Search
Search results
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
Is the Bible really gospel truth?</i> This is the question the honourable, academic Robert Babcock aims to find out on his quest to find the earliest copies of the gospels in order to prove the reliability of the story of Jesus as recounted in the King James Bible. However, this is not the key focus of Stephen Taylor’s fictional novel, <i>Gospels</i>. The main character is the perfidious John Campbell-John, a rogue, imposter and swindler who flees 19th-century England in an attempt to escape from his debts.
John meets the magnanimous Robert in Venice and, despite being polar opposites, become firm friends. After being honest for the first time in his life, admitting to owing thousands of pounds in gambling debts, Robert offers John the opportunity to accompany him on his quest through the deserts of Egypt. John accepts and the pair finds themselves on an adventure of discovery and personal redemption.
John and Robert make an unlikely but excellent team. Robert’s knowledge of the Bible and ancient history is vital, however, John’s propensity for falsehoods and cunningness gets them out of a few scrapes and tricky situations. Nonetheless, it is difficult for John to give up his old ways and his insular behaviour threatens to get them in more trouble.
Fortunately, Robert’s humility begins to influence the young scoundrel, as does his penchant for historical artefacts. As the story progresses, John begins to leave his past behind and becomes interested in Robert’s work, learning new things about Egyptian culture and the origins of the Bible. However, when a new gospel comes to light that threatens the whole of Christianity, Robert does not know what to do; and only John can give him counsel.
John Campbell-John is a character that the author introduced in a previous book. However, the timelines are not sequential, therefore <i>Gospels</i> is a stand-alone novel. The time frame for this book needed to be set in 1835 to correspond with historical truths. Although Robert’s discovery of a Gospel of Thaddeus Jude is an invention of the author, the quest itself is based on the journeys of three 19th-century Bible hunters. Stephen Taylor has conducted an enormous amount of research, including the biographies of Robert Curzon, Constantin von Tischendorf and Émile Amélineau who, on separate occasions, sought the same knowledge as the fictional Robert Babcock.
Despite being titled <i>Gospels</i>, the novel, for the most part, focuses on John Campbell-John and his wicked ways. Through a first-person narrative, John explains his past, his betrayal of a friend, and his addiction to gambling. Initially, he has no qualms about his behaviour and acts only for himself and his selfish greed. Whilst Robert goes in search of knowledge, John goes on a journey of redemption, coming to terms with his previous wrongdoings. However, acknowledging these faults is not enough, he needs to turn away from these roguish ways.
It is disappointing that the narrative does not focus more on the gospels, both real and imagined. There was enormous scope for an in-depth look at the life of Jesus and the inconsistencies in the Bible. The fictitious Gospel of Thaddeus Jude evokes a similar reaction in Robert as the Non-Canonical Gospel of Thomas found in the 19th-century had on many devout Christians. There was so much potential with this direction of thought, however, the author passes over it in preference to the life of John Campbell-John.
Slow to begin but increasingly interesting as it progresses, <i>Gospels</i> is a book of many themes. History, both 19th-century and ancient; religion, although not a Christian story; and achievement and absolution combine together to produce a unique tale that takes the reader from the back alleys of London to the River Nile and the deserts of Sinai. A subtle clue in the prologue keeps readers alert as they await the conclusion of the adventure – an ending that ambiguously reveals whether John moves on from the follies of his past.
Is the Bible really gospel truth?</i> This is the question the honourable, academic Robert Babcock aims to find out on his quest to find the earliest copies of the gospels in order to prove the reliability of the story of Jesus as recounted in the King James Bible. However, this is not the key focus of Stephen Taylor’s fictional novel, <i>Gospels</i>. The main character is the perfidious John Campbell-John, a rogue, imposter and swindler who flees 19th-century England in an attempt to escape from his debts.
John meets the magnanimous Robert in Venice and, despite being polar opposites, become firm friends. After being honest for the first time in his life, admitting to owing thousands of pounds in gambling debts, Robert offers John the opportunity to accompany him on his quest through the deserts of Egypt. John accepts and the pair finds themselves on an adventure of discovery and personal redemption.
John and Robert make an unlikely but excellent team. Robert’s knowledge of the Bible and ancient history is vital, however, John’s propensity for falsehoods and cunningness gets them out of a few scrapes and tricky situations. Nonetheless, it is difficult for John to give up his old ways and his insular behaviour threatens to get them in more trouble.
Fortunately, Robert’s humility begins to influence the young scoundrel, as does his penchant for historical artefacts. As the story progresses, John begins to leave his past behind and becomes interested in Robert’s work, learning new things about Egyptian culture and the origins of the Bible. However, when a new gospel comes to light that threatens the whole of Christianity, Robert does not know what to do; and only John can give him counsel.
John Campbell-John is a character that the author introduced in a previous book. However, the timelines are not sequential, therefore <i>Gospels</i> is a stand-alone novel. The time frame for this book needed to be set in 1835 to correspond with historical truths. Although Robert’s discovery of a Gospel of Thaddeus Jude is an invention of the author, the quest itself is based on the journeys of three 19th-century Bible hunters. Stephen Taylor has conducted an enormous amount of research, including the biographies of Robert Curzon, Constantin von Tischendorf and Émile Amélineau who, on separate occasions, sought the same knowledge as the fictional Robert Babcock.
Despite being titled <i>Gospels</i>, the novel, for the most part, focuses on John Campbell-John and his wicked ways. Through a first-person narrative, John explains his past, his betrayal of a friend, and his addiction to gambling. Initially, he has no qualms about his behaviour and acts only for himself and his selfish greed. Whilst Robert goes in search of knowledge, John goes on a journey of redemption, coming to terms with his previous wrongdoings. However, acknowledging these faults is not enough, he needs to turn away from these roguish ways.
It is disappointing that the narrative does not focus more on the gospels, both real and imagined. There was enormous scope for an in-depth look at the life of Jesus and the inconsistencies in the Bible. The fictitious Gospel of Thaddeus Jude evokes a similar reaction in Robert as the Non-Canonical Gospel of Thomas found in the 19th-century had on many devout Christians. There was so much potential with this direction of thought, however, the author passes over it in preference to the life of John Campbell-John.
Slow to begin but increasingly interesting as it progresses, <i>Gospels</i> is a book of many themes. History, both 19th-century and ancient; religion, although not a Christian story; and achievement and absolution combine together to produce a unique tale that takes the reader from the back alleys of London to the River Nile and the deserts of Sinai. A subtle clue in the prologue keeps readers alert as they await the conclusion of the adventure – an ending that ambiguously reveals whether John moves on from the follies of his past.
Darren (1599 KP) rated From Russia With Love (1964) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Characters – James Bond is forced into his next mission which includes seducing a spy that is wanting to turn on Russia, he shows us again just how skilled he is when it comes to dealing with life and death situations and his awareness of dangers around him. Tatiana Romanova is the Russian spy that has offered to give up information for safety to England, she might not be as true as James is told about, even though we know she is being forced into this mission. Rosa Klebb is the one that is recruiting the agents with Tatiana and Grant being her picks to help SPECTRE eliminate James Bond. Grant is the newest recruit assassin, hard as nails, resourceful and everything James will find difficult to beat in a fight.
Performances – Sean Connery has grown into this role being even better than the first film, he become the superstar name after this outing. Daniela Bianchi is good for a Bond girl, she is stronger than the first one and now we know what type of women will get in this role. Robert Shaw as the villain is great, he looks cold calculated through every single scene.
Story – The story here is a lot more interesting than the first film, we learn early on about the SPECTRE plan which shows us how we have a growing villainous threat for Bond to tackle. This helps make the franchise even more enjoyable because it isn’t just Bond solving a case, it is him trying to stay ahead while we know the twists coming. The story leaves us open to learn more about SPECTRE in future film which again is a pleasure for the audience to be seeing. How everything unfolds well we know Bond can solve the problems he is facing and we get to see the start of the infamous gadgets.
Action/Adventure – The action in the film is bigger, the fights last longer and the adventure that Bond must go on is showing us just how big the terrorist battle will be.
Settings – The film takes place for the most part in Turkey, which shows us another neutral country in the middle of the battle, the train sequences could be argued to be the most enjoyable though.
Scene of the Movie – The gadgets being introduced.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – James Bond attitude toward women.
Final Thoughts – This is a wonderful second instalment in the franchise, it gives us a bigger threat for long term villains in SPECTRE and does have big action throughout.
Overall: The sequel that makes things bigger.
Performances – Sean Connery has grown into this role being even better than the first film, he become the superstar name after this outing. Daniela Bianchi is good for a Bond girl, she is stronger than the first one and now we know what type of women will get in this role. Robert Shaw as the villain is great, he looks cold calculated through every single scene.
Story – The story here is a lot more interesting than the first film, we learn early on about the SPECTRE plan which shows us how we have a growing villainous threat for Bond to tackle. This helps make the franchise even more enjoyable because it isn’t just Bond solving a case, it is him trying to stay ahead while we know the twists coming. The story leaves us open to learn more about SPECTRE in future film which again is a pleasure for the audience to be seeing. How everything unfolds well we know Bond can solve the problems he is facing and we get to see the start of the infamous gadgets.
Action/Adventure – The action in the film is bigger, the fights last longer and the adventure that Bond must go on is showing us just how big the terrorist battle will be.
Settings – The film takes place for the most part in Turkey, which shows us another neutral country in the middle of the battle, the train sequences could be argued to be the most enjoyable though.
Scene of the Movie – The gadgets being introduced.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – James Bond attitude toward women.
Final Thoughts – This is a wonderful second instalment in the franchise, it gives us a bigger threat for long term villains in SPECTRE and does have big action throughout.
Overall: The sequel that makes things bigger.
Erika (17788 KP) rated Alita: Battle Angel (2019) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019 (Updated Feb 18, 2019)
This movie was on the borderline between good and just ok, I rounded up. I was irritated because the theater where I have the subscription with was only showing the film in 3D. I'm not a huge 3D fan, and don't think anything is really added by it.
I know James Cameron was supposed to be the main draw, but I think he's pompous, and Avatar is not a good movie (IMO/it's lame and a snore). I was there mainly for Robert Rodriguez, he's a BFD here.
Essentially, it's Ghost in the Shell with a different story around it. I loved the fight/actions scenes, I was riveted by those. But, everything around it was kind of lame with bad dialogue and an unnecessary love story.
I also hated that it left on a cliffhanger. The movie drastically under-performed, leading to the worst Presidents' Day box office in the US since 2004. Likelihood of a sequel? Slim to none.
I know James Cameron was supposed to be the main draw, but I think he's pompous, and Avatar is not a good movie (IMO/it's lame and a snore). I was there mainly for Robert Rodriguez, he's a BFD here.
Essentially, it's Ghost in the Shell with a different story around it. I loved the fight/actions scenes, I was riveted by those. But, everything around it was kind of lame with bad dialogue and an unnecessary love story.
I also hated that it left on a cliffhanger. The movie drastically under-performed, leading to the worst Presidents' Day box office in the US since 2004. Likelihood of a sequel? Slim to none.
Phil Rosenthal recommended The Night of the Hunter (1955) in Movies (curated)
Andy K (10821 KP) rated The Cotton Club (1984) in Movies
Jul 28, 2019
Richard Gere has made a lot of forgettable movies
Really. Seriously. If you think about it. The guy has been acting since the early 70s and he is mostly remembered for Chicago and Pretty Woman. Honorable mentions maybe to Officer and a Gentleman, Primal Fear or American Gigolo.
Director Francis Ford Coppola I'm sure was hoping to recreate the magic of the 1920s/1930s jazz club gangster era as he did with The Godfather in this film and it just didn't work. It seemed I just didn't care about the characters nearly as much and the case just wasn't up to it. Any time you have James Remar is your main bad guy in a film you are in trouble.
The highlight of the film for me was all the great jazz music, large vaudeville song and dance numbers and great tap dancing scenes with the great Gregory Hines. It was cool to see a very young "Larry" Fishburne and lots of other people you know from other movies, but it just wasn't enough. Nicolas Cage overacting (I know what a shocker) and over the top violence just to have over the top violence.
You won't find the caliber of Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall or James Caan here.
I really wanted to love this film as it has been on my "to watch" list for a long time; however, I was ultimately disappointed.
Director Francis Ford Coppola I'm sure was hoping to recreate the magic of the 1920s/1930s jazz club gangster era as he did with The Godfather in this film and it just didn't work. It seemed I just didn't care about the characters nearly as much and the case just wasn't up to it. Any time you have James Remar is your main bad guy in a film you are in trouble.
The highlight of the film for me was all the great jazz music, large vaudeville song and dance numbers and great tap dancing scenes with the great Gregory Hines. It was cool to see a very young "Larry" Fishburne and lots of other people you know from other movies, but it just wasn't enough. Nicolas Cage overacting (I know what a shocker) and over the top violence just to have over the top violence.
You won't find the caliber of Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall or James Caan here.
I really wanted to love this film as it has been on my "to watch" list for a long time; however, I was ultimately disappointed.
ClareR (5603 KP) rated The Dangerous Kingdom of Love in Books
Feb 21, 2022
After reading this book, I’d just like to say that I think Francis Bacon is perhaps one of my favourite characters ever! He has (I should clarify: in this book) the right mix of intelligence, humour and cunning to survive at the court of James I, and to keep me reading!
Francis realises that his place at court is in danger as long as Robert Carr is James I’s bedfellow (it hasn’t been explicitly told in history that James I was having sex with Carr and other young men, but he certainly liked having the young, attractive boys around). Carr is set to marry Frances Howard, and the Howards hate Bacon. Therefore, Bacon decides to find the King a new young man and oust Carr. This part where Bacon supports the rise of Villiers is, I believe, true, so this adds credence to the story.
It’s a love story for Bacon from here. He’s a reluctant romantic where Villiers is concerned (we’ll gloss over the fact that his wife, Alice Barnham, isn’t even hinted at), and realises too late that he doesn’t want to be without him. However this coincides with Bacon’s dramatic fall from grace (which is true).
I love historical fiction that takes the bones of a story and moulds it into something else VERY MUCH! Francis Bacon and all the other characters in this are fully formed people, given personalities, loves, dreams and quirks that you never see in the history books. Yes, it’s good to know what really happened (if that’s your thing), but this book was fun! Francis has a wicked side to him that I fell for. I had to keep reminding myself that this wasn’t the real Francis Bacon, it was Neil Blackmore’s Francis Bacon.
So yes, read this book. It’s bawdy and explicit in places, but oh my! The feels, people! This ticked all of my historical fiction boxes, and more besides!
Francis realises that his place at court is in danger as long as Robert Carr is James I’s bedfellow (it hasn’t been explicitly told in history that James I was having sex with Carr and other young men, but he certainly liked having the young, attractive boys around). Carr is set to marry Frances Howard, and the Howards hate Bacon. Therefore, Bacon decides to find the King a new young man and oust Carr. This part where Bacon supports the rise of Villiers is, I believe, true, so this adds credence to the story.
It’s a love story for Bacon from here. He’s a reluctant romantic where Villiers is concerned (we’ll gloss over the fact that his wife, Alice Barnham, isn’t even hinted at), and realises too late that he doesn’t want to be without him. However this coincides with Bacon’s dramatic fall from grace (which is true).
I love historical fiction that takes the bones of a story and moulds it into something else VERY MUCH! Francis Bacon and all the other characters in this are fully formed people, given personalities, loves, dreams and quirks that you never see in the history books. Yes, it’s good to know what really happened (if that’s your thing), but this book was fun! Francis has a wicked side to him that I fell for. I had to keep reminding myself that this wasn’t the real Francis Bacon, it was Neil Blackmore’s Francis Bacon.
So yes, read this book. It’s bawdy and explicit in places, but oh my! The feels, people! This ticked all of my historical fiction boxes, and more besides!
William Friedkin recommended The Night of the Hunter (1955) in Movies (curated)
Jonathan Rhys Meyers recommended Seven Samurai (1954) in Movies (curated)
David McK (3233 KP) rated Terminator: Dark Fate (2019) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019 (Updated Jul 24, 2022)
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
Terminator: Salvation
Terminator: Genisys
Forget them all.
(as an aside: notice how they get progressively worse as they went along?)
Right from the opening pre-credit sequence, this sets itself up as a sequel to the superlative Terminator 2: Judgment Day, ignoring all the above-named moves (and TV series). It's also no secret that this stars Linda Hamilton's kick-ass Sarah Connor (who was unceremoniously killed off off-screen in Terminator 3, before having her own TV show in the Sarah Connor Chronicles), with Gabriel Luna's Rev-9 a more worthy successor to Robert Patrick's T-1000 than Kristinna Loken's T-X and with the (inevitable) return of Arnie himself as an original series Terminator.
Like the first 2 movies, this is essentially a chase movie, with Connor and co on the run from the Rev-9 (from a future that has never heard of Cyberdyne or Skynet) while trying to protect Natalia Reyes Danni from the Rev-9: I also have to say that, like a lot of James Cameron's movies, this features powerful female roles, with Arnie really only along as back-up.
Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
Terminator: Salvation
Terminator: Genisys
Forget them all.
(as an aside: notice how they get progressively worse as they went along?)
Right from the opening pre-credit sequence, this sets itself up as a sequel to the superlative Terminator 2: Judgment Day, ignoring all the above-named moves (and TV series). It's also no secret that this stars Linda Hamilton's kick-ass Sarah Connor (who was unceremoniously killed off off-screen in Terminator 3, before having her own TV show in the Sarah Connor Chronicles), with Gabriel Luna's Rev-9 a more worthy successor to Robert Patrick's T-1000 than Kristinna Loken's T-X and with the (inevitable) return of Arnie himself as an original series Terminator.
Like the first 2 movies, this is essentially a chase movie, with Connor and co on the run from the Rev-9 (from a future that has never heard of Cyberdyne or Skynet) while trying to protect Natalia Reyes Danni from the Rev-9: I also have to say that, like a lot of James Cameron's movies, this features powerful female roles, with Arnie really only along as back-up.
Film and stuff (30 KP) rated Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) in Movies
May 15, 2019 (Updated May 15, 2019)
A great second Avengers outing
Starring: Robert Downey JR, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Rennee, James Spader, Samuel L Jackson and Paul Bettany.
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Plot - Tony Stark creates an AI that turns psychopathic and is determined to destroy the world. The Avengers must stop the AI known as Ultron.
With spectacular visuals and an amusing villain this is on the surface of things, exactly what you would want a sequel to the excellent Avengers Assemble to be. The way in which the Avengers are reintroduced is quit simply one of the coolest things I've seen for a while.
The issue is that it treads over a great deal of previous material and doesn't feel as original and fresh as the previous.
Surprisingly something that is handled brilliantly is the volume of characters that are in this. Something that many have tried and failed. Huge kudos for this Mr Whedon.
With a great deal more humour, a romance that feels slightly forced and amazing action sequences I would rate this marginally below Avengers Assemble. That being said, I enjoyed it immensely and would definitely recommend seeing it.
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Plot - Tony Stark creates an AI that turns psychopathic and is determined to destroy the world. The Avengers must stop the AI known as Ultron.
With spectacular visuals and an amusing villain this is on the surface of things, exactly what you would want a sequel to the excellent Avengers Assemble to be. The way in which the Avengers are reintroduced is quit simply one of the coolest things I've seen for a while.
The issue is that it treads over a great deal of previous material and doesn't feel as original and fresh as the previous.
Surprisingly something that is handled brilliantly is the volume of characters that are in this. Something that many have tried and failed. Huge kudos for this Mr Whedon.
With a great deal more humour, a romance that feels slightly forced and amazing action sequences I would rate this marginally below Avengers Assemble. That being said, I enjoyed it immensely and would definitely recommend seeing it.