbs etc and was relatively dull.
While a raft of super-strength gamers try to tackle the seemingly unbeatable Dungeon, Chris decides he needs to buy goods and services in-game with the help of the deus-ex style pot of money he suddenly inherits. He is taken to explore some of the online world in order to do so. This is where I started to lose interest, as the shopping and political aspects of the world and narrative now takes over, when all you want to do is get into that dungeon (you know, the one mentioned in the title of the book) with the rest of the true gamers.
In all the dungeon is just sort of solved. It just happens. We are treated to a re-telling of the action from some of those gamers but this was totally unsatisfactory. Three perilous rooms are in that dungeon and we get to see next to none of the action in solving them.
There is something of a race against time as Chris has a deadline looming to find the treasure hidden in the dungeon to deliver to the lord of the undead. This adds to the thrill somewhat but then the genre-required conspiracy starts to grow (the game was designed by the all-powerful AI to help save mankind from itself), and then the book loses a lot of its original charm for me.
I loved this trilogy, but can't help but feel Tucker had designed a massive world for the story to take place in, and suddenly realised two books in that he hadn't explored any of it (the first two books were very narrow in scope considering the size of the online world but did not suffer for that) and was nearing the end of the three books he had planned. In my view this story had at least another two or three books in it, I would have loved to have seen the dungeon rooms solved in the same detailed manner as the puzzles in the first two books, and would have liked a lot less metaphysical elephant-god mumbo jumbo. I can't help but feel Tucker realised he had set himself up with unsolvable situations and a character who couldn't really put himself in those positions.
In short: Great story, rushed ending ("sod it, say everyone else does the hard work and then an elephant god solves the unsolvable")
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Front Runner (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Candidate for a downfall.
We can all probably rattle off some of the classics movies with US politics as their backdrop. For me, “All the President’s Men”; “Primary Colors”; and “Frost/Nixon” might make that list. In the next tier down there are many great drama/thrillers – “Miss Sloane“; “The Post“; “The Ides of March”; “The American President”; “JFK” – and even some pretty funny comedies – “Dave” and “My Fellow Americans” for example. It’s actually quite difficult to think of many films on the subject that are outright dire, proving it remains a fertile ground for film-makers.
“The Front Runner” fortunately avoids this last category, but it’s certainly not good enough to make it into the ‘classics’ list either.
A true story.
The film is based on the true-story of US presidential hopeful Gary Hart (Hugh Jackman) and if you are NOT aware of the historical background then you might want to skip the rest of this review – and indeed all others – so you can see the film first and let the history come as a surprise to you.
Hart was younger than most candidates: good-looking, floppy-haired and refreshingly matter of fact in his dealings with the public and the press. Any interviews had to be about his politics: not about his family life with wife Lee (Vera Farmiga) and teenage daughter Andrea (Kaitlyn Dever).
Unfortunately, Hart has a weakness for a pretty face (or ten) and his marriage is rocky as a result: “Just don’t embarrass me” is Lee’s one requirement. His “nothing to hide” line to an intelligent Washington Post reporter – AJ Parker (a well cast Mamoudou Athie) – leads to a half-arsed stake-out by Miami Herald reporters and incriminating pictures linking Hart to a Miami pharmaceutical saleswoman Donna Rice (Sara Paxton). As the growing press tsunami rises, and his campaign manager (J.K. Simmons) gets more and more frustrated with him, can his candidacy survive and will his (now very much embarrassed) wife stick by him?
The turns.
Hugh Jackman is perfectly cast here; very believable as the self-centred, self-righteous and stubborn politician. But this central performance is surrounded by a strong team of supporting players. Vera Farmiga is superb as the wounded wife. Sara Paxton is heartbreaking as the intelligent college girl unfairly portrayed as a “slapper” by the media. The scenes between her and Hart-staffer Irene (Molly Ephraim), trying desperately to support her as best she can, are very nicely done. J.K Simmons as campaign manager Bill Dixon is as reliable as ever. And Alfred Molina turns up as the latest film incarnation of The Post’s Ben Bradlee – surely one of the most oft portrayed real-life journalists in film history.
“What did they just say”?
The biggest cause of dissatisfaction I have with the film is with the sound mixing. Was this a deliberate act by director Jason Reitman, to reflect the chaotic nature of political campaigning? Whether it was deliberate or not, much of the film’s dialogue – particularly in the first 30 minutes of the film – is drowned out by background noise. Sometimes I just longed for subtitles!
Just a little bit dull.
The screenplay, by Matt Bai (from his source book), Jay Carson (a Clinton staffer) and director Jason Reitman might align with the history, but the big problem is that the story’s just a little bit dull, particularly by today’s levels of scandal. This suffers the same fate as “House of Cards” (even before the Kevin Spacey allegations) in that the shocking realities of the Trump-era have progressively neutered the shock-factor of the fiction: to the point where it starts to become boring. Here, only once or twice does the screenplay hit a winning beat: for me, it was the scenes between Donna Rice and Irene Kelly and the dramatic press conference towards the end of the film. The rest of the time, the screenplay was perfectly serviceable but nothing spectacular.
When is a politician’s personal life private?
A core tenet of the film is Hart’s view that politics should be about the policies and not about the personality. Looking at the subject nowadays, it’s clearly a ridiculously idealistic viewpoint. Of course it matters. Politicians need to be trusted by their constituents (yeah, like that’s the case in the UK and the US at the moment!) and whether or not they slap their wives around or sleep with farm animals is clearly a material factor in that relationship. But this was clearly not as much the case in the 70’s as it is today, and the suggestion is that the Hart case was a turning point and a wake-up call to politicians around the world. (An interesting article by the Washington Post itself points out that this is also a simplistic view: that Hart should have been well aware of the dangerous game he was playing.)
Fidelity in politics.
Do you think that powerful politicos are driven to infidelity because they are powerful? Or that it is a characteristic of men who have the charisma to become political leaders in the first place? Such was the discussion my wife and I had in the car home after this film. Nature or political nurture? I’m still not sure.
It’s worth pointing out that to this day both Hart and Rice (interestingly, an alleged ex-girlfriend of Eagles front-man Don Henley) stick to their story that they never had sex.
Final thoughts.
The film’s perfectly watchable, has great acting, but is a little bit of a non-event. The end titles came and I thought “OK, that’s that then”…. nothing more. If you’re a fan of this style of historical political film then you probably won’t be disappointed by it; if not, probably best to wait and catch this on the TV.
“The Front Runner” fortunately avoids this last category, but it’s certainly not good enough to make it into the ‘classics’ list either.
A true story.
The film is based on the true-story of US presidential hopeful Gary Hart (Hugh Jackman) and if you are NOT aware of the historical background then you might want to skip the rest of this review – and indeed all others – so you can see the film first and let the history come as a surprise to you.
Hart was younger than most candidates: good-looking, floppy-haired and refreshingly matter of fact in his dealings with the public and the press. Any interviews had to be about his politics: not about his family life with wife Lee (Vera Farmiga) and teenage daughter Andrea (Kaitlyn Dever).
Unfortunately, Hart has a weakness for a pretty face (or ten) and his marriage is rocky as a result: “Just don’t embarrass me” is Lee’s one requirement. His “nothing to hide” line to an intelligent Washington Post reporter – AJ Parker (a well cast Mamoudou Athie) – leads to a half-arsed stake-out by Miami Herald reporters and incriminating pictures linking Hart to a Miami pharmaceutical saleswoman Donna Rice (Sara Paxton). As the growing press tsunami rises, and his campaign manager (J.K. Simmons) gets more and more frustrated with him, can his candidacy survive and will his (now very much embarrassed) wife stick by him?
The turns.
Hugh Jackman is perfectly cast here; very believable as the self-centred, self-righteous and stubborn politician. But this central performance is surrounded by a strong team of supporting players. Vera Farmiga is superb as the wounded wife. Sara Paxton is heartbreaking as the intelligent college girl unfairly portrayed as a “slapper” by the media. The scenes between her and Hart-staffer Irene (Molly Ephraim), trying desperately to support her as best she can, are very nicely done. J.K Simmons as campaign manager Bill Dixon is as reliable as ever. And Alfred Molina turns up as the latest film incarnation of The Post’s Ben Bradlee – surely one of the most oft portrayed real-life journalists in film history.
“What did they just say”?
The biggest cause of dissatisfaction I have with the film is with the sound mixing. Was this a deliberate act by director Jason Reitman, to reflect the chaotic nature of political campaigning? Whether it was deliberate or not, much of the film’s dialogue – particularly in the first 30 minutes of the film – is drowned out by background noise. Sometimes I just longed for subtitles!
Just a little bit dull.
The screenplay, by Matt Bai (from his source book), Jay Carson (a Clinton staffer) and director Jason Reitman might align with the history, but the big problem is that the story’s just a little bit dull, particularly by today’s levels of scandal. This suffers the same fate as “House of Cards” (even before the Kevin Spacey allegations) in that the shocking realities of the Trump-era have progressively neutered the shock-factor of the fiction: to the point where it starts to become boring. Here, only once or twice does the screenplay hit a winning beat: for me, it was the scenes between Donna Rice and Irene Kelly and the dramatic press conference towards the end of the film. The rest of the time, the screenplay was perfectly serviceable but nothing spectacular.
When is a politician’s personal life private?
A core tenet of the film is Hart’s view that politics should be about the policies and not about the personality. Looking at the subject nowadays, it’s clearly a ridiculously idealistic viewpoint. Of course it matters. Politicians need to be trusted by their constituents (yeah, like that’s the case in the UK and the US at the moment!) and whether or not they slap their wives around or sleep with farm animals is clearly a material factor in that relationship. But this was clearly not as much the case in the 70’s as it is today, and the suggestion is that the Hart case was a turning point and a wake-up call to politicians around the world. (An interesting article by the Washington Post itself points out that this is also a simplistic view: that Hart should have been well aware of the dangerous game he was playing.)
Fidelity in politics.
Do you think that powerful politicos are driven to infidelity because they are powerful? Or that it is a characteristic of men who have the charisma to become political leaders in the first place? Such was the discussion my wife and I had in the car home after this film. Nature or political nurture? I’m still not sure.
It’s worth pointing out that to this day both Hart and Rice (interestingly, an alleged ex-girlfriend of Eagles front-man Don Henley) stick to their story that they never had sex.
Final thoughts.
The film’s perfectly watchable, has great acting, but is a little bit of a non-event. The end titles came and I thought “OK, that’s that then”…. nothing more. If you’re a fan of this style of historical political film then you probably won’t be disappointed by it; if not, probably best to wait and catch this on the TV.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Just Mercy (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2020
Having seen Clemency in October I felt like I was prepared for what Just Mercy might throw at me. I was not. The two films handle the death row scenario in very different ways and the storyline that runs alongside it gives you two very different experiences.
Based on a true story - when it comes to history this phrase can be a horrible thing, and when you realise that the events of Just Mercy are only actually dating back to the late 80s/early 90s, well that's kind of sickening, it doesn't feel like this should be something from my own lifetime.
In the lead role of Bryan Stevenson we have Michael B. Jordan. We see Stevenson from intern to established lawyer and yet he doesn't really make any notable progression. The person he is at the beginning isn't all that changed by the end. Jordan's performance is fine, nothing felt technically wrong about it but the consistency was completely off. Every time the character was brought face to face with prejudice and high emotions he managed to knock it out of the park, he was nervous, he was scared, he was devastated. In between those moments he was just there, his performance didn't hold any weight against anyone else's.
Jamie Foxx shows us that missing consistency as Walter McMillan. It felt like he was fully immersed in his character the whole time. There are shots where we're focused on him while other characters are talking and he's always attentive to them, you can see him assessing Stevenson in their meetings and it was fascinating to watch. Every moment was strong without the need for any additional motivation.
When we're inside the prison there are so many different things going on. The tension between the guards and inmates, and that extending to Stevenson is powerful and it's development through the film and the change in attitude was a nice one to see. But the camaraderie between the inmates was probably the thing that was the most affecting, the execution in this was surprisingly subtle but very moving.
Just Mercy has a strong message about the divide and prejudice in southern America and the justice system, it's a very strong reminder of how much has changed because of strong-willed people and how much still needs to change. While I might not watch this film again it was certainly something I enjoyed watching, as much as "enjoyed" feels like the wrong word to use.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/just-mercy-movie-review.html
Based on a true story - when it comes to history this phrase can be a horrible thing, and when you realise that the events of Just Mercy are only actually dating back to the late 80s/early 90s, well that's kind of sickening, it doesn't feel like this should be something from my own lifetime.
In the lead role of Bryan Stevenson we have Michael B. Jordan. We see Stevenson from intern to established lawyer and yet he doesn't really make any notable progression. The person he is at the beginning isn't all that changed by the end. Jordan's performance is fine, nothing felt technically wrong about it but the consistency was completely off. Every time the character was brought face to face with prejudice and high emotions he managed to knock it out of the park, he was nervous, he was scared, he was devastated. In between those moments he was just there, his performance didn't hold any weight against anyone else's.
Jamie Foxx shows us that missing consistency as Walter McMillan. It felt like he was fully immersed in his character the whole time. There are shots where we're focused on him while other characters are talking and he's always attentive to them, you can see him assessing Stevenson in their meetings and it was fascinating to watch. Every moment was strong without the need for any additional motivation.
When we're inside the prison there are so many different things going on. The tension between the guards and inmates, and that extending to Stevenson is powerful and it's development through the film and the change in attitude was a nice one to see. But the camaraderie between the inmates was probably the thing that was the most affecting, the execution in this was surprisingly subtle but very moving.
Just Mercy has a strong message about the divide and prejudice in southern America and the justice system, it's a very strong reminder of how much has changed because of strong-willed people and how much still needs to change. While I might not watch this film again it was certainly something I enjoyed watching, as much as "enjoyed" feels like the wrong word to use.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/01/just-mercy-movie-review.html
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Judy (2019) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
If I am a legend, then why am I so lonely?
Judy is a fabulous and dazzling look into the finally years of an all time greats life and while it maybe paint by numbers at times Judy takes the surprisingly darker and more depressing route that many other biopics dont dare to. I was gobsmacked to find after that renee zellweger played judy garland as at no stage of the movie could you tell at all. Never been a real fan of Zellweger but here she really has surpassed herself and you literally would be forgiven for believing she was the actual Judy Garland at times, an award wining performance for sure. Judy's pain/struggles are plain to see here and the way Renee manages to portray the sheer depression behind those eyes as well as the switching on of 'the act' when she steps out onto stage to perform are both saddening and admirable (the way the camera shows her eyes change really is impressive). Its clear as a person she just longs to be loved, to belong/find happiness and to live a happy life with her children who adore her and bring her joy and completeness. Seemingly forced into showbusiness at a young age she never had a real chance to discover who she really is and what she enjoys and everyone she gets close to uses her as a puppet adding to the weight on her mind. Yet somewhere in all the sadness I find it so inspirational that she still found the strength and drive to put on a confident happy face and deliver powerful performances. Maybe deep down in a way being loved by the audience was her only glimpse of feeling true real love from someone when away from her children. Cinematography really impressed me as well giving a warm glamorous look when on stage with colours and lights that simply boom off the screen and then a cold, isolated and lonely feel when off stage really giving the movie a unique and immersive atmosphere. Costumes and sets also stun and dazzle as does the music which is filmed so well you feel at times you are sat in the room. Some dialog annoyed me near the beginning and two characters ruined the tone/felt forced but other than that I really did enjoyed this movie dare I say it more than I did Rocketman and Bohemian Rhapsody. A tragic/sad story that is well worth seeing
DRAGON BALL Z DOKKAN BATTLE
Games and Entertainment
App
A brand-new chapter in the Dragon Ball Z saga has arrived! Now you can experience all the nonstop...