Search
Search results
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Duchess Deal in Books
Jun 6, 2019
^^ Returning from the war, scarred Duke of Ashbury decides he needs an heir, but that would mean a wife and she’d have to look upon his beastly war wounds, which would never do. So when he sets his sights on the vicar’s daughter Emma Gladstone and proposes a marriage of convenience deal, he begins to put some rules into place to protect her (or maybe himself) from seeing his disfigured body.
^^ But Emma is no fool, and insists on some rules of her own. She can see that beneath the scars, bad temper and his awfully stubborn ways, he’s quite simply just a lonely man needing companionship, and no different to her. Surely beauty is only skin deep and there’s much more to him than outward appearances.
^^ Oh, what a lovely story this is. Yes, on the surface this is what I’d call a sweet romance; a poor girl meets rich Duke love story. But deep down, below the surface of the title and cover, I uncovered some hidden gems. It’s a story of two lost souls trying to make the best of what they feel they have left to offer.
^^ The Duke is a great character, and yes, he does have his faults, and I’m not talking his appearance, but can he really be blamed after what he’s been through? The war has left the Duke scarred, physically and mentally. He may be a hero on the battlefield, but with his scars on show he’s found himself to be rather intimidating to others; children scream, dogs howl, honestly, if no one can bear to look at him, how is he ever going to produce an heir?
^^ Then we meet Emma, wise before her years, and not a woman to be messed around. But if that’s so, why would Emma choose to go into a loveless marriage with a man who only wants her for an heir? He’s already made it totally clear they’ll never have to sleep in the same bed ever again after their child is born. What on earth could possibly be in it for her? Well, maybe deep down, Emma’s not so confident after all. Perhaps, this wealthy Duke may be her last chance to have a child, and gain some security into her life. After all, if her father said “No decent man would ever want you!” as he banished her from their house, then maybe there’s some truth to it?
^^ I found myself thinking this is very much a charming Beauty and the Beast story. The way Emma and Ash get to know each other is both realistic and so endearing. This has some cracking dialogue with several laugh out loud moments, which made this such an enjoyable, fast read. I can’t wait to read more like this from Mills and Boon.
^^ Oh and I nearly forgot. It’s got it’s sexy bits in it too, and they are totally fitting and in line with this time period. What did make me smile, (and I thought it was a nice touch) was how, at the beginning of the book, there is a lovely dedication from the author (also once a vicar’s daughter) thanking her dad for being nothing like her character Emma’s father. Tessa Dare also mentions which chapters her father should miss out when reading. Don’t you realise that these pages will be where everyone visits first? ?
Overall: This is a charming Beauty and the Beast story, about love, honesty and mistakingly becoming the Monster of Mayfair! (Hilarious).
^^ But Emma is no fool, and insists on some rules of her own. She can see that beneath the scars, bad temper and his awfully stubborn ways, he’s quite simply just a lonely man needing companionship, and no different to her. Surely beauty is only skin deep and there’s much more to him than outward appearances.
^^ Oh, what a lovely story this is. Yes, on the surface this is what I’d call a sweet romance; a poor girl meets rich Duke love story. But deep down, below the surface of the title and cover, I uncovered some hidden gems. It’s a story of two lost souls trying to make the best of what they feel they have left to offer.
^^ The Duke is a great character, and yes, he does have his faults, and I’m not talking his appearance, but can he really be blamed after what he’s been through? The war has left the Duke scarred, physically and mentally. He may be a hero on the battlefield, but with his scars on show he’s found himself to be rather intimidating to others; children scream, dogs howl, honestly, if no one can bear to look at him, how is he ever going to produce an heir?
^^ Then we meet Emma, wise before her years, and not a woman to be messed around. But if that’s so, why would Emma choose to go into a loveless marriage with a man who only wants her for an heir? He’s already made it totally clear they’ll never have to sleep in the same bed ever again after their child is born. What on earth could possibly be in it for her? Well, maybe deep down, Emma’s not so confident after all. Perhaps, this wealthy Duke may be her last chance to have a child, and gain some security into her life. After all, if her father said “No decent man would ever want you!” as he banished her from their house, then maybe there’s some truth to it?
^^ I found myself thinking this is very much a charming Beauty and the Beast story. The way Emma and Ash get to know each other is both realistic and so endearing. This has some cracking dialogue with several laugh out loud moments, which made this such an enjoyable, fast read. I can’t wait to read more like this from Mills and Boon.
^^ Oh and I nearly forgot. It’s got it’s sexy bits in it too, and they are totally fitting and in line with this time period. What did make me smile, (and I thought it was a nice touch) was how, at the beginning of the book, there is a lovely dedication from the author (also once a vicar’s daughter) thanking her dad for being nothing like her character Emma’s father. Tessa Dare also mentions which chapters her father should miss out when reading. Don’t you realise that these pages will be where everyone visits first? ?
Overall: This is a charming Beauty and the Beast story, about love, honesty and mistakingly becoming the Monster of Mayfair! (Hilarious).
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Insurgent (2015) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
A little soulless
There hasn’t been a better time to be part of the Young Adult revolution. From Stephanie Meyer’s underwhelming Twilight saga to Suzanne Collins’ superb Huger Games trilogy and everything in between, there is something about this genre that audiences love to read and to watch.
Coming a little late to the party is Veronica Roth’s Divergent franchise. After last year’s bland debut, a new director in the shape of Robert Schwentke (Flightplan, Tattoo) takes on the second film in the series, Insurgent, but can it finally bring something to the table?
Insurgent continues the story of a post-apocalyptic America that has been divided into ‘factions’ based on the personality traits of survivors. Being placed in a faction helps you live your life in accordance with the rules of the governing body of the time. However, having traits belonging to all five categories makes you a Divergent – a risk to peace in other words.
This action sequel follows Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) and Four Eaton (Theo James), two Divergents on the run from Kate Winslet’s domineering Jeanie Matthews as they try to find out the truth about who they are and what is really going on behind the scenes.
For the uninitiated, Insurgent is a tiresome process and requires some prior knowledge of the first film to truly understand what is going on. However, in comparison to its dull and overly long predecessor, there is much to enjoy here.
The obliterated city of Chicago is given much more room to breathe and the beautifully choreographed shots of well-known landmarks draped in moss and ferns are a stunning addition and look much more realistic than the computer-generated imagery used for the Capitol in the Hunger Games series.
Moreover, there are some great acting performances scattered throughout, Woodley really gets her teeth stuck into the lead role after her disappointing turn in Divergent and Theo James provides the eye candy in a Liam Hemsworth-esque characterisation.
However, it is in Kate Winslet and newcomer Naomi Watts’ performances that we really see something special.
Despite their lack of screen time, they command each sequence they are a part of and it’s a shame they’re not used more throughout the near 2 hour runtime.
Unfortunately comparisons to other YA adaptations are unavoidable. Put Insurgent up against its main rival The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and the odds simply aren’t in its favour. The sheer star power the latter film commands is enviable and despite Winslet and Watts’ excellent performances, it just isn’t quite enough.
It all feels a little hollow, a bit flat and non-descript as the audience is thrown from one mildly entertaining set piece to another, right up until the obligatory gasps as you realise it’s another year to pick up where that cliff-hanger left things.
In the end, Insurgent improves on its overly convoluted predecessor and is much better than anything the Twilight saga threw at us, but it pales in comparison to the treat of watching ‘The Girl on Fire’ strut her stuff.
Alas, sitting in the middle isn’t quite enough in this highly competitive genre and despite some stunning cinematography and great acting, Insurgent feels a little soulless.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/22/a-little-soulless-insurgent-review/
Coming a little late to the party is Veronica Roth’s Divergent franchise. After last year’s bland debut, a new director in the shape of Robert Schwentke (Flightplan, Tattoo) takes on the second film in the series, Insurgent, but can it finally bring something to the table?
Insurgent continues the story of a post-apocalyptic America that has been divided into ‘factions’ based on the personality traits of survivors. Being placed in a faction helps you live your life in accordance with the rules of the governing body of the time. However, having traits belonging to all five categories makes you a Divergent – a risk to peace in other words.
This action sequel follows Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) and Four Eaton (Theo James), two Divergents on the run from Kate Winslet’s domineering Jeanie Matthews as they try to find out the truth about who they are and what is really going on behind the scenes.
For the uninitiated, Insurgent is a tiresome process and requires some prior knowledge of the first film to truly understand what is going on. However, in comparison to its dull and overly long predecessor, there is much to enjoy here.
The obliterated city of Chicago is given much more room to breathe and the beautifully choreographed shots of well-known landmarks draped in moss and ferns are a stunning addition and look much more realistic than the computer-generated imagery used for the Capitol in the Hunger Games series.
Moreover, there are some great acting performances scattered throughout, Woodley really gets her teeth stuck into the lead role after her disappointing turn in Divergent and Theo James provides the eye candy in a Liam Hemsworth-esque characterisation.
However, it is in Kate Winslet and newcomer Naomi Watts’ performances that we really see something special.
Despite their lack of screen time, they command each sequence they are a part of and it’s a shame they’re not used more throughout the near 2 hour runtime.
Unfortunately comparisons to other YA adaptations are unavoidable. Put Insurgent up against its main rival The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and the odds simply aren’t in its favour. The sheer star power the latter film commands is enviable and despite Winslet and Watts’ excellent performances, it just isn’t quite enough.
It all feels a little hollow, a bit flat and non-descript as the audience is thrown from one mildly entertaining set piece to another, right up until the obligatory gasps as you realise it’s another year to pick up where that cliff-hanger left things.
In the end, Insurgent improves on its overly convoluted predecessor and is much better than anything the Twilight saga threw at us, but it pales in comparison to the treat of watching ‘The Girl on Fire’ strut her stuff.
Alas, sitting in the middle isn’t quite enough in this highly competitive genre and despite some stunning cinematography and great acting, Insurgent feels a little soulless.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/03/22/a-little-soulless-insurgent-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated It (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Make sure you take a pillow
Horror buffs and Stephen King fans everywhere have been waiting for this moment since 2009. It is of course, a modern adaptation of the author’s novel, IT.
Plagued with production problems from the get-go, I see a pattern emerging here, IT has been in the hands of multiple directors with numerous actors in the running to play that iconic clown. I am of course, talking about Pennywise.
Fast forward to 2017, and with Mama Andy Muschietti taking over directorial duties and Bill Skarsgård hopping into that tight-fitting suit we finally have a finished product. But what is it like?Seven young outcasts in Derry, Maine, are about to face their worst nightmare — an ancient, shape-shifting evil that emerges from the sewer every 27 years to prey on the town’s children. Banding together over the course of one horrifying summer, the friends must overcome their own personal fears to battle the murderous, bloodthirsty clown known as Pennywise.
Let’s start off by saying this is much, much better than last month’s The Dark Tower. Stephen King adaptations can go one of two ways and it was feared that IT would follow in the aforementioned film’s footsteps. Thankfully, this isn’t the case.
IT is frankly, an incredible interpretation of King’s iconic novel filled with exceptional performances, stunning cinematography and an emotional heart not normally seen in the genre. It’s unlike anything you will have seen before.
Now, let’s talk about the elephant in the room, Pennywise. Tim Curry played the hell out of that character in the 1990 miniseries and it would be senseless for 27-year-old Bill Skarsgård to follow too closely in his footsteps. At 6ft 3”, Skarsgård is certainly an imposing presence and his Pennywise is much more menacing than Curry’s, but to compare them too much would be unfair to each.
Elsewhere, all the members of the Losers’ Club are brilliant. I have never seen this calibre of acting from such a young group. Jaeden Lieberher as Bill in particular is astonishing. The scenes in which they all work together without the threat of Pennywise are a treat and give the film an uncharacteristically poignant style.
Moreover, the shot choices that Muschietti uses are striking. He rightly stays away from confining the horror to dimly lit corridors and alleyways and whilst this does feature more towards the finale, Derry makes a fine location bathed for the most part in gorgeous sunlight.
Whilst not being completely faithful to King’s novel, Muschietti’s film features all of the iconic scenes that you would expect. The opening sequence from the book in which little Georgie is confronted by Pennywise in the storm drain is shockingly brutal and sets up the tone for the rest of the picture.
This is a truly frightening film, speckled with just enough gore to keep it realistic and whilst it’s true there are one-too-many jump scares, the brilliant source material stops them from feeling too cheap. In the back of your mind, you’re well aware that this is very similar to the book indeed.
Overall, IT is better than anyone could have hoped. It’s scary, deeply emotional, funny and beautifully filmed with an exquisite score by Benjamin Wallfisch. If you’re a horror fan you must watch. If you’re a film fan, you must watch – just take a pillow with you, for protection purposes of course.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/09/09/it-review-make-sure-you-take-a-pillow/
Plagued with production problems from the get-go, I see a pattern emerging here, IT has been in the hands of multiple directors with numerous actors in the running to play that iconic clown. I am of course, talking about Pennywise.
Fast forward to 2017, and with Mama Andy Muschietti taking over directorial duties and Bill Skarsgård hopping into that tight-fitting suit we finally have a finished product. But what is it like?Seven young outcasts in Derry, Maine, are about to face their worst nightmare — an ancient, shape-shifting evil that emerges from the sewer every 27 years to prey on the town’s children. Banding together over the course of one horrifying summer, the friends must overcome their own personal fears to battle the murderous, bloodthirsty clown known as Pennywise.
Let’s start off by saying this is much, much better than last month’s The Dark Tower. Stephen King adaptations can go one of two ways and it was feared that IT would follow in the aforementioned film’s footsteps. Thankfully, this isn’t the case.
IT is frankly, an incredible interpretation of King’s iconic novel filled with exceptional performances, stunning cinematography and an emotional heart not normally seen in the genre. It’s unlike anything you will have seen before.
Now, let’s talk about the elephant in the room, Pennywise. Tim Curry played the hell out of that character in the 1990 miniseries and it would be senseless for 27-year-old Bill Skarsgård to follow too closely in his footsteps. At 6ft 3”, Skarsgård is certainly an imposing presence and his Pennywise is much more menacing than Curry’s, but to compare them too much would be unfair to each.
Elsewhere, all the members of the Losers’ Club are brilliant. I have never seen this calibre of acting from such a young group. Jaeden Lieberher as Bill in particular is astonishing. The scenes in which they all work together without the threat of Pennywise are a treat and give the film an uncharacteristically poignant style.
Moreover, the shot choices that Muschietti uses are striking. He rightly stays away from confining the horror to dimly lit corridors and alleyways and whilst this does feature more towards the finale, Derry makes a fine location bathed for the most part in gorgeous sunlight.
Whilst not being completely faithful to King’s novel, Muschietti’s film features all of the iconic scenes that you would expect. The opening sequence from the book in which little Georgie is confronted by Pennywise in the storm drain is shockingly brutal and sets up the tone for the rest of the picture.
This is a truly frightening film, speckled with just enough gore to keep it realistic and whilst it’s true there are one-too-many jump scares, the brilliant source material stops them from feeling too cheap. In the back of your mind, you’re well aware that this is very similar to the book indeed.
Overall, IT is better than anyone could have hoped. It’s scary, deeply emotional, funny and beautifully filmed with an exquisite score by Benjamin Wallfisch. If you’re a horror fan you must watch. If you’re a film fan, you must watch – just take a pillow with you, for protection purposes of course.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/09/09/it-review-make-sure-you-take-a-pillow/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Transformers Revenge of the Fallen (2009) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
The good, the bad, and the down right ugly return in the sequel to Michael Bay’s 2007 summer blockbuster, Transformers. Revenge of the Fallen picks up 2 years after the events of the first film and really shows why Michael Bay was again the perfect choice to helm this franchise. Speculation about how long the film was going to be has finally been answered. 2 and a half hours for the uninitiated would seem a terrifying prospect as characters are introduced from all corners; but for fans of the bots, it’s a thrill ride from the very start, right up until the end credits role. Shia Le Beouf and Megan Foxx return as Sam Witwicky and love interest Mikeala in a sequel that’s as loud and obnoxious as it is long. As with the first film, the story is a little thin on the ground, but thankfully there is enough here to satisfy even the hardest to please. The Decepticons (the bad guys) are mobilizing once again to take control of Earth, while the Autobots (the good guys) working together with human intelligence try to destroy their feared rivals. It’s based on plastic toy figures, so you can’t expect much more.
Special effects are again outstanding with a finish on them that not even the first movie could hold a candle to, the transformers once more look 100% realistic in their presence, though with a $200m budget, outstanding was the least to be expected. Regrettably, the action sequences sometimes can look messy, with a mash of metal making it hard to distinguish who is attacking who or who has fallen; one heart wrenching scene in particular makes this point even more evident. Acting from all corners is sublime, Le Beouf certainly knows how to do that cocky teenager and Megan Foxx provides a nice bit of lustre to place on the horizon. But, by far the standout is Julie White as Mrs. Witwicky, her performance in the first film was brilliant, but she has exceeded that by a mile in this instalment; utterly hilarious is the only way to describe her acting. Of the robotic kind, Peter Cullen does an excellent job as the voice of Autobot leader Optimus Prime, with the same gravely texture that made him such a hit for the cartoon series in the first place. Hugo Weaving also returns as the voice of arch nemesis Megatron. Bay packs on the slapstick in this sequel, perhaps going a little too far with the humour; after all, it isn’t supposed to be an outright comedy, though some of the funny touches are out-and-out hilarious. The finale is, as with its predecessor a little short and to the point, though many would say it was ‘succinct’, but any longer and the film would have started to drag, Bay obviously learning his lesson from the mess that was Pearl Harbour. Overall then, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is an excellent sequel to what promises to be an exciting future for the franchise. Whilst it may not match its predecessor in terms of story and plot, it is a must watch for all action cravers.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-2009/
Special effects are again outstanding with a finish on them that not even the first movie could hold a candle to, the transformers once more look 100% realistic in their presence, though with a $200m budget, outstanding was the least to be expected. Regrettably, the action sequences sometimes can look messy, with a mash of metal making it hard to distinguish who is attacking who or who has fallen; one heart wrenching scene in particular makes this point even more evident. Acting from all corners is sublime, Le Beouf certainly knows how to do that cocky teenager and Megan Foxx provides a nice bit of lustre to place on the horizon. But, by far the standout is Julie White as Mrs. Witwicky, her performance in the first film was brilliant, but she has exceeded that by a mile in this instalment; utterly hilarious is the only way to describe her acting. Of the robotic kind, Peter Cullen does an excellent job as the voice of Autobot leader Optimus Prime, with the same gravely texture that made him such a hit for the cartoon series in the first place. Hugo Weaving also returns as the voice of arch nemesis Megatron. Bay packs on the slapstick in this sequel, perhaps going a little too far with the humour; after all, it isn’t supposed to be an outright comedy, though some of the funny touches are out-and-out hilarious. The finale is, as with its predecessor a little short and to the point, though many would say it was ‘succinct’, but any longer and the film would have started to drag, Bay obviously learning his lesson from the mess that was Pearl Harbour. Overall then, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is an excellent sequel to what promises to be an exciting future for the franchise. Whilst it may not match its predecessor in terms of story and plot, it is a must watch for all action cravers.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2010/10/18/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-2009/
Kyera (8 KP) rated A Study in Charlotte (Charlotte Holmes, #1) in Books
Jan 31, 2018
If you’re a fan of re-tellings then you will love A Study in Charlotte, a contemporary novel that follows the lives of a new generation of Sherlock and Holmes. Jamie Watson’s life is turned upside down when he is sent to a boarding school in Connecticut that just so happens to be close to his father’s house. The same man that got remarried and Jamie hasn’t spoken to in years. Despite his protests Jamie finds himself at this new school and longing for London. The one bright spot? Charlotte Holmes, whose accent makes him feel like home and won’t give him the time of day. As the only Holmes around his age, Jamie has been dreaming about Charlotte since he learned her name. He wonders what she looks like and imagines blonde hair, creating fantastic stories in his head of their crime solving adventure and friendship reminiscent of the original Sherlock and Holmes. His dreams aren’t exactly grounded in reality and it turns out that she has dark hair, but he’s not fazed. He manages to become friendly, if not friends with Holmes.
Charlotte and Jamie are wonderful, contemporary versions of their counterparts with familiar attributes while still being their own unique characters. Charlotte has a problem with narcotics, plays the violin and can usually be found with her beakers and test tubes (hopefully not blowing anything up). Jamie wants to be a writer, is a decent rugby player (despite what his scholarship might lead you to believe) and is braver than he thinks. Their best-friendship is appealing and realistic, despite Charlotte’s unique outlook on how to treat other human beings. You fall in love with the characters, whether you relate to Charlotte, Jamie, a little of both, or maybe one of the other supporting characters – you’ll find yourself enjoying this novel.
Each character even has a well thought out backstory that we learn more about throughout the course of the novel. What events and mistakes lead to Charlotte being sent to a boarding school in Connecticut when she should be in England? If a Moriarty and narcotics are involved, then you know it’s going to be intense – especially when the famous crime family isn’t particularly forgiving. Jamie’s story is less thrilling but no less important to his character. Not everyone is as they appear, some have secrets, some don’t always make the best choices, but it all drives the story forward. The book is full of poison, explosions, spying, chases and other staples of great mysteries.
The book has a lot of nods to classic Sherlock and Watson adventures and sometimes outright mentions them. As a huge Sherlock fan, from the classic novels of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to the modern BBC creation – this book was perfection. I loved how it felt like a new story featuring some of my favourite characters and it kept you guessing until the end. The action and plot were well paced, allowing the story to unfold like a mystery should. Don’t worry, Moriarty’s were included in the writing of this story.
Highly recommended to young adult/teen fans of mystery, contemporary, or the classic Sherlock Holmes novels. I fell in love with this series and can’t wait to see where it goes from here.
Charlotte and Jamie are wonderful, contemporary versions of their counterparts with familiar attributes while still being their own unique characters. Charlotte has a problem with narcotics, plays the violin and can usually be found with her beakers and test tubes (hopefully not blowing anything up). Jamie wants to be a writer, is a decent rugby player (despite what his scholarship might lead you to believe) and is braver than he thinks. Their best-friendship is appealing and realistic, despite Charlotte’s unique outlook on how to treat other human beings. You fall in love with the characters, whether you relate to Charlotte, Jamie, a little of both, or maybe one of the other supporting characters – you’ll find yourself enjoying this novel.
Each character even has a well thought out backstory that we learn more about throughout the course of the novel. What events and mistakes lead to Charlotte being sent to a boarding school in Connecticut when she should be in England? If a Moriarty and narcotics are involved, then you know it’s going to be intense – especially when the famous crime family isn’t particularly forgiving. Jamie’s story is less thrilling but no less important to his character. Not everyone is as they appear, some have secrets, some don’t always make the best choices, but it all drives the story forward. The book is full of poison, explosions, spying, chases and other staples of great mysteries.
The book has a lot of nods to classic Sherlock and Watson adventures and sometimes outright mentions them. As a huge Sherlock fan, from the classic novels of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to the modern BBC creation – this book was perfection. I loved how it felt like a new story featuring some of my favourite characters and it kept you guessing until the end. The action and plot were well paced, allowing the story to unfold like a mystery should. Don’t worry, Moriarty’s were included in the writing of this story.
Highly recommended to young adult/teen fans of mystery, contemporary, or the classic Sherlock Holmes novels. I fell in love with this series and can’t wait to see where it goes from here.
If you thought a modern retelling of [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926]--set mainly in present day Cincinnati--didn't exactly sound like a page-turner, no one could exactly blame you. But, nonetheless, you'd be quite wrong. Sittenfeld's novel imagines the Bennet family in our modern times; Mr. and Mrs. Bennet live in a rambling Tudor home in Cincinnati: broke and somewhat clueless as their house crumbles around them. Mrs. Bennet spends her time clucking around her five unmarried daughters: Jane, Liz, Mary, Kitty, and Lydia. The book revolves mainly around the perspective of Liz, a magazine writer in her upper thirties living in New York City. She and Jane, also in NYC, return home to their parents and younger sisters after Mr. Bennet has a heart attack, only to find the house and the family in a bit of a shambles.
The book is amazing. It's been a while since I read [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926], but even I can tell you that the novel does an excellent job of following the original plot without being annoying or cloying. It's [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926] with lesbians and hate sex! The book comes across as familiar yet new, allowing you to ache, laugh, and rage at what feels like a group of old friends.
Mr. Bennet is a trip, even while having a heartbreaking sadness and sweetness at his core (though some of his zingers are priceless). The younger sisters are as (nearly) vapid as to be expected--truly awful at times--for much of the book. But seriously, Lydia and Kitty loving CrossFit? It's awesome. And Liz is wonderful; you will adore this surprisingly realistic and modern Liz, with all of her foibles and issues: a truly modern Liz struggling mightily to keep her family together and afloat.
As for Darcy, well he's as Darcy as ever. Somehow Sittenfeld has managed to truly capture the essence of Austen's Darcy and Elizabeth in her new characters. I don't know how, but it's funny and lovely all at the same time. (Side note: As a woman in her early thirties, will I ever be able to read about Darcy without picturing Colin Firth? I now have a desperate need to watch the BBC/A&E mini-series again.)
Overall, I found this book funny, touching, and compulsively readable. The characters are truly characters: they are fully formed within moments of picking up the book. The city of Cincinnati makes a great guest appearance, with the city playing a prominent role in many scenes (hi Skyline Chili!). If you loved the original, you'll find this updated version enjoyable and imaginative, with a surprising depth behind it. If you've never read Austen's work (and you should), you will still discover a funny, sweet yet weighty story of a family trying to make it in this day and age. Highly recommended (4.5 stars).
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley (thank you!); it is available for U.S. publication on 4/19/16. You can check out a review of this novel and many others on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
The book is amazing. It's been a while since I read [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926], but even I can tell you that the novel does an excellent job of following the original plot without being annoying or cloying. It's [b:Pride and Prejudice|1885|Pride and Prejudice|Jane Austen|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320399351s/1885.jpg|3060926] with lesbians and hate sex! The book comes across as familiar yet new, allowing you to ache, laugh, and rage at what feels like a group of old friends.
Mr. Bennet is a trip, even while having a heartbreaking sadness and sweetness at his core (though some of his zingers are priceless). The younger sisters are as (nearly) vapid as to be expected--truly awful at times--for much of the book. But seriously, Lydia and Kitty loving CrossFit? It's awesome. And Liz is wonderful; you will adore this surprisingly realistic and modern Liz, with all of her foibles and issues: a truly modern Liz struggling mightily to keep her family together and afloat.
As for Darcy, well he's as Darcy as ever. Somehow Sittenfeld has managed to truly capture the essence of Austen's Darcy and Elizabeth in her new characters. I don't know how, but it's funny and lovely all at the same time. (Side note: As a woman in her early thirties, will I ever be able to read about Darcy without picturing Colin Firth? I now have a desperate need to watch the BBC/A&E mini-series again.)
Overall, I found this book funny, touching, and compulsively readable. The characters are truly characters: they are fully formed within moments of picking up the book. The city of Cincinnati makes a great guest appearance, with the city playing a prominent role in many scenes (hi Skyline Chili!). If you loved the original, you'll find this updated version enjoyable and imaginative, with a surprising depth behind it. If you've never read Austen's work (and you should), you will still discover a funny, sweet yet weighty story of a family trying to make it in this day and age. Highly recommended (4.5 stars).
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley (thank you!); it is available for U.S. publication on 4/19/16. You can check out a review of this novel and many others on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am a hardcore Shakespeare fan. One of my bosses at work knows this and let me borrow her copy of this book thinking that it would interest me. Unfortunately, it fell a little flat.
I do not agree with the main argument of this biography: that William Shakespeare was, in fact, only a pen name for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. No. I do not agree with this claim, like so many other Shakespeare scholars and lovers because the "facts" put forth are just very thinly stretched ideas and concepts that cannot be proven.
This book, instead of pushing me to think about how this fact could even possibly be true, is more about the life of Edward de Vere and how some of the circumstances in his life would be able to loosely connect to the plays Shakespeare had written. In tying in the plays, Anderson thinks he is making a stronger claim for his argument, but is honestly just trying to connect things that are unalike to "prove" what he is thinking. As an English major, I don't really like that way of thinking much.
Most of what he was trying to argue could have been left out and, instead, just have the appendices left in there. In the approximately sixty pages of the four appendices, he stated what over three hundred pages could not. No, I do not agree with the argument he is making, but it seems like it is stronger and more coherent in the appendix.
I want to point out a specific quotation from the Appendix A on page 381 to make a point about this book. It states: The thesis of this book, the "Oxfordian" proposition that Edward de Vere was Shake-speare, is a theory built on circumstantial evidence. There is no single "smoking gun" document that leads one inexorably to the conclusion that de Vere wrote Hamlet, King Lear, the Sonnets, etc." I understand that it is difficult to try to prove a theory that many argue against (myself included), but basing your argument solely on circumstantial evidence is not the way to go. It makes the argument, at least to me, seem less realistic and, in all honesty, difficult to agree with. If you cannot prove someone is guilty solely based on circumstantial evidence, you should not try to prove a complex argument that a famous playwright was not a real person, but, in fact, a pseudonym for another historical figure around the same time.
The "facts" that de Vere's life has similar qualities to the plays written by Shakespeare leading to the thought that de Vere, himself, is Shakespeare is a stretch, and not a convincing one at that.
Overall, I did not enjoy this book and I did not find it convincing at all. It felt more like a history lesson about the background of Edward de Vere rather than any kind of argument towards the idea that he could have been Shakespeare.
In my heart of hearts, I will always believe that William Shakespeare was, in fact, a real man by the name of William Shakespeare, not some made up name for a man who wanted to keep his private life separate from the public.
I do not agree with the main argument of this biography: that William Shakespeare was, in fact, only a pen name for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. No. I do not agree with this claim, like so many other Shakespeare scholars and lovers because the "facts" put forth are just very thinly stretched ideas and concepts that cannot be proven.
This book, instead of pushing me to think about how this fact could even possibly be true, is more about the life of Edward de Vere and how some of the circumstances in his life would be able to loosely connect to the plays Shakespeare had written. In tying in the plays, Anderson thinks he is making a stronger claim for his argument, but is honestly just trying to connect things that are unalike to "prove" what he is thinking. As an English major, I don't really like that way of thinking much.
Most of what he was trying to argue could have been left out and, instead, just have the appendices left in there. In the approximately sixty pages of the four appendices, he stated what over three hundred pages could not. No, I do not agree with the argument he is making, but it seems like it is stronger and more coherent in the appendix.
I want to point out a specific quotation from the Appendix A on page 381 to make a point about this book. It states: The thesis of this book, the "Oxfordian" proposition that Edward de Vere was Shake-speare, is a theory built on circumstantial evidence. There is no single "smoking gun" document that leads one inexorably to the conclusion that de Vere wrote Hamlet, King Lear, the Sonnets, etc." I understand that it is difficult to try to prove a theory that many argue against (myself included), but basing your argument solely on circumstantial evidence is not the way to go. It makes the argument, at least to me, seem less realistic and, in all honesty, difficult to agree with. If you cannot prove someone is guilty solely based on circumstantial evidence, you should not try to prove a complex argument that a famous playwright was not a real person, but, in fact, a pseudonym for another historical figure around the same time.
The "facts" that de Vere's life has similar qualities to the plays written by Shakespeare leading to the thought that de Vere, himself, is Shakespeare is a stretch, and not a convincing one at that.
Overall, I did not enjoy this book and I did not find it convincing at all. It felt more like a history lesson about the background of Edward de Vere rather than any kind of argument towards the idea that he could have been Shakespeare.
In my heart of hearts, I will always believe that William Shakespeare was, in fact, a real man by the name of William Shakespeare, not some made up name for a man who wanted to keep his private life separate from the public.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated A Missing, Presumed in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Also read my review here: http://bookbum.weebly.com/book-reviews/missing-presumed-by-susie-steiner
AVAILABLE NOW IN THE UK!
There aren’t really any more avenues for detective novel writers to go down, each story follows a very similar storyline to the last but still we pick them up. Why? Because some are shite and others are amazing but it’s so hard to tell by just reading the synopsis. This one? Well it’s certainly similar to other novels <i>but</i> it’s refreshingly lighthearted, still managing to tackle dark subjects but in an easy-to-read way.
My one problem with the book that I noticed straight away was <b>too many narrators.</b> Luckily, as the novel went on, it got easier to remember who was who so it wasn’t as annoying as in the beginning but it was a little confusing at the start.
Other than my hatred for having to focus so much on whose chapter it was, I actually liked all of the characters in this book! It was so nice to have a police based book where none of them were arseholes and they all managed to get along, like most colleagues do in the real world! Even the SIO was normal! Though, I will admit, I found reading about Miriam a bit dull, I could have done without most of her stuff.
Manon was such a realistic person, she really reminds me of an actual human being rather than that fuddy duddy police machine type robot you find in so many of the these types of books. I loved that she had a life outside of work that we got to see, that wasn’t only depressing. Granted it was a little sad that she was so lonely but her internet dates were so funny and that made everything a lot nicer to read. Also, her whole spiel on hobbies was hilarious!
<b><i>”I’ve decided to get hobbied up.”
“And how is that going?” asks Davy, with hopefulness that would imply he’d never met Manon.
“Awful. I hate it. I mean, what’s the point of doing something just for the sake of it, when it isn’t your job?”</b></i>
Davy was by far my favourite character in the book. It was so refreshing to find an officer who thoroughly enjoyed their job and time with their colleagues. He was a total sweetheart, I loved him! I also loved the mystery that was Kim, she was a funny ol’ character to have as an extra, just brightening up a scene every now and then with her strangeness.
I felt the plot for this novel was more of a character building plot, rather than a fast paced mystery thriller, but that was something I didn’t mind when it came to this book because all of the characters were worth getting to know.
The resolution of the novel kind of disappointed me. It wasn’t how I would have pictured the missing person's case to have ended up, but I was happy with how the ending chapters gave us an insight into how everyone on the force was doing and how their personal lives ended up.
I’m glad to hear that Manon will be featured in other novels by the author because she was a great character and I will definitely be reading more novels with her in!
Thank you to Netgalley and HarperCollins UK, HarperFiction for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
AVAILABLE NOW IN THE UK!
There aren’t really any more avenues for detective novel writers to go down, each story follows a very similar storyline to the last but still we pick them up. Why? Because some are shite and others are amazing but it’s so hard to tell by just reading the synopsis. This one? Well it’s certainly similar to other novels <i>but</i> it’s refreshingly lighthearted, still managing to tackle dark subjects but in an easy-to-read way.
My one problem with the book that I noticed straight away was <b>too many narrators.</b> Luckily, as the novel went on, it got easier to remember who was who so it wasn’t as annoying as in the beginning but it was a little confusing at the start.
Other than my hatred for having to focus so much on whose chapter it was, I actually liked all of the characters in this book! It was so nice to have a police based book where none of them were arseholes and they all managed to get along, like most colleagues do in the real world! Even the SIO was normal! Though, I will admit, I found reading about Miriam a bit dull, I could have done without most of her stuff.
Manon was such a realistic person, she really reminds me of an actual human being rather than that fuddy duddy police machine type robot you find in so many of the these types of books. I loved that she had a life outside of work that we got to see, that wasn’t only depressing. Granted it was a little sad that she was so lonely but her internet dates were so funny and that made everything a lot nicer to read. Also, her whole spiel on hobbies was hilarious!
<b><i>”I’ve decided to get hobbied up.”
“And how is that going?” asks Davy, with hopefulness that would imply he’d never met Manon.
“Awful. I hate it. I mean, what’s the point of doing something just for the sake of it, when it isn’t your job?”</b></i>
Davy was by far my favourite character in the book. It was so refreshing to find an officer who thoroughly enjoyed their job and time with their colleagues. He was a total sweetheart, I loved him! I also loved the mystery that was Kim, she was a funny ol’ character to have as an extra, just brightening up a scene every now and then with her strangeness.
I felt the plot for this novel was more of a character building plot, rather than a fast paced mystery thriller, but that was something I didn’t mind when it came to this book because all of the characters were worth getting to know.
The resolution of the novel kind of disappointed me. It wasn’t how I would have pictured the missing person's case to have ended up, but I was happy with how the ending chapters gave us an insight into how everyone on the force was doing and how their personal lives ended up.
I’m glad to hear that Manon will be featured in other novels by the author because she was a great character and I will definitely be reading more novels with her in!
Thank you to Netgalley and HarperCollins UK, HarperFiction for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Follow You in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Initially, I really hated the title of this book, it sounds super cheesy and weird, but after finding out it relates to the Twitter Killer plot, I actually thought it was quite cool. The plotline here is that there was Twitter thread called '#BeMyKiller' where you could advertise yourself up to be killed (in a pranky way) but then a few people who responded to this thread were murdered. I thought this was a really unique motivation for the crimes in this and so my hatred for the title dissipated.
This is a fast paced book, with never a dull moment! If you're one of those people who pushes themselves through "just one more chapter", this book is going to stop you from sleeping... There are 130 chapters in this book, with some of them being just a page long!
I liked the plot for this, that they were making a film about the murders, that then turned into more murders. The setting was in the dark and dreary murder place of Meredith, "Fun Central" and because it was an old kids play area, with ball bits and go-kart tracks, it had an eerie feel to it that worked well alongside the gruesome murders. And yes, they were gruesome murders.
Writing was well done. It's not a challenging book to read, there's no amazing descriptive passages or hard-hitting themes, it's just an easy thriller read. One problem I did have with the writing is something so stupid and very specific that it almost seems pointless in saying it, but it got on my nerves enough times that I have to mention it. "So why did you use the #BeMyKiller hashtag?" - how do you read that sentence? I read it as "hashtag Be My Killer hashtag"... yes that's all that's annoyed me, the double use of the hashtag... don't use a # if you're then going to write out hashtag!!!
Our main character in this novel is Hazel, and while she's creating this film to get justice for Meredith's killer, I didn't particularly like her. The blurb makes it sound like Hazel is doing her documentary to get justice for Meredith, but to me, it felt like she was making the film to save her company from going under. She was too deceptive with all the characters about her reasoning behind creating this new film, that her passion to catch the killer felt fake. As for Meredith being a "childhood friend", I'd say that wasn't very realistic, the book makes it feel like they were more acquaintances than anything, and that Hazel just sort of pitied Meredith. It's never good when you don't like the main character, but I was reasonably happy still going along with this novel. Hazel was dislikable but she was tolerable.
I had my suspicions of who the killer might be, which turned out to be wrong, but I think I would have preferred my scenario to play out because the real reveal was pretty dramatic and out there. Although the last 40% of the book was super tense and horror-movie-like it got a little OTT in my opinion.
Overall this is a great thriller if you're looking for a book with non-stop action, but it's not particularly clever and it's very dark, so if you're not into that kinda thing, you won't enjoy this one. It's clear that Parker has a talent for writing and I will definitely look out for more books of his, but this, for me, was a very mediocre thriller novel.
This is a fast paced book, with never a dull moment! If you're one of those people who pushes themselves through "just one more chapter", this book is going to stop you from sleeping... There are 130 chapters in this book, with some of them being just a page long!
I liked the plot for this, that they were making a film about the murders, that then turned into more murders. The setting was in the dark and dreary murder place of Meredith, "Fun Central" and because it was an old kids play area, with ball bits and go-kart tracks, it had an eerie feel to it that worked well alongside the gruesome murders. And yes, they were gruesome murders.
Writing was well done. It's not a challenging book to read, there's no amazing descriptive passages or hard-hitting themes, it's just an easy thriller read. One problem I did have with the writing is something so stupid and very specific that it almost seems pointless in saying it, but it got on my nerves enough times that I have to mention it. "So why did you use the #BeMyKiller hashtag?" - how do you read that sentence? I read it as "hashtag Be My Killer hashtag"... yes that's all that's annoyed me, the double use of the hashtag... don't use a # if you're then going to write out hashtag!!!
Our main character in this novel is Hazel, and while she's creating this film to get justice for Meredith's killer, I didn't particularly like her. The blurb makes it sound like Hazel is doing her documentary to get justice for Meredith, but to me, it felt like she was making the film to save her company from going under. She was too deceptive with all the characters about her reasoning behind creating this new film, that her passion to catch the killer felt fake. As for Meredith being a "childhood friend", I'd say that wasn't very realistic, the book makes it feel like they were more acquaintances than anything, and that Hazel just sort of pitied Meredith. It's never good when you don't like the main character, but I was reasonably happy still going along with this novel. Hazel was dislikable but she was tolerable.
I had my suspicions of who the killer might be, which turned out to be wrong, but I think I would have preferred my scenario to play out because the real reveal was pretty dramatic and out there. Although the last 40% of the book was super tense and horror-movie-like it got a little OTT in my opinion.
Overall this is a great thriller if you're looking for a book with non-stop action, but it's not particularly clever and it's very dark, so if you're not into that kinda thing, you won't enjoy this one. It's clear that Parker has a talent for writing and I will definitely look out for more books of his, but this, for me, was a very mediocre thriller novel.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Thirteen Reasons Why in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a> at the end of November).
I came across this book on Amazon when I was adding books to my wishlist, and I thought it sounded interesting. I also had quite a few credits on Audible to use, so I thought I'd use one to purchase this book. I wasn't disappointed.
The title had me intrigued. It made me want to read the blurb.
I'm not really a big fan of the cover if I'm honest although I don't know what I'd like to see on the cover. Maybe I'd put Clay on the cover as well. I'm not really sure.
I enjoyed the world building. I find it hard to believe that no one would follow the instructions left on the tapes that Hannah made, but I suppose it could happen. The world building fits with what high school was like, at least when I was a teenager.
I found the pacing to be done well. I couldn't wait to find out what was going to happen on the next tape. There were only a few times where the pacing slowed a bit, but it didn't stay slow for very long.
The plot is an interesting one. Hannah make a cassette tape for each of the thirteen people that she felt contributed to her committing suicide. Clay is trying to think of all the times he was around Hannah and wondering why he'd be on the tapes. It was interesting to find out the way certain people contributed to Hannah's depression. I also think the plot sends a great message about how we shouldn't judge anyone because we don't know what that person has gone through or is going through.
I think the characters were written fairly well. At first, I felt a bad for Hannah. However, as time went on, I felt that Hannah became too selfish, not because of her suicide, but just by what she said on the tapes. Clay came across as a nice guy (and Hannah even said he was), but I just would've liked to know more about him.
The dialogue worked for a young adult book. The characters actually sounded their age and not like an adult trying to write YA characters. The dialogue flows freely and smoothly as well. Being that this is a book about a girl's suicide, the dialogue does mention that as well as rape and another sexual situation. There is a few swear words, but the swearing is only mild.
Usually, the narrator's of audiobooks tend to annoy me, but Debra Wiseman and Joel Johnstone did an excellent job. Debra Wiseman really brings the character of Hannah alive, and Joel Johnstone does the same for Clay. I think they both portrayed emotions really well. However, I had imagined Clay to sound a bit different. Johnstone's voice sounded just a tad bit too old for Clay's age in my opinion. Other then that, Wiseman and Johnstone were superb!
Overall, Thirteen Reasons Why is a very different but interesting book. I felt that even though it deals with suicide, it does send out a positive message.
Due to the major theme and some sexual scenes, I'd recommend this book to those aged 16+ who want to read something realistic.
I came across this book on Amazon when I was adding books to my wishlist, and I thought it sounded interesting. I also had quite a few credits on Audible to use, so I thought I'd use one to purchase this book. I wasn't disappointed.
The title had me intrigued. It made me want to read the blurb.
I'm not really a big fan of the cover if I'm honest although I don't know what I'd like to see on the cover. Maybe I'd put Clay on the cover as well. I'm not really sure.
I enjoyed the world building. I find it hard to believe that no one would follow the instructions left on the tapes that Hannah made, but I suppose it could happen. The world building fits with what high school was like, at least when I was a teenager.
I found the pacing to be done well. I couldn't wait to find out what was going to happen on the next tape. There were only a few times where the pacing slowed a bit, but it didn't stay slow for very long.
The plot is an interesting one. Hannah make a cassette tape for each of the thirteen people that she felt contributed to her committing suicide. Clay is trying to think of all the times he was around Hannah and wondering why he'd be on the tapes. It was interesting to find out the way certain people contributed to Hannah's depression. I also think the plot sends a great message about how we shouldn't judge anyone because we don't know what that person has gone through or is going through.
I think the characters were written fairly well. At first, I felt a bad for Hannah. However, as time went on, I felt that Hannah became too selfish, not because of her suicide, but just by what she said on the tapes. Clay came across as a nice guy (and Hannah even said he was), but I just would've liked to know more about him.
The dialogue worked for a young adult book. The characters actually sounded their age and not like an adult trying to write YA characters. The dialogue flows freely and smoothly as well. Being that this is a book about a girl's suicide, the dialogue does mention that as well as rape and another sexual situation. There is a few swear words, but the swearing is only mild.
Usually, the narrator's of audiobooks tend to annoy me, but Debra Wiseman and Joel Johnstone did an excellent job. Debra Wiseman really brings the character of Hannah alive, and Joel Johnstone does the same for Clay. I think they both portrayed emotions really well. However, I had imagined Clay to sound a bit different. Johnstone's voice sounded just a tad bit too old for Clay's age in my opinion. Other then that, Wiseman and Johnstone were superb!
Overall, Thirteen Reasons Why is a very different but interesting book. I felt that even though it deals with suicide, it does send out a positive message.
Due to the major theme and some sexual scenes, I'd recommend this book to those aged 16+ who want to read something realistic.