Search
Search results
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Green Darkness in Books
May 16, 2018
Having picked <i>Green Darkness</i> up from the local library bookstore sale for only a quarter, I truly had no idea what I was getting myself into. Historical fiction, in any form, is not a genre that I've spent much time with, and coupling that with paranormal romance? Well, we can safely say that I was in for a ride.
<i>Green Darkness</i> shares the harrowing tale of forbidden love in mid-1500s England between an unfortunate peasant girl and a Benedictine monk, betwixt the reigns of King Edward VI, Queen Mary I, and Queen Elizabeth - a time when Catholicism and Protestantism (depending on the ruler) were met with persecution. It doesn't begin in that era, however; rather, the story starts in the 1960s, when Celia and her newly wedded husband, Richard Marsdon, arrive at his family's ancestral estate in Sussex. A baffling illness befalls the Marsdons, leaving the unorthodox physician, Doctor Akananda, to unravel the mysterious past that haunts the pair from hundreds of years before.
The twisting tale that unravels of that love affair is only a small part of what I enjoyed about this book, as romance is not typically my cup of tea. What truly enticed me was [a:Anya Seton|18930|Anya Seton|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1224813438p2/18930.jpg]'s faithfulness not only to history, but to location, legend, and use of historical figures. Cowdray House and Ightham Mote are real places, and an unfounded rumor regarding the Mote suggests that a female skeleton was found within its walls - which Seton used as a basis for her story. Through Seton, I discovered an unknown love for Tudor England, and undoubtedly I will read more books set in that time period.
Despite my praise for the book, I was unable to give it a five star rating because of its conclusion: it was as if Seton ran out of fuel. The idea of reincarnation takes a more ridiculous turn when Doctor Akananda hints at more pasts that conveniently interlock the same people. As if that were not enough of an affront, the resolution itself fell flat. With the Marsdon family tragedy conveniently wrapped up, Celia and Stephen seem aloof and their interaction felt a bit too forced. It is for this reason that I gave the book four stars.
<i>Green Darkness</i> shares the harrowing tale of forbidden love in mid-1500s England between an unfortunate peasant girl and a Benedictine monk, betwixt the reigns of King Edward VI, Queen Mary I, and Queen Elizabeth - a time when Catholicism and Protestantism (depending on the ruler) were met with persecution. It doesn't begin in that era, however; rather, the story starts in the 1960s, when Celia and her newly wedded husband, Richard Marsdon, arrive at his family's ancestral estate in Sussex. A baffling illness befalls the Marsdons, leaving the unorthodox physician, Doctor Akananda, to unravel the mysterious past that haunts the pair from hundreds of years before.
The twisting tale that unravels of that love affair is only a small part of what I enjoyed about this book, as romance is not typically my cup of tea. What truly enticed me was [a:Anya Seton|18930|Anya Seton|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1224813438p2/18930.jpg]'s faithfulness not only to history, but to location, legend, and use of historical figures. Cowdray House and Ightham Mote are real places, and an unfounded rumor regarding the Mote suggests that a female skeleton was found within its walls - which Seton used as a basis for her story. Through Seton, I discovered an unknown love for Tudor England, and undoubtedly I will read more books set in that time period.
Despite my praise for the book, I was unable to give it a five star rating because of its conclusion: it was as if Seton ran out of fuel. The idea of reincarnation takes a more ridiculous turn when Doctor Akananda hints at more pasts that conveniently interlock the same people. As if that were not enough of an affront, the resolution itself fell flat. With the Marsdon family tragedy conveniently wrapped up, Celia and Stephen seem aloof and their interaction felt a bit too forced. It is for this reason that I gave the book four stars.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Eternal Code (2019) in Movies
Sep 13, 2019
Characters – Corey is a homeless suicidal war veteran, he keeps to himself and when he gets given money, he spends the money on helping the fellow homeless, being friendly with lonely older men in the park and helping somebody in danger. He will get a chance to use his skills once again to help a teenage girl who is being hunted down by criminals, his skills will help make him deadly to anyone who crosses his path. Oliver is the leader of the project, he wants to continue using it for his own good, which means he will go to the extremes to make sure it gets done. Charlie is one of the criminals that has taken the family members, she along with her team are solely in this for the money. Mark is the husband of Bridget, he tries to advice, even though he will only support her decision. Bridget is the woman that has invented a revolutionary idea, which she doesn’t want used for the wrong thing, her pulling the plug has set about the events including her kidnapping.
Performances – This is a movie that does try to use the biggest names to sale the movie, Scout Taylor-Compton being the biggest name in the film, even though she is mostly just a criminal thug, she doesn’t give us a bad performance, just she isn’t really a main character. Damien Chinappi would be one of the leads in the film as the he does bring us a performance that does fit the action side of the film, where we do feel sympathy for his character. Richard Tyson will always make for a great villain and this is no different. When we look at the rest of the cast, we see solid performances across the board.
Story – The story here follows the events of a kidnapping which takes a turn, when a war veteran looks to help the helpless, while a corrupt businessman looks to complete a project which will change everything as we know it in the world. When it comes to the idea of the kidnapping side of the story, we do get a nice spin on how everything unfolds, making it truly unpredictable with what will happen next. While that is a good thing, it can mean we do meet a couple of too many characters, which doesn’t let other get flushed out enough. We are left with seeing just how dealing with inventions will see people looking for greed, while seeing a war veteran getting another shot to prove himself in combat is nice to see.
Action – The action is restricted, but it does show how the conflicts are meant to be edgy and more in the shadows which is better to watch for the tone.
Settings – The film is set in and around one city which shows how the minds in it would operate, we see how the project would be secretly locked away from the world and see how the criminals will act in the shadows of abandoned locations.
Scene of the Movie – Corey military trained scenes.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does feel like we have a few too many characters at time.
Final Thoughts – This is an action thriller that does have a lot of direction you wouldn’t normally see, it does keep us guessing despite having a couple of characters we don’t need to have.
Overall: Action film that goes down different paves.
Performances – This is a movie that does try to use the biggest names to sale the movie, Scout Taylor-Compton being the biggest name in the film, even though she is mostly just a criminal thug, she doesn’t give us a bad performance, just she isn’t really a main character. Damien Chinappi would be one of the leads in the film as the he does bring us a performance that does fit the action side of the film, where we do feel sympathy for his character. Richard Tyson will always make for a great villain and this is no different. When we look at the rest of the cast, we see solid performances across the board.
Story – The story here follows the events of a kidnapping which takes a turn, when a war veteran looks to help the helpless, while a corrupt businessman looks to complete a project which will change everything as we know it in the world. When it comes to the idea of the kidnapping side of the story, we do get a nice spin on how everything unfolds, making it truly unpredictable with what will happen next. While that is a good thing, it can mean we do meet a couple of too many characters, which doesn’t let other get flushed out enough. We are left with seeing just how dealing with inventions will see people looking for greed, while seeing a war veteran getting another shot to prove himself in combat is nice to see.
Action – The action is restricted, but it does show how the conflicts are meant to be edgy and more in the shadows which is better to watch for the tone.
Settings – The film is set in and around one city which shows how the minds in it would operate, we see how the project would be secretly locked away from the world and see how the criminals will act in the shadows of abandoned locations.
Scene of the Movie – Corey military trained scenes.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It does feel like we have a few too many characters at time.
Final Thoughts – This is an action thriller that does have a lot of direction you wouldn’t normally see, it does keep us guessing despite having a couple of characters we don’t need to have.
Overall: Action film that goes down different paves.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Breaking In (2018) (2018) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
Story: Breaking In starts when Shaun Russell (Union) takes her children Jasmine (Alexus) and Glover (Carr) to her father’s estate after his death, the weekend is meant to be to prepare the house for sale. The weekend takes a dark twist when four thieves Eddie (Burke), Duncan (Cabral), Sam (Meaden) and Peter (Furze) have broken in, searching for a secret safe.
With Shaun locked out and her children being held captive by the thieves, she will do anything to save her children, not caring what the men want, this does become a battle of a mother that will do anything versus thieves that won’t stop for anything.
Thoughts on Breaking In
Characters – Shaun is a mother of two children that is tidying up the affairs of her late father, she thinks her weekend will just be tidying up his house, but she soon shows that she has a few skills picked up from her father, she will play a cat-n-mouse game with a group of thieves that are holding her children hostage, Shaun will prove herself as somebody smarter than the thieves, showing a mother’s love will overcome any plan. Eddie is the leader of the thieves, he remains calm and in control, even if his men can get out of hand, he only wants the money, getting pushed into difficult decisions. Duncan is the loose cannon of the thieves, he doesn’t want to leave any witnesses to the crime they are committing. Jasmine is the eldest daughter that needs to protect her little brother from the situation, even if the two have a bickering relationship.
Performances – Gabrielle Union in the leading role is great, she brings us a strong powerful mother that isn’t going to let any man take advantage of her family. Billy Burke does bring the required calmness to his character which is everything needed, with Richard Cabral bring his own unhinged character to life to just about step away from the generic normal one. Ajiona Alexus and Seth Carr fill the children roles which in the works very well as they feel like they could easily be brother and sister.
Story – The story here follows a mother that will do anything to get her children to safety after their home gets invaded by a group of criminals searching for money. This is a home invasion film, it doesn’t need to break away from the normal in anyway, we know the formula, with this one putting the spin on the mother being separated from her children, we have the discussion of power between the criminals and mother, which is an important scene. We see how the mother might have a few more tricks up her sleeves that first thought. This is everything you expect without needing to make anything complicated, making it an easy watch.
Action/Crime – The action is restricted because of the separation between the characters, but when we need it, we get action we need, the crime story does follow how the thieves operate, though we don’t learn everything about the father’s situation in the criminal world.
Settings – The film is set in one location which is the house that has the ability to hold people out or keep people in, this helps build the battle between mother and thieves.
Scene of the Movie – Losing control.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not truly learning about the Shaun’s father previous life as a criminal.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book home invasion film, it does give us plenty of entertainment and is above the average in the sub-genre.
Overall: Home invasion above the rest.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/20/breaking-in-2018/
With Shaun locked out and her children being held captive by the thieves, she will do anything to save her children, not caring what the men want, this does become a battle of a mother that will do anything versus thieves that won’t stop for anything.
Thoughts on Breaking In
Characters – Shaun is a mother of two children that is tidying up the affairs of her late father, she thinks her weekend will just be tidying up his house, but she soon shows that she has a few skills picked up from her father, she will play a cat-n-mouse game with a group of thieves that are holding her children hostage, Shaun will prove herself as somebody smarter than the thieves, showing a mother’s love will overcome any plan. Eddie is the leader of the thieves, he remains calm and in control, even if his men can get out of hand, he only wants the money, getting pushed into difficult decisions. Duncan is the loose cannon of the thieves, he doesn’t want to leave any witnesses to the crime they are committing. Jasmine is the eldest daughter that needs to protect her little brother from the situation, even if the two have a bickering relationship.
Performances – Gabrielle Union in the leading role is great, she brings us a strong powerful mother that isn’t going to let any man take advantage of her family. Billy Burke does bring the required calmness to his character which is everything needed, with Richard Cabral bring his own unhinged character to life to just about step away from the generic normal one. Ajiona Alexus and Seth Carr fill the children roles which in the works very well as they feel like they could easily be brother and sister.
Story – The story here follows a mother that will do anything to get her children to safety after their home gets invaded by a group of criminals searching for money. This is a home invasion film, it doesn’t need to break away from the normal in anyway, we know the formula, with this one putting the spin on the mother being separated from her children, we have the discussion of power between the criminals and mother, which is an important scene. We see how the mother might have a few more tricks up her sleeves that first thought. This is everything you expect without needing to make anything complicated, making it an easy watch.
Action/Crime – The action is restricted because of the separation between the characters, but when we need it, we get action we need, the crime story does follow how the thieves operate, though we don’t learn everything about the father’s situation in the criminal world.
Settings – The film is set in one location which is the house that has the ability to hold people out or keep people in, this helps build the battle between mother and thieves.
Scene of the Movie – Losing control.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Not truly learning about the Shaun’s father previous life as a criminal.
Final Thoughts – This is a by the book home invasion film, it does give us plenty of entertainment and is above the average in the sub-genre.
Overall: Home invasion above the rest.
https://moviesreview101.com/2019/06/20/breaking-in-2018/
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Breaking In (2018) (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Get In.
Into every life a little rain must fall. Some fairly pervasive advertising drove me into the cinema to see this one… often a sign that the distributors think it has legs. And from its quirky opening titles (with a COMPLETELY expected shock denouement!) I started to think it did have something. The beginning is in fact VERY similar to the introductory scene of “Get Out” in its randomness, and for one brief moment I wondered if the film was trying to parody that indie classic from last year… with only some studio lawyers getting in the way of them really calling it “Get In”. (“No, no, no… ‘Get’ is copyrighted… you’ll have to use some other word!”).
But no. It turns out that this is a pretty below-average B-movie after all,
The plot is pretty derivative of the “family in dire peril” variety made famous by the “Taken” series. Not being able to persuade Liam Neeson to wear a dress in this “Times Up” era, the Neeson-actioner writer Ryan Engle (“The Commuter“, “Non-Stop“) switches the action to focus on stressed mother Shaun Russell (Gabrielle Union).
Shaun has come to deepest Wisconsin with her two kids, Jasmine (Ajiona Alexus) and Glover (Seth Carr) to arrange the sale of her deceased father’s luxury home: a house absolutely brimming to the elegant rafters with security features. But unknown to them, there are already intruders in the house searching for something of value, and with Shaun locked outside the secure fortress home she will stop at nothing to break in and bring her children safely home.
The sad thing about this one is that the fairly unknown cast actually do a pretty good job. The chief villain Eddie, played by Billy Burke, channels an effectively ‘evil-quiet-Gary-Oldman” turn to good effect. His accomplices, the more sensitive Sam (Levi Meaden), luckless Peter (Mark Furze) and (particularly) the psychopathic Duncan (Richard Cabral) (can a psychopath really be called Duncan?) are broad caricatures, but never too broad to be totally awful.
Gabrielle Union kicks-ass effectively with her particular set of skills (see below), but particularly good is 22-year old Ajiona Alexus who has a great screen presence and deserves to be in much better films than this.
Where the film stumbles and goes crashing through its carbonite shutters is in the story and the screenplay’s dialogue.
The former is just bat-shit crazy, with so many ridiculous plot-holes and “yeah-but” moments that you lose count. For example, at one point the daughter is looking for her mobile phone WHICH IS IN THE ROOM and which would wrap the plot up in 10 minutes flat…. but then something else happens and they stop looking for it, never to be thought of again!
And what of those ‘particular set of skills’ that Shaun has? Oh, I forgot to say… she has none!! Or at least you assume not, since Shaun seems to have no back-story whatsoever, other than the fact that her daddy is very very rich and being investigated by the D/A. For what? Embezzlement? Tax evasion? Smartie-smuggling? Gun running? Perhaps he was a mafia overlord and Shaun was brought up with martial arts, gun and knife training to spy-school level? Perhaps none of the above, and she was just an obsessive watcher of Engle-scripted flicks? We will never know.
In addition, Shaun gets the proverbial crap kicked out of her on so many occasions, but there is no trip to casualty required. (Yes, I know Neeson and most other action heroes have the same implausible in-vulnerabilities, but it just seems so much less realistic when she is a not-particularly sporty or athletic woman).
And that dialogue… it’s just plain laughable in places. If Eddie doesn’t do his “Mamma hen will come back to save her chicks” speech once, he does it five times….
“Hey, James”… (James McTeigue, director, “V for Vendetta”)… says Burke, “Haven’t I said this line four times already”. “Sure”, says McTeigue, “I’m not sure where exactly I want to put it in the final cut yet, but only one of them will stay in. Don’t worry… I won’t make you look stupid to the cinema-going audience!!”
Every last thriller cliché is mined as the story grinds to an unmemorable and very flat conclusion.
Before wrapping up, I’d point out Another crime being committed in the music department. Australian composer Johnny Klimek’s action thriller score is actually quiet good, full of nice electronic riffs. But he really doesn’t know when to shut up. I remember an interview by John Williams on scoring the score to Hitchcock’s “Family Plot” where he recounted that Hitchcock taught him the value of a sudden absence of music at key moments. This film is too recent to learn the many lessons of “A Quiet Place“: but there are so many moments in this film where silence should have been golden. At one point the (what should be) heart-stopping sound effect of a creaking beam can barely be heard over Klimek’s pounding electronics.
So in summary, although it’s the award of ‘good acting attempt’ badges to sew onto the cast’s scout uniforms, my message to you dear reader re this one is “Get Out” of the cinema and enjoy the nice summer evenings instead!
But no. It turns out that this is a pretty below-average B-movie after all,
The plot is pretty derivative of the “family in dire peril” variety made famous by the “Taken” series. Not being able to persuade Liam Neeson to wear a dress in this “Times Up” era, the Neeson-actioner writer Ryan Engle (“The Commuter“, “Non-Stop“) switches the action to focus on stressed mother Shaun Russell (Gabrielle Union).
Shaun has come to deepest Wisconsin with her two kids, Jasmine (Ajiona Alexus) and Glover (Seth Carr) to arrange the sale of her deceased father’s luxury home: a house absolutely brimming to the elegant rafters with security features. But unknown to them, there are already intruders in the house searching for something of value, and with Shaun locked outside the secure fortress home she will stop at nothing to break in and bring her children safely home.
The sad thing about this one is that the fairly unknown cast actually do a pretty good job. The chief villain Eddie, played by Billy Burke, channels an effectively ‘evil-quiet-Gary-Oldman” turn to good effect. His accomplices, the more sensitive Sam (Levi Meaden), luckless Peter (Mark Furze) and (particularly) the psychopathic Duncan (Richard Cabral) (can a psychopath really be called Duncan?) are broad caricatures, but never too broad to be totally awful.
Gabrielle Union kicks-ass effectively with her particular set of skills (see below), but particularly good is 22-year old Ajiona Alexus who has a great screen presence and deserves to be in much better films than this.
Where the film stumbles and goes crashing through its carbonite shutters is in the story and the screenplay’s dialogue.
The former is just bat-shit crazy, with so many ridiculous plot-holes and “yeah-but” moments that you lose count. For example, at one point the daughter is looking for her mobile phone WHICH IS IN THE ROOM and which would wrap the plot up in 10 minutes flat…. but then something else happens and they stop looking for it, never to be thought of again!
And what of those ‘particular set of skills’ that Shaun has? Oh, I forgot to say… she has none!! Or at least you assume not, since Shaun seems to have no back-story whatsoever, other than the fact that her daddy is very very rich and being investigated by the D/A. For what? Embezzlement? Tax evasion? Smartie-smuggling? Gun running? Perhaps he was a mafia overlord and Shaun was brought up with martial arts, gun and knife training to spy-school level? Perhaps none of the above, and she was just an obsessive watcher of Engle-scripted flicks? We will never know.
In addition, Shaun gets the proverbial crap kicked out of her on so many occasions, but there is no trip to casualty required. (Yes, I know Neeson and most other action heroes have the same implausible in-vulnerabilities, but it just seems so much less realistic when she is a not-particularly sporty or athletic woman).
And that dialogue… it’s just plain laughable in places. If Eddie doesn’t do his “Mamma hen will come back to save her chicks” speech once, he does it five times….
“Hey, James”… (James McTeigue, director, “V for Vendetta”)… says Burke, “Haven’t I said this line four times already”. “Sure”, says McTeigue, “I’m not sure where exactly I want to put it in the final cut yet, but only one of them will stay in. Don’t worry… I won’t make you look stupid to the cinema-going audience!!”
Every last thriller cliché is mined as the story grinds to an unmemorable and very flat conclusion.
Before wrapping up, I’d point out Another crime being committed in the music department. Australian composer Johnny Klimek’s action thriller score is actually quiet good, full of nice electronic riffs. But he really doesn’t know when to shut up. I remember an interview by John Williams on scoring the score to Hitchcock’s “Family Plot” where he recounted that Hitchcock taught him the value of a sudden absence of music at key moments. This film is too recent to learn the many lessons of “A Quiet Place“: but there are so many moments in this film where silence should have been golden. At one point the (what should be) heart-stopping sound effect of a creaking beam can barely be heard over Klimek’s pounding electronics.
So in summary, although it’s the award of ‘good acting attempt’ badges to sew onto the cast’s scout uniforms, my message to you dear reader re this one is “Get Out” of the cinema and enjoy the nice summer evenings instead!