Search
Search results
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated I Know Who You Are in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://i0.wp.com/diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/I-Know-Who-You-Are-blog-tour-banner.jpg?resize=768%2C909&ssl=1"/>;
<b>I Know Who You Are by Alice Feeney is a book that stays with you after you read it. Dark, twisted and unpredictable until the very last chapter.</b>
In the very beginning, we are met with the unknown. Aimee Sinclair is an actress and when she comes home, she realizes her husband is missing. The police suspect she is hiding something. They are right, she does have a secret…
The book switches between two timelines; the first being Aimee today and the second being Aimee’s childhood. We get to enjoy these parallel stories and understand how Aimee’s childhood directly influences her decisions as a grown up.
<b><i>‘’Sometimes it only takes one person to believe in you, to change your life forever. Sometimes it only takes one person not believing in you to destroy it. Humans are a highly sensitive species.’’</i></b>
Alice’s writing is brilliant, and when reading the two timelines, you feel the child and you feel the adult. A skill not many writers can perfect.
Aimee’s whole life has been about being a different person. That is why she choose to become an actress. She can change into different people as she wants, and keep her true self hidden somewhere safe. But she didn’t learn this all by herself.
The book will leave things unpredictable until the very end. I had my theories and they kept changing all the time. The moment you feel you are close to the truth, something happens and you are back at the start. I loved it!
I wasn’t disappointed with the ending, but I did feel grossed out and disgusted by a certain someone. At times, some scenes felt like too much, but they were crucial to the story.
<b><i>If you love dark and twisted psychological thrillers, you will most probably enjoy reading I Know Who You Are by Alice Feeney.</i></b>
<b>Trigger warnings for abuse in all shapes and forms, animal cruelty and childhood trauma.</b>
Thank you to the team at HQ, for the opportunity to be part of this blog tour, and for sending me a paperback copy in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://i0.wp.com/diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/I-Know-Who-You-Are-blog-tour-banner.jpg?resize=768%2C909&ssl=1"/>;
<b>I Know Who You Are by Alice Feeney is a book that stays with you after you read it. Dark, twisted and unpredictable until the very last chapter.</b>
In the very beginning, we are met with the unknown. Aimee Sinclair is an actress and when she comes home, she realizes her husband is missing. The police suspect she is hiding something. They are right, she does have a secret…
The book switches between two timelines; the first being Aimee today and the second being Aimee’s childhood. We get to enjoy these parallel stories and understand how Aimee’s childhood directly influences her decisions as a grown up.
<b><i>‘’Sometimes it only takes one person to believe in you, to change your life forever. Sometimes it only takes one person not believing in you to destroy it. Humans are a highly sensitive species.’’</i></b>
Alice’s writing is brilliant, and when reading the two timelines, you feel the child and you feel the adult. A skill not many writers can perfect.
Aimee’s whole life has been about being a different person. That is why she choose to become an actress. She can change into different people as she wants, and keep her true self hidden somewhere safe. But she didn’t learn this all by herself.
The book will leave things unpredictable until the very end. I had my theories and they kept changing all the time. The moment you feel you are close to the truth, something happens and you are back at the start. I loved it!
I wasn’t disappointed with the ending, but I did feel grossed out and disgusted by a certain someone. At times, some scenes felt like too much, but they were crucial to the story.
<b><i>If you love dark and twisted psychological thrillers, you will most probably enjoy reading I Know Who You Are by Alice Feeney.</i></b>
<b>Trigger warnings for abuse in all shapes and forms, animal cruelty and childhood trauma.</b>
Thank you to the team at HQ, for the opportunity to be part of this blog tour, and for sending me a paperback copy in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
JT (287 KP) rated The Little Things (2021) in Movies
Feb 6, 2021
The opening of The Little Things promises a lot but ultimately the tension that is driven during the first ten minutes is nowhere to be seen for the rest of the run time.
With three Oscar-winning actors and a genre that I absolutely love I couldn’t have been more excited, but that excitement started to take a nosedive when ‘The Little Things‘ started to get a ‘little dull’. Joe ‘Deke’ Deacon (Denzel Washington) is former Los Angeles cop turned local county sheriff, whose content with chasing small-time criminals. When he is asked to go back to the city to pick up some evidence for another case he crosses paths with Jim Baxter (Rami Malek) who is on the hunt for a sadistic serial killer.
Baxter realising that he is in the presence of greatness asks Deacon to accompany him to a crime scene, at which point Deke’s instincts point to someone potentially far more dangerous. Set in the 90s this is raw police work and the use of technology is limited, this is about assessing a crime scene in-depth, or in this case why the killer posed his victims in specific ways or returned to the crime scene later to move them.
Director John Lee Hancock wrote the script 30 years ago which is where it has remained until now. At one point Steven Spielberg and Clint Eastwood were rumoured to direct. The film bears resemblance to such thrillers as Se7en and Zodiac, however, The Little Things might be 30 years too late. The atmosphere and ambience is a neo-noir, at one point Deke is lying on a bed in a run-down motel room starring at polaroid photos of past victims on the wall. An obsession burning inside to catch the killer, which during flashbacks, he has encountered before.
And then there is Albert Sparma (Jared Leto) the prime suspect, or is he? Such is the film’s ambiguity that the third act will leave you scratching your head, trying to piece the evidence together yourself in a bid to catch the killer. Sparma has all the tendencies of a serial killer, he certainly has the look and demeanour. But he may also be a self-obsessed crime buff, with a morbid fascination for death and crime scenes.
All three actors give a solid account of themselves, with Leto making the biggest impression. He’s creepy in a way that will get under your skin. The film is bursting with ideas and places to ramp up the tension but it falls short which is such a shame. As someone who is very fond of a good psychological thriller, this was definitely a missed opportunity.
With three Oscar-winning actors and a genre that I absolutely love I couldn’t have been more excited, but that excitement started to take a nosedive when ‘The Little Things‘ started to get a ‘little dull’. Joe ‘Deke’ Deacon (Denzel Washington) is former Los Angeles cop turned local county sheriff, whose content with chasing small-time criminals. When he is asked to go back to the city to pick up some evidence for another case he crosses paths with Jim Baxter (Rami Malek) who is on the hunt for a sadistic serial killer.
Baxter realising that he is in the presence of greatness asks Deacon to accompany him to a crime scene, at which point Deke’s instincts point to someone potentially far more dangerous. Set in the 90s this is raw police work and the use of technology is limited, this is about assessing a crime scene in-depth, or in this case why the killer posed his victims in specific ways or returned to the crime scene later to move them.
Director John Lee Hancock wrote the script 30 years ago which is where it has remained until now. At one point Steven Spielberg and Clint Eastwood were rumoured to direct. The film bears resemblance to such thrillers as Se7en and Zodiac, however, The Little Things might be 30 years too late. The atmosphere and ambience is a neo-noir, at one point Deke is lying on a bed in a run-down motel room starring at polaroid photos of past victims on the wall. An obsession burning inside to catch the killer, which during flashbacks, he has encountered before.
And then there is Albert Sparma (Jared Leto) the prime suspect, or is he? Such is the film’s ambiguity that the third act will leave you scratching your head, trying to piece the evidence together yourself in a bid to catch the killer. Sparma has all the tendencies of a serial killer, he certainly has the look and demeanour. But he may also be a self-obsessed crime buff, with a morbid fascination for death and crime scenes.
All three actors give a solid account of themselves, with Leto making the biggest impression. He’s creepy in a way that will get under your skin. The film is bursting with ideas and places to ramp up the tension but it falls short which is such a shame. As someone who is very fond of a good psychological thriller, this was definitely a missed opportunity.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Last House on the Left (1972) in Movies
Sep 3, 2020
To Avoid Fainting Keep Repeating...Its Only A Movie
The Last House on the Left- was wes's directoral debut and what a start. Its a disturbing, psychological, graphic, exploitation horror film.
The plot: Teenagers Mari (Sandra Cassel) and Phyllis (Lucy Grantham) head to the city for a concert, then afterward go looking for drugs. Instead, they find a gang of escaped convicts who subject them to a night of torture and rape. The gang then kills the girls in the woods, not realizing they're near Mari's house. When they pose as salesmen and are taken in by Mari's mother (Cynthia Carr) and father (Gaylord St. James), it doesn't take the parents long to figure out their identities and plot revenge.
Wes Craven, who had no money at the time, was put on the job of synchronizing dailies for Cunningham's re-shoot. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham and they became good friends. Hallmark bought the film for $10,000, and it was considered a "hit"; this prompted Hallmark to persuade them to make another film with a bigger budget, and gave them $90,000 to shoot a horror film.
This script, written under the title Night of Vengeance, has never been released; only a brief glimpse is visible in the featurette Celluloid Crime of the Century (a 2003 documentary on the making of the film).
The majority of the cast of The Last House on the Left were inexperienced or first-time actors, with the exception of Richard Towers, Eleanor Shaw, and Sandra Peabody who were all soap opera regulars and had prior film roles.
The film underwent multiple title changes, with its investors initially titling it Sex Crime of the Century. However, after test screenings were completed, it was decided to change the title to Krug and Company; however, this title was found to have little draw during test screenings. A marketing specialist who was an acquaintance of Cunningham's proposed the title The Last House on the Left. Craven initially thought the title was "terrible."
Due to its graphic content, the film sparked protests from the public throughout the fall of 1972 who called for its removal from local theaters.
Promotional material capitalized on the film's graphic content and divisive reception, featuring the tagline: "To avoid fainting, keep repeating 'It's only a movie' ..." advertising campaign. Under the Last House... title, the film proved to be a hit.
Though the film passed with an R-rating by the Motion Picture Association of America, director Craven claimed that on several occasions, horrified audience members would demand that theater projectionists destroy the footage, sometimes stealing the film themselves.
It is a distubing film but it is a excellet film by a horror icon.
The plot: Teenagers Mari (Sandra Cassel) and Phyllis (Lucy Grantham) head to the city for a concert, then afterward go looking for drugs. Instead, they find a gang of escaped convicts who subject them to a night of torture and rape. The gang then kills the girls in the woods, not realizing they're near Mari's house. When they pose as salesmen and are taken in by Mari's mother (Cynthia Carr) and father (Gaylord St. James), it doesn't take the parents long to figure out their identities and plot revenge.
Wes Craven, who had no money at the time, was put on the job of synchronizing dailies for Cunningham's re-shoot. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham and they became good friends. Hallmark bought the film for $10,000, and it was considered a "hit"; this prompted Hallmark to persuade them to make another film with a bigger budget, and gave them $90,000 to shoot a horror film.
This script, written under the title Night of Vengeance, has never been released; only a brief glimpse is visible in the featurette Celluloid Crime of the Century (a 2003 documentary on the making of the film).
The majority of the cast of The Last House on the Left were inexperienced or first-time actors, with the exception of Richard Towers, Eleanor Shaw, and Sandra Peabody who were all soap opera regulars and had prior film roles.
The film underwent multiple title changes, with its investors initially titling it Sex Crime of the Century. However, after test screenings were completed, it was decided to change the title to Krug and Company; however, this title was found to have little draw during test screenings. A marketing specialist who was an acquaintance of Cunningham's proposed the title The Last House on the Left. Craven initially thought the title was "terrible."
Due to its graphic content, the film sparked protests from the public throughout the fall of 1972 who called for its removal from local theaters.
Promotional material capitalized on the film's graphic content and divisive reception, featuring the tagline: "To avoid fainting, keep repeating 'It's only a movie' ..." advertising campaign. Under the Last House... title, the film proved to be a hit.
Though the film passed with an R-rating by the Motion Picture Association of America, director Craven claimed that on several occasions, horrified audience members would demand that theater projectionists destroy the footage, sometimes stealing the film themselves.
It is a distubing film but it is a excellet film by a horror icon.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Night House (2020) in Movies
Aug 23, 2021
Rebecca Hall - outstanding (1 more)
Nicely vague script: leaves a lot to interpret
This one really creeped me out
Positives:
- Of the different movie genres, comedy and horror are probably the ones that polarise opinion the most. One person's meat is another's fowl. But I have to say that this movie officially creeped me out. I was extremely tense for just about the whole 107 minute running time. Much of this is down to Rebecca Hall, who is just SUPERB in this. She brilliantly portrays a woman on the edge, her impassive character breaking every so often into an "everything's fine" sarcastic smile. I know that the Academy tend not to nominate actors for Oscars for 'frivolous' films, but this genuinely, to me, felt like an Oscar-nomination-worthy performance.
- I've talked before in my blog about the overuse of 'jump scares' in horror films and the law of diminishing returns. This film doles them out very sparingly indeed. There are two notable ones (one spoiled by the trailer!) but - man - the first of these had me levitating off the seat!
- The script is very vague indeed about where you end up in this movie. (I've tried to do a synopsis of what I *think* happened in a "Sp0iler section" in my blog). The script deliciously muddies the waters between dreams and reality; sanity and madness; sobriety and drunkenness; with the real-life Madelyn (Stacy Martin) bringing you up short at times with an "oh - so that bit must by reality then"!
Negatives:
- The ending. I'm not sure how I wanted it to end. But it felt wholly anti-climactic.
Summary Thoughts on "The Night House": London-born Rebecca Hall seems to have a "leisurely" output as an actress, but she really deserves more prominence in the industry. (If you've not seen it yet, watch her outstanding performance in "Christine" as another proof point). Here she magnificently holds the movie together.
Effective horror films for me are those on the tense psychological side rather than the mindless slasher variety. This point was well made by Tom Shone in his review in "The Sunday Times", describing it as a "middle-aged kind of horror movie!". "The Night House" delivered those mental chills for me in spades. There is actually very little gore in this one. But it certainly had me thinking about it when I woke up in the middle of the night last night. Was that a noise downstairs??
If you like your scary films, then this one is highly recommended.
(For my full graphical review, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
- Of the different movie genres, comedy and horror are probably the ones that polarise opinion the most. One person's meat is another's fowl. But I have to say that this movie officially creeped me out. I was extremely tense for just about the whole 107 minute running time. Much of this is down to Rebecca Hall, who is just SUPERB in this. She brilliantly portrays a woman on the edge, her impassive character breaking every so often into an "everything's fine" sarcastic smile. I know that the Academy tend not to nominate actors for Oscars for 'frivolous' films, but this genuinely, to me, felt like an Oscar-nomination-worthy performance.
- I've talked before in my blog about the overuse of 'jump scares' in horror films and the law of diminishing returns. This film doles them out very sparingly indeed. There are two notable ones (one spoiled by the trailer!) but - man - the first of these had me levitating off the seat!
- The script is very vague indeed about where you end up in this movie. (I've tried to do a synopsis of what I *think* happened in a "Sp0iler section" in my blog). The script deliciously muddies the waters between dreams and reality; sanity and madness; sobriety and drunkenness; with the real-life Madelyn (Stacy Martin) bringing you up short at times with an "oh - so that bit must by reality then"!
Negatives:
- The ending. I'm not sure how I wanted it to end. But it felt wholly anti-climactic.
Summary Thoughts on "The Night House": London-born Rebecca Hall seems to have a "leisurely" output as an actress, but she really deserves more prominence in the industry. (If you've not seen it yet, watch her outstanding performance in "Christine" as another proof point). Here she magnificently holds the movie together.
Effective horror films for me are those on the tense psychological side rather than the mindless slasher variety. This point was well made by Tom Shone in his review in "The Sunday Times", describing it as a "middle-aged kind of horror movie!". "The Night House" delivered those mental chills for me in spades. There is actually very little gore in this one. But it certainly had me thinking about it when I woke up in the middle of the night last night. Was that a noise downstairs??
If you like your scary films, then this one is highly recommended.
(For my full graphical review, please check out onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Mindhunter - Season 1 in TV
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Fantastic Performances (3 more)
Brilliant Script
Good Direction
Great Soundtrack
A Method In The Madness?
Mindhunter is a Netflix series set in the late 70's, that follows two FBI detectives as they embark to learn more about serial killers and why they do the things that they do. One of the detectives, Bill Tench, actually coins the phrase, 'serial killer,' at one point and the team do seem to be making progressive steps into understanding a disturbed psyche, even if some of the methods they use along the way are fairly questionable.
The series is produced by David Fincher, who also directs 4 episodes of this first season. If you are a fan of Fincher's other work, then this will be right up your street. It shares a lot of similarities with Se7en, The Social Network, Gone Girl, Panic Room and definitely Zodiac. The two main series stars, Jonathan Groff and Holt McCallany are brilliant in their roles. You may recognise McCallany from Fight Club and Groff from Glee, but this show couldn't be a further departure from Glee if it tried, which makes Groff's already electric performance, even better.
McCallany plays Bill Tench, an older FBI agent who has a good few years of experience under his belt. Groff plays Holden Ford, a young maverick, who barges his way towards progress, regardless of who gets caught up in the collateral damage. The two work fantastically together and the chemistry between the two actors is one of the best things about this show. The supporting cast are also solid, with Hannah Gross standing out as Holden's girlfriend, as well as Anna Torv, who plays a doctor of psychology helping the two detectives analyse the data that they collect from interviews held with various serial killers. The serial killers featured throughout the show are also memorable, especially Jerry Brudos and Ed Kemper. Cameron Britton, who plays Kemper, gives a subtly terrifying performance and is exponentially engaging for every minute that he is onscreen.
The performances are helped with a brilliant script. The dialogue is snappy and effective, causing as many existential questions as it does unorthodox observations. Fincher's direction, is of course, fantastic and the other directors who work on this show also do a good job. The soundtrack to the show is sometimes antithetic to what is going on in the storyline, but it is always effective and never distracting. The shot composition and cinematography was also on point in each episode, with some really effective imagery being implemented throughout.
Overall, this is a brilliantly made, psychological drama. The writing is of a very high standard and the performances are excellent all around. If you are a fan of serial killer stories or anything David Fincher has worked on before, this will be for you. The characters are all interesting and deep and although they may do some questionable things, I can't wait to see where this endeavour takes them next.
The series is produced by David Fincher, who also directs 4 episodes of this first season. If you are a fan of Fincher's other work, then this will be right up your street. It shares a lot of similarities with Se7en, The Social Network, Gone Girl, Panic Room and definitely Zodiac. The two main series stars, Jonathan Groff and Holt McCallany are brilliant in their roles. You may recognise McCallany from Fight Club and Groff from Glee, but this show couldn't be a further departure from Glee if it tried, which makes Groff's already electric performance, even better.
McCallany plays Bill Tench, an older FBI agent who has a good few years of experience under his belt. Groff plays Holden Ford, a young maverick, who barges his way towards progress, regardless of who gets caught up in the collateral damage. The two work fantastically together and the chemistry between the two actors is one of the best things about this show. The supporting cast are also solid, with Hannah Gross standing out as Holden's girlfriend, as well as Anna Torv, who plays a doctor of psychology helping the two detectives analyse the data that they collect from interviews held with various serial killers. The serial killers featured throughout the show are also memorable, especially Jerry Brudos and Ed Kemper. Cameron Britton, who plays Kemper, gives a subtly terrifying performance and is exponentially engaging for every minute that he is onscreen.
The performances are helped with a brilliant script. The dialogue is snappy and effective, causing as many existential questions as it does unorthodox observations. Fincher's direction, is of course, fantastic and the other directors who work on this show also do a good job. The soundtrack to the show is sometimes antithetic to what is going on in the storyline, but it is always effective and never distracting. The shot composition and cinematography was also on point in each episode, with some really effective imagery being implemented throughout.
Overall, this is a brilliantly made, psychological drama. The writing is of a very high standard and the performances are excellent all around. If you are a fan of serial killer stories or anything David Fincher has worked on before, this will be for you. The characters are all interesting and deep and although they may do some questionable things, I can't wait to see where this endeavour takes them next.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Wheelman (2017) in Movies
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Grillo is great (1 more)
Decent script
One Hell Of A Night
Wheelman is a Netflix movie that unfortunately debuted on the same date as the hotly anticipated Stephen King adaption, 1922. Though Wheelman deserves more than to be overlooked and although I didn't expect much going into it, I came away afterwards pleasantly surprised.
This movie reminds me of a bunch of others. There is some aspects of Phonebooth used here, it was also reminiscent of a Tom Hardy film called Locke that came out a couple of years ago. It is also similar to what Drive was marketed as in the trailers before it's release, (even though Drive ended up being a psychological nior drama.) The movie took a while to convince me; for the first 15 minutes nothing happened that really excited me, but once I got a bit deeper into and more invested in the story that was unfolding, I ended up being sucked into the wild ride that the protagonist was going through. I think that the film's success on that front, relies a great deal on the performance of Frank Grillo, so it's just as well he brought his A-game here. For 99% of the movie, Grillo is onscreen, so there is no hiding from the camera in terms of his performance and he nails every second of it. He really manages to make an insanely dangerous situation feel grounded and relatable. The other actors are mostly featured via their voices on the phone, which again makes their performances difficult to deliver, but they all manage it convincingly. I always knew who each person was in relation to each other and what each character's motives were, which isn't always clear in a movie where most characters are only heard on the phone.
The script is decent, but I feel that a lot of the dialogue was ad-libbed, which again adds a natural, more realistic feel to the events that are unfolding. This was a good move by the director and the direction overall is great. There are some fairly odd creative choices made, but all of them are effective and feel worthwhile. The cinematography and sound mixing are implemented effectively and add to the overall urgent tone that the movie is pursuing.
Overall, this is definitely worth a watch. To me, it is like a callback to a 70's action chase thriller, with a modern twist. There is also an element of film noir present and the intense tone will keep you engaged until the end credits. You do need to stick with the film past the fifteen minute mark though. Although the whole thing is only 82 minutes long in it's entirety, it takes while to really suck you in, but once it does, it is a really fun ride worth taking.
This movie reminds me of a bunch of others. There is some aspects of Phonebooth used here, it was also reminiscent of a Tom Hardy film called Locke that came out a couple of years ago. It is also similar to what Drive was marketed as in the trailers before it's release, (even though Drive ended up being a psychological nior drama.) The movie took a while to convince me; for the first 15 minutes nothing happened that really excited me, but once I got a bit deeper into and more invested in the story that was unfolding, I ended up being sucked into the wild ride that the protagonist was going through. I think that the film's success on that front, relies a great deal on the performance of Frank Grillo, so it's just as well he brought his A-game here. For 99% of the movie, Grillo is onscreen, so there is no hiding from the camera in terms of his performance and he nails every second of it. He really manages to make an insanely dangerous situation feel grounded and relatable. The other actors are mostly featured via their voices on the phone, which again makes their performances difficult to deliver, but they all manage it convincingly. I always knew who each person was in relation to each other and what each character's motives were, which isn't always clear in a movie where most characters are only heard on the phone.
The script is decent, but I feel that a lot of the dialogue was ad-libbed, which again adds a natural, more realistic feel to the events that are unfolding. This was a good move by the director and the direction overall is great. There are some fairly odd creative choices made, but all of them are effective and feel worthwhile. The cinematography and sound mixing are implemented effectively and add to the overall urgent tone that the movie is pursuing.
Overall, this is definitely worth a watch. To me, it is like a callback to a 70's action chase thriller, with a modern twist. There is also an element of film noir present and the intense tone will keep you engaged until the end credits. You do need to stick with the film past the fifteen minute mark though. Although the whole thing is only 82 minutes long in it's entirety, it takes while to really suck you in, but once it does, it is a really fun ride worth taking.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Fragments of the Lost in Books
Jan 10, 2018
Different but enjoyable novel
When Jessa Whitworth's high school ex-boyfriend dies suddenly, it's as if the world stops. One moment Caleb is at her track meet, taking the butterfly necklace she handed to him, and the next, he's gone, his car washed over a flooded bridge on a stormy day. Caleb's mom eventually asks Jessa to pack up his room--she blames Jessa for the accident, since Caleb had gone to see her that day, and Jessa feels she cannot say no. She's left to clean out his room and winds up piecing together bits of Caleb's life as she does. Each photograph, article of clothing, and notebook reminds her of parts of her life with Caleb. Even worse, she realizes there is so much she didn't know about him. With that realization, Jessa wonders, what really happened the day Caleb went over the bridge?
This novel isn't really what I expected at all, though I should have realized that it would be less teen angst and more teen angst and psychological mystery combined, as the two Megan Miranda novels I have read, The Perfect Stranger: A Novel and All the Missing Girls, are more in the suspense/thriller category.
The biggest issue for me was that this one starts off really slow. It's hard to get into any kind of momentum as every forward plot movement is broken by Jessa finding something and immediately remembering back into her past with Caleb. I was a little frustrated in the beginning, wanting more to happen.
I really enjoyed the character of Jessa, though. She was a little hard on herself in relation to Caleb's death, but she was also a teen dealing with both the death of a loved one and a recent breakup (their split occurring not too long before his death). She came across as pretty realistic. The supporting cast was a little more nebulous for me--Caleb's mom was pretty harsh, and we didn't see too much of Jessa's family, though I liked her older brother, Julian. Caleb's best friend and neighbor, Max, was probably the other character that was easiest to get to know and he was rather well fleshed out. Caleb himself--whom we learn about through Jessa's point of view and flashbacks--is a hard one to figure out, but that only adds to the mystique of how he ended up at the bridge that day.
Overall, if you can bring a little patience, this book is one to enjoy. It eventually picks up and while the storyline is somewhat different (this whole novel is rather hard to describe), I really did enjoy it. I felt satisfied with the ending--it was worth reading. I enjoyed Miranda's two adult mysteries and while this is the first of her YA novels that I've read, I will definitely investigate others. 3.5 stars.
This novel isn't really what I expected at all, though I should have realized that it would be less teen angst and more teen angst and psychological mystery combined, as the two Megan Miranda novels I have read, The Perfect Stranger: A Novel and All the Missing Girls, are more in the suspense/thriller category.
The biggest issue for me was that this one starts off really slow. It's hard to get into any kind of momentum as every forward plot movement is broken by Jessa finding something and immediately remembering back into her past with Caleb. I was a little frustrated in the beginning, wanting more to happen.
I really enjoyed the character of Jessa, though. She was a little hard on herself in relation to Caleb's death, but she was also a teen dealing with both the death of a loved one and a recent breakup (their split occurring not too long before his death). She came across as pretty realistic. The supporting cast was a little more nebulous for me--Caleb's mom was pretty harsh, and we didn't see too much of Jessa's family, though I liked her older brother, Julian. Caleb's best friend and neighbor, Max, was probably the other character that was easiest to get to know and he was rather well fleshed out. Caleb himself--whom we learn about through Jessa's point of view and flashbacks--is a hard one to figure out, but that only adds to the mystique of how he ended up at the bridge that day.
Overall, if you can bring a little patience, this book is one to enjoy. It eventually picks up and while the storyline is somewhat different (this whole novel is rather hard to describe), I really did enjoy it. I felt satisfied with the ending--it was worth reading. I enjoyed Miranda's two adult mysteries and while this is the first of her YA novels that I've read, I will definitely investigate others. 3.5 stars.
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated Mindhunter: Inside the FBI Elite Serial Crime Unit (Now A Netflix Series) in Books
Mar 10, 2019
Douglas is a show-off
This is hands-down the most action-packed biography I have ever read! And it’s almost the most egotistical and narcissistic sounding biography I have ever read.
In his opening scene in the prologue, Douglas finds himself waking up from a coma in hospital expecting to be tortured by sick criminals, having (almost) single-handily run the FBI’s psychological profiling unit, handling hundreds of cases for several years.
I haven’t had the opportunity to watch the Netflix series based on this book, but I am quite a fan of the Criminal Minds series, so I had an idea of what to expect. However, you need to get 6 chapters in before Douglas starts talking about his work as an FBI profiler. He starts off talking about growing up, his love life, and getting into his career.
Douglas may call himself a profiler, but in my opinion, he is first and foremost a story-teller, with a talent for a drama-filled yarn. And rather than being put off by his constant bragging, I found myself hanging on his every word.
This light and long prelude to the criminal profiling section of the book made the crime details feel all the more gruesome. Some of the predictions made by Douglas about the murderers are barely believable. I mean, how can a crime scene really tell you the age of a murderer or what kind of car he drives?
Unfortunately, Douglas doesn’t offer much explanation into these kinds of things, and the leader is left assuming it’s all down to statistics. And if there’s anywhere the book is let down it would be here, because this would be why readers would pick the book up.
I once read a similar book called The Profiler, by Pat Brown. Brown, however, was a mere spectator to criminal goings on and had no influence whatever on getting criminals brought to justice. Douglas, however, would meet with local police and provide strategies on getting the bad guy, and getting him to confess.
To me, the most crucial chapter was Battle of the Shrinks. It looks at how criminals are dealt with once apprehended. Here Douglas meets with a psychiatrist whose job it was to assess whether criminals can have their sentences shortened and be let off early. This psychiatrist didn’t bother reading police reports to see from an outsider exactly what the criminal had done because he didn’t want to be made biased it and wanted to meet the criminal exactly as they presented himself to him. Douglas was appalled by this attitude and tried to get this over to the psychiatrist, but sadly, to no avail.
In short, this is a very entertaining book, and while it can teach you lot, reading it will never make you as good a profiler as John Douglas himself.
In his opening scene in the prologue, Douglas finds himself waking up from a coma in hospital expecting to be tortured by sick criminals, having (almost) single-handily run the FBI’s psychological profiling unit, handling hundreds of cases for several years.
I haven’t had the opportunity to watch the Netflix series based on this book, but I am quite a fan of the Criminal Minds series, so I had an idea of what to expect. However, you need to get 6 chapters in before Douglas starts talking about his work as an FBI profiler. He starts off talking about growing up, his love life, and getting into his career.
Douglas may call himself a profiler, but in my opinion, he is first and foremost a story-teller, with a talent for a drama-filled yarn. And rather than being put off by his constant bragging, I found myself hanging on his every word.
This light and long prelude to the criminal profiling section of the book made the crime details feel all the more gruesome. Some of the predictions made by Douglas about the murderers are barely believable. I mean, how can a crime scene really tell you the age of a murderer or what kind of car he drives?
Unfortunately, Douglas doesn’t offer much explanation into these kinds of things, and the leader is left assuming it’s all down to statistics. And if there’s anywhere the book is let down it would be here, because this would be why readers would pick the book up.
I once read a similar book called The Profiler, by Pat Brown. Brown, however, was a mere spectator to criminal goings on and had no influence whatever on getting criminals brought to justice. Douglas, however, would meet with local police and provide strategies on getting the bad guy, and getting him to confess.
To me, the most crucial chapter was Battle of the Shrinks. It looks at how criminals are dealt with once apprehended. Here Douglas meets with a psychiatrist whose job it was to assess whether criminals can have their sentences shortened and be let off early. This psychiatrist didn’t bother reading police reports to see from an outsider exactly what the criminal had done because he didn’t want to be made biased it and wanted to meet the criminal exactly as they presented himself to him. Douglas was appalled by this attitude and tried to get this over to the psychiatrist, but sadly, to no avail.
In short, this is a very entertaining book, and while it can teach you lot, reading it will never make you as good a profiler as John Douglas himself.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Outliers (The Outliers, #1) in Books
Feb 8, 2018
Wylie and Cassie aren't exactly best friends anymore. Even though Wylie's mom has died recently in a car crash, and Wylie's anxiety has ratcheted up so much she hasn't left the house in three weeks, the once inseparable pair have barely talked in over a week. But when Wylie gets a pleading text from Cassie saying she needs help, Wylie knows she will be there for her friend. Along with Cassie's boyfriend, Jasper, Wylie summons the courage to leave the house and follow Cassie's odd texts and clues to find her. But it doesn't take long to realize that Cassie might be in serious trouble. Even worse, it seems like trying to find Cassie is going to put Wylie, Jasper, and their families in danger, too.
This was an odd book. I was expecting a "run into obstacles finding my troubled best friend, maybe learn a lesson along the way" Young Adult tale, but the book takes a turn about halfway through and the tale becomes one of psychological depth, focusing on the story of the "outliers." <spoiler>These "outliers" are those who have a special range of emotional intelligence that allow them to have an uncanny ability to read people, emotions, and situations. It's Wylie's father, a scientist, who has discovered them as an unintentional result of his latest study, and it seems like everyone wants a piece of them and what they might mean. So, suddenly, the book is no longer simply about friendship, but crazy Government and private contractor entities and other shadowy forces who are after Wylie's dad's work. We meet a whole host of characters, none of whom we can really trust, and things (at least for me) go a little bit downhill from there. </spoiler>
That's not to say that this isn't a good book. It's interesting and almost compulsively readable, even with the bizarre plot. I'd probably have enjoyed it even more if I'd just been mentally prepared for the plot turn, honestly. Wylie is a fairly intriguing and likable character, and I found myself getting rather invested in Jasper. The other characters, as I said, are set up as untrustworthy purely by the nature of the plot, but they are fascinating in their own way. The idea of the outliers is a compelling one, even if the danger behind it seems a little forced. It's also hard not knowing exactly who to trust or how much of the narrative to believe - it's so much it gets a little frustrating at time. Still, it's clear by the end that McCreight has set this up as a series, and I'll certainly be reading the next book. The one is an entertaining, quick read if nothing else.
I received an ARC of this book from Edelweiss (thank you!); it is available for publication on 5/3/2016. You can read a review of this book and many more at my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
This was an odd book. I was expecting a "run into obstacles finding my troubled best friend, maybe learn a lesson along the way" Young Adult tale, but the book takes a turn about halfway through and the tale becomes one of psychological depth, focusing on the story of the "outliers." <spoiler>These "outliers" are those who have a special range of emotional intelligence that allow them to have an uncanny ability to read people, emotions, and situations. It's Wylie's father, a scientist, who has discovered them as an unintentional result of his latest study, and it seems like everyone wants a piece of them and what they might mean. So, suddenly, the book is no longer simply about friendship, but crazy Government and private contractor entities and other shadowy forces who are after Wylie's dad's work. We meet a whole host of characters, none of whom we can really trust, and things (at least for me) go a little bit downhill from there. </spoiler>
That's not to say that this isn't a good book. It's interesting and almost compulsively readable, even with the bizarre plot. I'd probably have enjoyed it even more if I'd just been mentally prepared for the plot turn, honestly. Wylie is a fairly intriguing and likable character, and I found myself getting rather invested in Jasper. The other characters, as I said, are set up as untrustworthy purely by the nature of the plot, but they are fascinating in their own way. The idea of the outliers is a compelling one, even if the danger behind it seems a little forced. It's also hard not knowing exactly who to trust or how much of the narrative to believe - it's so much it gets a little frustrating at time. Still, it's clear by the end that McCreight has set this up as a series, and I'll certainly be reading the next book. The one is an entertaining, quick read if nothing else.
I received an ARC of this book from Edelweiss (thank you!); it is available for publication on 5/3/2016. You can read a review of this book and many more at my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Apartment 255 in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Firstly Id like to thank Netgalley and Momentum Books for giving me the opportunity to read this book.
I really wanted to like this more than I did. The story of the disturbed Ginny playing out her sick fantasies and aiming to ruin her best friends life is a great plot for a great psychological thriller but something with this book was amiss.
I think, for me, the reason this book didnt fulfil my original expectations was purely down to the characters. Ginny was the only interesting character to read about, yet there wasnt much description when it came to her and instead the story focused on the couple whose lives were being destroyed. I found Sarah too annoying to like, even when she wasnt being manipulated and tortured by Ginnys actions. For me, she was too happy and lovey dovey. Yes, she had just got engaged and I expect anyone to be happy after that, but the way she described Tom and their life together was such a picture perfect, cookie cutter life that it made everything seem like she was living out her own fantasy of this perfect life she had. Tom was more interesting as a character than Sarah, but ultimately still a bit of a drip. It just seemed like he couldnt live without his precious Sare Bear and seemed incapable of doing anything but think of her, whether with love or with anger. It may sound like Im being cynical but I found it all too sickly sweet. Thel and Hals story didnt interest me either, it felt like part of a story that didnt need to be there and easily could have been replaced with more about Ginny or at least cut down.
The plot for this was amazing and although it felt a bit slow to begin with, it does become fast paced and exciting for the reader nearer the end, though hearing more from Ginnys side would have been more interesting than always hearing about how angry Sarah felt right at that moment or how confused Tom was that Sarah was being the way she was.
The ending was certainly a twist of events that I hadnt seen coming. The reason for Ginny being so twisted and evil certainly came as a shock for me and the last couple of sentences in the book were chilling.
Overall I did enjoy this book but it wasnt something I was reaching for every night, instead I used it to pass the time while on the train to and from work. I can see this becoming a popular book and Im certain I know people who would love this, but I hate sickly sweet and there was definitely too much of that in this book for me.
I really wanted to like this more than I did. The story of the disturbed Ginny playing out her sick fantasies and aiming to ruin her best friends life is a great plot for a great psychological thriller but something with this book was amiss.
I think, for me, the reason this book didnt fulfil my original expectations was purely down to the characters. Ginny was the only interesting character to read about, yet there wasnt much description when it came to her and instead the story focused on the couple whose lives were being destroyed. I found Sarah too annoying to like, even when she wasnt being manipulated and tortured by Ginnys actions. For me, she was too happy and lovey dovey. Yes, she had just got engaged and I expect anyone to be happy after that, but the way she described Tom and their life together was such a picture perfect, cookie cutter life that it made everything seem like she was living out her own fantasy of this perfect life she had. Tom was more interesting as a character than Sarah, but ultimately still a bit of a drip. It just seemed like he couldnt live without his precious Sare Bear and seemed incapable of doing anything but think of her, whether with love or with anger. It may sound like Im being cynical but I found it all too sickly sweet. Thel and Hals story didnt interest me either, it felt like part of a story that didnt need to be there and easily could have been replaced with more about Ginny or at least cut down.
The plot for this was amazing and although it felt a bit slow to begin with, it does become fast paced and exciting for the reader nearer the end, though hearing more from Ginnys side would have been more interesting than always hearing about how angry Sarah felt right at that moment or how confused Tom was that Sarah was being the way she was.
The ending was certainly a twist of events that I hadnt seen coming. The reason for Ginny being so twisted and evil certainly came as a shock for me and the last couple of sentences in the book were chilling.
Overall I did enjoy this book but it wasnt something I was reaching for every night, instead I used it to pass the time while on the train to and from work. I can see this becoming a popular book and Im certain I know people who would love this, but I hate sickly sweet and there was definitely too much of that in this book for me.