Search
Search results
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Never Saw You Coming in Books
Sep 30, 2021
An insightful look at love and religion
Meg Hennessey grew up finding comfort in her faith. But her conservative parents also kept her sheltered based on their interpretation of the rules of the church. But at age eighteen, Meg learns her entire life was a lie. Instead of going to work at a church camp for a year, she heads to Marquette, Michigan to learn more about the family she never knew she had. There, she meets Micah Allen. Micah's dad is a former pastor who is now in prison. Micah adored and believed in his father, who let the church, his congregation, and his family down famously--the press still hounds Micah years later. With his father's probation hearing coming up, his mother wants him to forgive him, but Micah isn't sure he can. Meg and Micah meet and find themselves drawn to each other. But each struggle with what they've been taught about love, along with the pasts they may need to leave behind to move forward.
"Because the uncomfortable truth is, while the church loves sinners in their pews, they don't want them in front of a crowd. It's the difference between acceptance and tolerance, and it might catch on. God forbid."
This is a really lovely and moving story. While it includes a lot of religious themes and discussion, it never felt like too much--religion and forgiveness informs the story, rather than detracts from it. Meg is a side character in Hahn's excellent book, MORE THAN MAYBE, and we see glimpses of Vada and Luke from that tale (which is really fun). It's wonderful to see Meg fully explored here--Hahn writes her sections in a snappy and smart way, capturing Meg perfectly. She's so sweet, yet smart and tough. Her entire life has been upended, and Meg truly must rethink her whole faith and foundation. I think a weaker person would crumple at such a situation. Watching her grow is really fun; you cannot help but root for her.
And Micah is a great character, too. He too, has had his faith tested, as his father destroyed his church and Micah's belief in the church. Micah and Meg's romance is cute, honest, and real. Hahn's book explores how shamed these two feel by falling in love and how the church has conditioned them to feel that love, happiness, and romance can be wrong and even sinful. It tackles the pain of loving a Jesus/God who then censures you for loving. It's so adept at this and skilled at portraying their struggles. How can the love of these two sweet, earnest kids be wrong? And as they explore why bad things happen--especially as they believe so fully--the book makes you think and examine deeply. It deftly exposes the church's focus on female purity only, while often ignoring the males. Honestly, whether you're religious or not, this is a must-read, especially in these times, when so much of the control of a women's body seems not be our own.
Overall, I loved this book. It offers a charming romance, along with a timely look at religion and how it can affect young people as they make their way in the world. The side characters are excellent (I'm looking at you, Duke, and Cash the dog!). Hahn's writing is as excellent as ever. 4.5 stars. Please note the author's own note for a trigger warning for self-harm and suicide.
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press / Wednesday Books and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
"Because the uncomfortable truth is, while the church loves sinners in their pews, they don't want them in front of a crowd. It's the difference between acceptance and tolerance, and it might catch on. God forbid."
This is a really lovely and moving story. While it includes a lot of religious themes and discussion, it never felt like too much--religion and forgiveness informs the story, rather than detracts from it. Meg is a side character in Hahn's excellent book, MORE THAN MAYBE, and we see glimpses of Vada and Luke from that tale (which is really fun). It's wonderful to see Meg fully explored here--Hahn writes her sections in a snappy and smart way, capturing Meg perfectly. She's so sweet, yet smart and tough. Her entire life has been upended, and Meg truly must rethink her whole faith and foundation. I think a weaker person would crumple at such a situation. Watching her grow is really fun; you cannot help but root for her.
And Micah is a great character, too. He too, has had his faith tested, as his father destroyed his church and Micah's belief in the church. Micah and Meg's romance is cute, honest, and real. Hahn's book explores how shamed these two feel by falling in love and how the church has conditioned them to feel that love, happiness, and romance can be wrong and even sinful. It tackles the pain of loving a Jesus/God who then censures you for loving. It's so adept at this and skilled at portraying their struggles. How can the love of these two sweet, earnest kids be wrong? And as they explore why bad things happen--especially as they believe so fully--the book makes you think and examine deeply. It deftly exposes the church's focus on female purity only, while often ignoring the males. Honestly, whether you're religious or not, this is a must-read, especially in these times, when so much of the control of a women's body seems not be our own.
Overall, I loved this book. It offers a charming romance, along with a timely look at religion and how it can affect young people as they make their way in the world. The side characters are excellent (I'm looking at you, Duke, and Cash the dog!). Hahn's writing is as excellent as ever. 4.5 stars. Please note the author's own note for a trigger warning for self-harm and suicide.
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press / Wednesday Books and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Nightmare Alley (2021) in Movies
Feb 4, 2022
Sum Does Not Add Up To The Total Of The Parts
If you ever want to understand the meaning of the term “the sum does not equal the total of the parts”, you need to look no further than the latest film from Guillermo Del Toro, the neo-noir thriller, NIGHTMARE ALLEY.
This film looked like it had all the right elements for a fantastic, adult film. A neo-noir thriller with a distinctive period look, helmed by a first rate director and featuring an A-List cast that are (for the most part) perfectly cast in their roles.
So why doesn’t this film rise above ordinary?
Ultimately, it is because this type of film, a neo-noir crime thriller where none of the characters are likeable or are easy to root for, is a tricky tightrope walk and, in this instance, Director del Toro opted to play it safe, focusing on mood and atmosphere, while strapping his talented cast with characters (and, ultimately, performances) that are middle-of-the road.
Bradley Cooper is the right performer in today’s world to play Stanton Carlisle, the drifter that becomes a carney that becomes a a con-man “Mentalist” who is drawn into a sinister plot by the mysterious Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett - also the right performer in today’s world to play this part). These 2 have decent (but not great) chemistry with each other, for you know (they way del Toro has Directed Blanchett’s performance) that she is up to something, thus keeping us at arm’s length.
But I am getting ahead of myself, for that is the 2nd half of this film, I haven’t even touched on the first half - which is part of the issue here as well.
The first hour of this 2 1/2 hour film is all set up as we follow Cooper’s character as he is introduced into a Circus sideshow of the 1940’s - and all of the characters therein. This is an interesting - if kind of slow - setup as we are treated to some interesting character building performances by some pretty terrific actors - Toni Colette, Ron Perlman, David Strathairn and, of course, the always good Willem DaFoe.
Oh, and I haven’t even mentioned Rooney Mara who is sort of the “through-line” between the 2 halves of this film, but her character is so vanilla, that one forgets her character event exists.
But…after an hour of setting up this world and these characters - the film pivots away from this area and goes to a whole different world…and a different plot. It is like a SuperHero Origin film where the first 1/2 of the film is the Origin and the 2nd half is the first adventure of said SuperHero.
And this just doesn’t work all that well in this film (even with a callback at the end), it is jarring and creates 2 different movies, neither of which rises above the average.
I lay the blame for all of this on Director Guillermo del Toro who appeared to be more interested in the look of this film (and the look is AMAZING) and just let the actors act, but not get in the way. The direction is bland, the performances are bland and the plot just doesn’t hold together.
Which is very disappointing, considering what “could have been”.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars out of 10 and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This film looked like it had all the right elements for a fantastic, adult film. A neo-noir thriller with a distinctive period look, helmed by a first rate director and featuring an A-List cast that are (for the most part) perfectly cast in their roles.
So why doesn’t this film rise above ordinary?
Ultimately, it is because this type of film, a neo-noir crime thriller where none of the characters are likeable or are easy to root for, is a tricky tightrope walk and, in this instance, Director del Toro opted to play it safe, focusing on mood and atmosphere, while strapping his talented cast with characters (and, ultimately, performances) that are middle-of-the road.
Bradley Cooper is the right performer in today’s world to play Stanton Carlisle, the drifter that becomes a carney that becomes a a con-man “Mentalist” who is drawn into a sinister plot by the mysterious Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett - also the right performer in today’s world to play this part). These 2 have decent (but not great) chemistry with each other, for you know (they way del Toro has Directed Blanchett’s performance) that she is up to something, thus keeping us at arm’s length.
But I am getting ahead of myself, for that is the 2nd half of this film, I haven’t even touched on the first half - which is part of the issue here as well.
The first hour of this 2 1/2 hour film is all set up as we follow Cooper’s character as he is introduced into a Circus sideshow of the 1940’s - and all of the characters therein. This is an interesting - if kind of slow - setup as we are treated to some interesting character building performances by some pretty terrific actors - Toni Colette, Ron Perlman, David Strathairn and, of course, the always good Willem DaFoe.
Oh, and I haven’t even mentioned Rooney Mara who is sort of the “through-line” between the 2 halves of this film, but her character is so vanilla, that one forgets her character event exists.
But…after an hour of setting up this world and these characters - the film pivots away from this area and goes to a whole different world…and a different plot. It is like a SuperHero Origin film where the first 1/2 of the film is the Origin and the 2nd half is the first adventure of said SuperHero.
And this just doesn’t work all that well in this film (even with a callback at the end), it is jarring and creates 2 different movies, neither of which rises above the average.
I lay the blame for all of this on Director Guillermo del Toro who appeared to be more interested in the look of this film (and the look is AMAZING) and just let the actors act, but not get in the way. The direction is bland, the performances are bland and the plot just doesn’t hold together.
Which is very disappointing, considering what “could have been”.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars out of 10 and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Artemis Fowl (2020) in Movies
Jun 13, 2020
Disney: "We're making a film of Artemis Fowl!"
Me: *wildly switches from happiness to devastation about the possibilities*
Artemis Fowl's father, Artemis Fowl Snr., has gone missing, the media is portraying him as a criminal and calling for answers. Shocked and confused by what's happening Artemis Jnr. receives a phone call from his father's kidnapper and must hand over an item to secure his release. But he's no idea what the item is, or where, he's about to learn a great deal about fantastical things in a very short space of time and meet an odd selection of new friends.
So... I'm going to break this down into two parts, the first bit will be just about the film and the second will be me ranting about the film in conjunction with the book... *calm thoughts* Let us begin.
From the very beginning I was thrown, the opening in no way seems like a family film and I was wondering if by avoiding reading about it all beforehand that I'd got the wrong idea about what to expect.
With such a good cast backing up our newcomers I had medium hopes for what was going to hit our screens...
Ferdia Shaw takes on the part of Artemis Fowl Jnr., putting aside the comparison between the two versions until later, the performance isn't bad but it's quite forgettable. The same sadly goes for Lara McDonnell as Holly Short. Neither one has much of a presence on screen and I think that's mostly to do with the fact that Artemis and Holly are both rather bland in the whole story.
There's something oddly appealing about Josh Gad as Mulch but I'm not sure that giving him such a large role as narrator worked. It's never really clear why he's given that role and the scene's where we cut back to him talking are given a strange noir look that doesn't match with the rest of the film. Even so, I'm willing to concede that he's my favourite character as he has just enough humour to carry it.
Judi Dench as Commander Root was a little bit of a challenge to see. Root is a gruff but caring character, the trouble come in the fact that the change comes quite unnaturally at times.
One of the main failings is that there are times when the script feels poor, the dialogue is a little forced and doesn't fit with the characters, couple that with a variety of scenes that don't fit with the style of everything else and the fact that some pieces could be removed without really affecting anything around it and I'm left less than inspired by the film.
I did like the look of Haven City, the animation of the overhead view looked really promising. As we got into the city though I couldn't help but think it looked a little cheap and the aesthetic wasn't great. Effects, in general, were not good if I'm honest, particularly when you get to the siege on Fowl manor, when the siege is ending it comes with some chaos that is a perfect example of this coupled with another example of how the story glosses over an explanation of what's happening that could have offered some extra development for characters. (Specifically in this instance, Foley, who was woefully underused. He might not have been as majestic as a Brosnan centaur but he deserved better than the film gave him.)
By the end a lot of things get resolved seemingly by fairy magic because it's not clear how any of it happens. Potentially it's something that I wouldn't have noticed as there's a certain amount of this kind of wrapping up that you can forgive, but by this point I was so frustrated by everything that I was spotting everything.
I'm aware I'm waffling more than I intended so let me "briefly" mention things regarding the book...
The film is, in my opinion, only vaguely based on the book. It has kept ideas and pieces of story while removing and adding characters to varying degrees. Notably Artemis' mother is gone and his father is there instead. Removing mum makes Juliet's inclusion surplus to requirements, I can understand wanting to keep her for a young female character for viewers to identify with, but the role she ends up with is bland and in no way lives up to the book's version. The blandness also extends to her brother, Butler, and that's partly because of the major change they made...
Artemis. He is barely recognisable in comparison. He's a jeans-wearing, surfing, tween? He's much more casual than the original and this fluffier version doesn't have the same edge that book Artemis does. In their revamp they have changed his story and I very quickly felt like it could have been a sequel to the books, Artemis Snr. felt more like the Artemis from the books grown up and he was teaching his son about all the things he learnt. Part of the thing I enjoyed about the books is that Artemis was always an anti-hero of sorts, he was very difficult to like at times because of his actions, film Artemis is a little bit jumbled in this respect as they give him a very clear reason for the things he does so when he tries to show that tough side it doesn't have any impact.
There are a lot of differences, but I will leave that analysis for someone who is much more thorough at scouring the books and film than I am. I'll be keeping my eye out for other reviews with the comparisons in, if you spot any then please leave a link in the comments below.
When it came to scoring this I thought about it on two levels.
As a film from such a big company I was quite shocked by the quality of script and effects, there was a baddie that didn't really participate in anything and there were scenes and characters which weren't needed... and to finish it off in such an obvious set up for a sequel... I was done. I had marked it down for a generous score of 2 stars, that's normally my "I didn't like it but I can see why other people might" score, but I can't quite see what would appeal to people in it if I'm honest.
As an adaptation of the book I was too frustrated by the changes they made to Artemis, they essentially changed the fundamentals of the character and that had a knock-on effect to other characters as well. No one came out unscathed, but even though Mulch was heavily adapted I was glad that some of his humour was still there. Scoring on this basis I would have given it 1 star, but again, that felt generous to me.
In the end I will always score something on my enjoyment, in this instance it seems fair to even out the two scores. They've taken a great book and removed most of its personality, the final product was not exciting to watch and I don't think I could bring myself to watch a sequel.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/artemis-fowl-movie-review.html
Me: *wildly switches from happiness to devastation about the possibilities*
Artemis Fowl's father, Artemis Fowl Snr., has gone missing, the media is portraying him as a criminal and calling for answers. Shocked and confused by what's happening Artemis Jnr. receives a phone call from his father's kidnapper and must hand over an item to secure his release. But he's no idea what the item is, or where, he's about to learn a great deal about fantastical things in a very short space of time and meet an odd selection of new friends.
So... I'm going to break this down into two parts, the first bit will be just about the film and the second will be me ranting about the film in conjunction with the book... *calm thoughts* Let us begin.
From the very beginning I was thrown, the opening in no way seems like a family film and I was wondering if by avoiding reading about it all beforehand that I'd got the wrong idea about what to expect.
With such a good cast backing up our newcomers I had medium hopes for what was going to hit our screens...
Ferdia Shaw takes on the part of Artemis Fowl Jnr., putting aside the comparison between the two versions until later, the performance isn't bad but it's quite forgettable. The same sadly goes for Lara McDonnell as Holly Short. Neither one has much of a presence on screen and I think that's mostly to do with the fact that Artemis and Holly are both rather bland in the whole story.
There's something oddly appealing about Josh Gad as Mulch but I'm not sure that giving him such a large role as narrator worked. It's never really clear why he's given that role and the scene's where we cut back to him talking are given a strange noir look that doesn't match with the rest of the film. Even so, I'm willing to concede that he's my favourite character as he has just enough humour to carry it.
Judi Dench as Commander Root was a little bit of a challenge to see. Root is a gruff but caring character, the trouble come in the fact that the change comes quite unnaturally at times.
One of the main failings is that there are times when the script feels poor, the dialogue is a little forced and doesn't fit with the characters, couple that with a variety of scenes that don't fit with the style of everything else and the fact that some pieces could be removed without really affecting anything around it and I'm left less than inspired by the film.
I did like the look of Haven City, the animation of the overhead view looked really promising. As we got into the city though I couldn't help but think it looked a little cheap and the aesthetic wasn't great. Effects, in general, were not good if I'm honest, particularly when you get to the siege on Fowl manor, when the siege is ending it comes with some chaos that is a perfect example of this coupled with another example of how the story glosses over an explanation of what's happening that could have offered some extra development for characters. (Specifically in this instance, Foley, who was woefully underused. He might not have been as majestic as a Brosnan centaur but he deserved better than the film gave him.)
By the end a lot of things get resolved seemingly by fairy magic because it's not clear how any of it happens. Potentially it's something that I wouldn't have noticed as there's a certain amount of this kind of wrapping up that you can forgive, but by this point I was so frustrated by everything that I was spotting everything.
I'm aware I'm waffling more than I intended so let me "briefly" mention things regarding the book...
The film is, in my opinion, only vaguely based on the book. It has kept ideas and pieces of story while removing and adding characters to varying degrees. Notably Artemis' mother is gone and his father is there instead. Removing mum makes Juliet's inclusion surplus to requirements, I can understand wanting to keep her for a young female character for viewers to identify with, but the role she ends up with is bland and in no way lives up to the book's version. The blandness also extends to her brother, Butler, and that's partly because of the major change they made...
Artemis. He is barely recognisable in comparison. He's a jeans-wearing, surfing, tween? He's much more casual than the original and this fluffier version doesn't have the same edge that book Artemis does. In their revamp they have changed his story and I very quickly felt like it could have been a sequel to the books, Artemis Snr. felt more like the Artemis from the books grown up and he was teaching his son about all the things he learnt. Part of the thing I enjoyed about the books is that Artemis was always an anti-hero of sorts, he was very difficult to like at times because of his actions, film Artemis is a little bit jumbled in this respect as they give him a very clear reason for the things he does so when he tries to show that tough side it doesn't have any impact.
There are a lot of differences, but I will leave that analysis for someone who is much more thorough at scouring the books and film than I am. I'll be keeping my eye out for other reviews with the comparisons in, if you spot any then please leave a link in the comments below.
When it came to scoring this I thought about it on two levels.
As a film from such a big company I was quite shocked by the quality of script and effects, there was a baddie that didn't really participate in anything and there were scenes and characters which weren't needed... and to finish it off in such an obvious set up for a sequel... I was done. I had marked it down for a generous score of 2 stars, that's normally my "I didn't like it but I can see why other people might" score, but I can't quite see what would appeal to people in it if I'm honest.
As an adaptation of the book I was too frustrated by the changes they made to Artemis, they essentially changed the fundamentals of the character and that had a knock-on effect to other characters as well. No one came out unscathed, but even though Mulch was heavily adapted I was glad that some of his humour was still there. Scoring on this basis I would have given it 1 star, but again, that felt generous to me.
In the end I will always score something on my enjoyment, in this instance it seems fair to even out the two scores. They've taken a great book and removed most of its personality, the final product was not exciting to watch and I don't think I could bring myself to watch a sequel.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/06/artemis-fowl-movie-review.html
Gotham is the kind of show where I wonder whether they tried to save money by just having the interns write the script. It's got that stilted, on-the-nose kind of dialogue that makes me just feel bad for the actors. For a while I thought the quality of the writing varied from scene to scene, but it was really just that a certain few actors (those that play Fish Mooney, Ed Nygma, and Harvey Bullock spring to mind) that were able to transcend the material they were working with, while others struggled and some just seemed to give up.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
Season one starts off promisingly enough for a superhero themed crime show. The premise is solid - we get to watch how these superheroes and supervillians come to be. And that is really the draw that keeps me watching - the character driven moments where we see Nygma descend into madness, the Penguin rise through the ranks of the underworld, Mooney wrestle to keep control of her little patch of Gotham. The conflict James Gordon faces in the first season - a Lawful Good character up against rampant, insidious, and impossible to root up corruption throughout every level of Gotham's government is genuinely interesting and feels like a relevant emotional thread that keeps you going through all of the schlocky and improbable events. All three seasons seem to have a firm grasp of their season plot arc and tentpole moments, setting up the next season nicely for whatever main villain and evil will be explored, but I feel like the tone of the show has shifted wildly. The show can't decide if it's gritty or campy, whether it's a comic book or a crime procedural. It handwaves technology and superpowers in a way that fails to establish in-world rules or limitations. So every super power is all-powerful until plot convenient. I also just personally hate the third season "blood virus" arc and the non-canonical Mad Hatter who speaks in rhyming couplets.
Speaking of which, I'd love to tell the writers that a mass of contradictory, plot-convenient impulses does not a strong female character make. Barbara Kean's story arc makes absolutely no sense. Lee Thompkins seems only to exist to push Gordon to do things he wouldn't otherwise, and Selina Kyle is easily swapped out with every spunky street urchin ever.
I almost want to be offended that every single queer character is, or ends up being, a baddie, but honestly I think that's probably just because the antagonists are more interesting and fleshed out characters to begin with. Still, there's some serious issues with representation (shocker). The third season introduces a really icky variant of the Born Sexy Yesterday trope (watch the video by the Pop Culture Detective, it's worth it.)
Still, I think the casting is pretty great, acting ability aside. The costuming is good, although everything is hampered by the show's refusal to nail down any sort of time period. The dream sequences in the first two seasons are beautiful. I love Oswald Cobblepot and Ed Nygma, and I'd love to see the actor who plays Bruce Wayne master more than just his admittedly very good "holding back tears" expression.
If you're looking for something campy, if you like your villians and your superheroes, and if you need something to watch while you fold laundry or go to sleep, I would recommend this show. It's a show that thrives on tired old tropes, but it lifts those tropes from its source material, so fans of comics might enjoy it, or might be aggrieved at the retconning of beloved old character's backstories.
Whatever you do, don't call Nymga insane. He's better now. He has a certificate.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Dark Knight (2008) in Movies
Apr 16, 2018
Not a Masterpiece, but has a Masterful performance
With the DARK KNIGHT, Christopher Nolan kicks his movie's up a notch. His previous films were critical - but not necessarily commercial - successes. With the 2nd of his Batman trilogy, Nolan swings for the seats and in more ways than one, hits a home run.
THE DARK KNIGHT continues the "dark, realistic" Batman story line (based on the Frank Miller Graphic Novels of the same name) that Nolan started with BATMAN BEGINS. This film starts off simply enough - a "James Bond" type of opening action sequence that has Batman tying up some loose ends (specifically regarding the villain Scarecrow), but Nolan (and his brother, the Screenwriter Jonathan Nolan) do a clever thing, they interweave the introduction of a new villain, The Joker, into this universe.
While The Joker commits crime after crime, his real purpose is to bring chaos and anarchy to Gotham City - and he succeeds wonderfully well, despite the attempts of Batman, Alfred, Lucious Fox and Detective Jim Gordon to stop him.
As is befitting a criminal such as The Joker - and also, as befitting a big budget summer tent pole blockbuster film - the stunts of this film are amazing, over-the-top, explosive and LOUD. There are death defying stunts, breathlessly captured, long, screeching car chases (that's a good thing) and fight scenes that are well choreographed and are, by the most part, done "practically" (not with the aid of CGI), including a wonderful stunt of flipping a semi-truck and trailer up in the air and onto it's back by the nose of the truck.
These stunts would mean nothing if there wasn't some folks to root for and get behind - and this film has those characters - and performances - in spades with continued good work from Nolan "Dark Knight Trilogy" regulars Christian Bale (Batman/Bruce Wayne), Detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), Alfred the Butler (Michael Caine, really shining here) and Lucious Fox (Morgan Freeman - a nice character add to this universe for this trilogy). This core really brings the goods, which is good, for the newcomers to this series - Aaron Eckhart's District Attorney Harvey Dent and Maggie Gillenhall taking over the role of Rachel Dawes (from Katie Holmes) are pretty bland in comparison.
But...all of them pale in comparison to the once-in-a-lifetime performance and character of Heath Ledger as The Joker. Ledger, as most of you know, rightfully won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for this role - a rare feat for a "comic book" movie. This is not only the Best Supporting Actor turn for 2008, but I would argue it is one of the best Supporting Actor turns of all-time. Anytime that Ledger is on the screen, your eye goes to him and you lose all sense of anything else that is going on. His look, his tics, his pauses, his vocal patterns, his mannerisms, his walk, ALL convey a sense of the character and added all up, it is quite something to behold.
Many, many have called this their favorite "comic book" film of all time, but I don't think I share that idea. While Nolan spent much of his time on the characters, the "look" of the film and the effects and stunts, he left the story a little too thin and the length of this film is a bit too long, for my tastes. I was most certainly looking at my watch during the "thrilling conclusion" of this film waiting for it to be done.
Now...to be fair...most of the reason for that is that I was exhausted watching Ledger's performance. He wore me out. But...that's a compliment, not a complaint.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
THE DARK KNIGHT continues the "dark, realistic" Batman story line (based on the Frank Miller Graphic Novels of the same name) that Nolan started with BATMAN BEGINS. This film starts off simply enough - a "James Bond" type of opening action sequence that has Batman tying up some loose ends (specifically regarding the villain Scarecrow), but Nolan (and his brother, the Screenwriter Jonathan Nolan) do a clever thing, they interweave the introduction of a new villain, The Joker, into this universe.
While The Joker commits crime after crime, his real purpose is to bring chaos and anarchy to Gotham City - and he succeeds wonderfully well, despite the attempts of Batman, Alfred, Lucious Fox and Detective Jim Gordon to stop him.
As is befitting a criminal such as The Joker - and also, as befitting a big budget summer tent pole blockbuster film - the stunts of this film are amazing, over-the-top, explosive and LOUD. There are death defying stunts, breathlessly captured, long, screeching car chases (that's a good thing) and fight scenes that are well choreographed and are, by the most part, done "practically" (not with the aid of CGI), including a wonderful stunt of flipping a semi-truck and trailer up in the air and onto it's back by the nose of the truck.
These stunts would mean nothing if there wasn't some folks to root for and get behind - and this film has those characters - and performances - in spades with continued good work from Nolan "Dark Knight Trilogy" regulars Christian Bale (Batman/Bruce Wayne), Detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), Alfred the Butler (Michael Caine, really shining here) and Lucious Fox (Morgan Freeman - a nice character add to this universe for this trilogy). This core really brings the goods, which is good, for the newcomers to this series - Aaron Eckhart's District Attorney Harvey Dent and Maggie Gillenhall taking over the role of Rachel Dawes (from Katie Holmes) are pretty bland in comparison.
But...all of them pale in comparison to the once-in-a-lifetime performance and character of Heath Ledger as The Joker. Ledger, as most of you know, rightfully won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for this role - a rare feat for a "comic book" movie. This is not only the Best Supporting Actor turn for 2008, but I would argue it is one of the best Supporting Actor turns of all-time. Anytime that Ledger is on the screen, your eye goes to him and you lose all sense of anything else that is going on. His look, his tics, his pauses, his vocal patterns, his mannerisms, his walk, ALL convey a sense of the character and added all up, it is quite something to behold.
Many, many have called this their favorite "comic book" film of all time, but I don't think I share that idea. While Nolan spent much of his time on the characters, the "look" of the film and the effects and stunts, he left the story a little too thin and the length of this film is a bit too long, for my tastes. I was most certainly looking at my watch during the "thrilling conclusion" of this film waiting for it to be done.
Now...to be fair...most of the reason for that is that I was exhausted watching Ledger's performance. He wore me out. But...that's a compliment, not a complaint.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Blockers (2018) in Movies
Apr 25, 2018
Decent
Blockers met my expectations and I'm not saying that's a good thing. Don't get me wrong, it's a decent film that might make you crack a smile or two while you fold a load of laundry. However, it just misses the mark of being in the upper echelon of comedies. Let's dive into this film about three parents trying to stop their kids from losing their virginity on prom night.
Acting: 8
The film revolved mostly around the parents who tested their range in spite of the film being a comedy. Even with less screen time, however, I thought the kids (probably adults in actuality) outshined their parental figures by far. Gideon Adlon was outstanding in her role as Sam, a girl trying to figure things out in her own life, but still keep up with her friends. Her performance allows you to empathize with her character and root for her story to end well. She gives me a bit of a Maika Monroe vibe and that's a good thing.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Butt chugging. I could just stop there really. The entire scene was shot in such an awkward way, it put you right there in the moment. There were a handful of other scenes that were captured perfectly as well, but I won't ruin the experience. Let's just say the gang goes on an adventure to remember and you're left with a few hilarious sequences as a result.
Conflict: 5
I just couldn't get on board with the mission here. It felt like the parents had worse things to worry about than following their kids on prom night. Even they questioned their own aims at times. If you're not on board, you can't really expect me to be.
There was another part of me that thought, "What's the big deal in the first place? Is all this really worth it?" Of course the parents end up asking themselves the same question, but not until they're way in too deep. There were definitely some ways they could have raised the stakes to give the conflict more meaning.
Genre: 7
Was it laugh out loud funny? At times, absolutely. There were certain moments that I definitely wished there were more of, but all in all, I felt the film tiptoed around being balls-to-the-wall hilarious. Sure the comedy lagged in some places, but when it was funny, it was really funny.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
When it wasn't funny, on the other hand, the film just dragged on, leaving for a pretty inconsistent pace. When you waste dialogue on jokes or scenes that aren't funny, the film slows way down as a whole. Definite room for improvement.
Plot: 9
The story takes you on a comedy adventure from one shenanigan to the next. Despite the weak conflict, I thought the story itself was fine. I never felt as if things just happened for the sake of advancing the plot (Pet Peeve #1). The story was far-fetched, but it works within its own realm.
Resolution: 9
Loved the resolution for the parents as they all came to terms with their own realities. There were some moments of mending, laughing, and true feel-good points. I especially enjoyed the resolution for Sam's character. This could have easily been a film about just her and it would have been just as enjoyable if not better.
Overall: 73
Blockers manages to rebound from its very slow start into a decent semblance of a movie. The characters are hilarious and the film can be just as sentimental as it is funny at times. See it...at home.
Acting: 8
The film revolved mostly around the parents who tested their range in spite of the film being a comedy. Even with less screen time, however, I thought the kids (probably adults in actuality) outshined their parental figures by far. Gideon Adlon was outstanding in her role as Sam, a girl trying to figure things out in her own life, but still keep up with her friends. Her performance allows you to empathize with her character and root for her story to end well. She gives me a bit of a Maika Monroe vibe and that's a good thing.
Beginning: 4
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 9
Butt chugging. I could just stop there really. The entire scene was shot in such an awkward way, it put you right there in the moment. There were a handful of other scenes that were captured perfectly as well, but I won't ruin the experience. Let's just say the gang goes on an adventure to remember and you're left with a few hilarious sequences as a result.
Conflict: 5
I just couldn't get on board with the mission here. It felt like the parents had worse things to worry about than following their kids on prom night. Even they questioned their own aims at times. If you're not on board, you can't really expect me to be.
There was another part of me that thought, "What's the big deal in the first place? Is all this really worth it?" Of course the parents end up asking themselves the same question, but not until they're way in too deep. There were definitely some ways they could have raised the stakes to give the conflict more meaning.
Genre: 7
Was it laugh out loud funny? At times, absolutely. There were certain moments that I definitely wished there were more of, but all in all, I felt the film tiptoed around being balls-to-the-wall hilarious. Sure the comedy lagged in some places, but when it was funny, it was really funny.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 6
When it wasn't funny, on the other hand, the film just dragged on, leaving for a pretty inconsistent pace. When you waste dialogue on jokes or scenes that aren't funny, the film slows way down as a whole. Definite room for improvement.
Plot: 9
The story takes you on a comedy adventure from one shenanigan to the next. Despite the weak conflict, I thought the story itself was fine. I never felt as if things just happened for the sake of advancing the plot (Pet Peeve #1). The story was far-fetched, but it works within its own realm.
Resolution: 9
Loved the resolution for the parents as they all came to terms with their own realities. There were some moments of mending, laughing, and true feel-good points. I especially enjoyed the resolution for Sam's character. This could have easily been a film about just her and it would have been just as enjoyable if not better.
Overall: 73
Blockers manages to rebound from its very slow start into a decent semblance of a movie. The characters are hilarious and the film can be just as sentimental as it is funny at times. See it...at home.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated A Spark Of Light in Books
Mar 12, 2019
Serious subject but great characters & story
It starts off as a typical day at the Center, a women's reproductive health care clinic in Mississippi. For Hugh McElroy, it's his 40th birthday, and a day that he hopes will pass by quietly and quickly. But everything changes in a moment when an armed shooter enters the Center--shooting employees and patients on sight. Hugh, a negotiator for the police, is immediately called to the scene. Once there, he comes to the horrifying realization that his sister, Bex, and his only daughter, fifteen-year-old, Wren, are inside. Hugh tries to keep this information to himself, determined to save the people he loves the most. Meanwhile, many inside the clinic are struggling to stay alive, while the shooter is trying to come to terms with the reasons that brought him to the clinic in the first place.
"Here was the one thing all these women had in common: they hadn't asked for this moment in their lives."
Jodi Picoult is known for her powerful books that make you question the world around you, and her latest is certainly no exception. This novel asks interesting, thought-provoking, and timely questions: not just about abortion but about women's rights in general and the power men have over women, including their bodies. It makes you think, and it's certainly not an easy read. I found it to be an eye-opening experience. You may go in with a set view and particular political stance--and while this novel is in no way attempting to change your view--it allows you to see things from all sorts of points of view. The book is filled with complicated people and their stories; nothing is simple here.
The novel is told backward: starting with a shooter entering the clinic and working back from that moment. I'm not always a fan of this format, and it does take some getting used to (for me anyway). I read this one while I was sick and busy at work, so I always had to pause a little bit to get my bearings with each chapter. But the format causes the story to be extremely tense, forcing you to really want to know what happens. I've read some reviews where they thought the backward style left nothing unexplained/nothing left to know, but I found it to be the opposite. The first chapter leaves you with a near cliffhanger, and you spend the rest of the book frantically flipping the pages, trying to find out what happens.
I found this one to be especially poignant and excellent at portraying its characters. Picoult captures moments in time, as our characters remember back on things. It's a lovely look at fatherhood for two sets of families, and Hugh and his daughter, Wren, are a wonderful pair. Picoult does an excellent job paralleling them with another set of characters, too. Then there's Izzy, a nurse, with whom I dare you not to fall in love, and Dr. Louie, the doctor at the clinic. Both are so tough and easy to root for. I also learned so much while reading about them. It was easy to picture these characters and even easier to fall for them--all signs of a well-written novel.
By the end, Picoult has some twists up her sleeve: some surprising, some not. I thought the ending wrapped up a little quickly, but I still was impressed with one. You don't enjoy it, per se--the subject matter is a little rough for that, but you'll find yourself wowed by the characters and their shared story. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!)
"Here was the one thing all these women had in common: they hadn't asked for this moment in their lives."
Jodi Picoult is known for her powerful books that make you question the world around you, and her latest is certainly no exception. This novel asks interesting, thought-provoking, and timely questions: not just about abortion but about women's rights in general and the power men have over women, including their bodies. It makes you think, and it's certainly not an easy read. I found it to be an eye-opening experience. You may go in with a set view and particular political stance--and while this novel is in no way attempting to change your view--it allows you to see things from all sorts of points of view. The book is filled with complicated people and their stories; nothing is simple here.
The novel is told backward: starting with a shooter entering the clinic and working back from that moment. I'm not always a fan of this format, and it does take some getting used to (for me anyway). I read this one while I was sick and busy at work, so I always had to pause a little bit to get my bearings with each chapter. But the format causes the story to be extremely tense, forcing you to really want to know what happens. I've read some reviews where they thought the backward style left nothing unexplained/nothing left to know, but I found it to be the opposite. The first chapter leaves you with a near cliffhanger, and you spend the rest of the book frantically flipping the pages, trying to find out what happens.
I found this one to be especially poignant and excellent at portraying its characters. Picoult captures moments in time, as our characters remember back on things. It's a lovely look at fatherhood for two sets of families, and Hugh and his daughter, Wren, are a wonderful pair. Picoult does an excellent job paralleling them with another set of characters, too. Then there's Izzy, a nurse, with whom I dare you not to fall in love, and Dr. Louie, the doctor at the clinic. Both are so tough and easy to root for. I also learned so much while reading about them. It was easy to picture these characters and even easier to fall for them--all signs of a well-written novel.
By the end, Picoult has some twists up her sleeve: some surprising, some not. I thought the ending wrapped up a little quickly, but I still was impressed with one. You don't enjoy it, per se--the subject matter is a little rough for that, but you'll find yourself wowed by the characters and their shared story. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Up (2009) in Movies
May 30, 2019
A Movie That Never Stumbles Towards its End Goal.
After the death of his wife (tear), Carl Fredericksen (Edward Asner) decides to tie a bunch of balloons to his house and fly off on a great adventure. He gets more than what he bargained for when he realizes he won’t be alone on this adventure.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Up has more power in its first twelve minutes than most films do in their entire runtime. I can watch this a dozen times and it still hits me the same exact way. It tells the story of the relationship between Carl and Ellie in all of its highs and lows. You will be hard-pressed to find a better beginning than this throughout the history of movies. There’s something so real and heartfelt about it that sucks you in and sets up Carl’s character perfectly.
Characters: 10
Life has turned Carl into a cranky old man whose everything hurts all the time. He takes no guff and, at the end of the day, just wants to be left alone. He is one of numerous rich characters than shine throughout the movie, both animal and human alike. Young boyscout Russell (Jordan Nagai) puts a smile on my face with every single scene that he’s in. He’s always willing to go above and beyond to help. So inquisitive, yet so clueless. Throw in Doug the talking dog and the awesome Snipe and you have the perfect mix of original characters you want to root for.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
I was blown away by the amazing visuals Up has to offer. So many colors shoot out at you as you see the balloons hovering over Carl’s house for the first time. The house floats into Paradise Falls after surviving a wicked storm and you’re treated to just that—Paradise. Canyons and a tropical rainforest full of lush greenery. The detail that went into this animation is outstanding.
Conflict: 10
There is plenty of action to be had on this great adventure. What starts as an innocent trip is quickly disrupted by a storm that turns everything upside down. The adventure soars to new heights after that, never really slowing down much for you to check on the time. Beginnings are important, but middles even moreso, and the events that unfold during the meat of the film are fun and harrowing at the same time.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Up is like riding a smooth wave. Some moments are more intense than others, but you’re always headed towards an end goal of sorts. Bad pacing is filled with road blocks and unnecessary scenes, but Up manages to maximize its full runtime by making every single moment count.
Plot: 10
A beautiful story that couldn’t have been told in a more beautiful way. It’s fun and unique, definitely something you haven’t seen before. I honestly can’t think of a better way it could have been done.
Resolution: 10
I’m one of the few weirdos who was touched just as much by the ending as I was the beginning. It makes you happy to see what befalls the characters, yet a bit sad as you realize the movie is reaching its conclusion. At the end, Up doesn’t linger. It does what it needs to do and concludes perfectly.
Overall: 100
There is a reason Up is one of three animated movies nominated for Best Picture. It is one of the greatest movies ever made and tops my all-time list as of 5/30/2019. Noticed I didn’t say “one of the greatest animated movies”, but one of the greatest MOVIES. It’s an all-timer driven by great character relationships and powerful, emotion-filled scenes.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Up has more power in its first twelve minutes than most films do in their entire runtime. I can watch this a dozen times and it still hits me the same exact way. It tells the story of the relationship between Carl and Ellie in all of its highs and lows. You will be hard-pressed to find a better beginning than this throughout the history of movies. There’s something so real and heartfelt about it that sucks you in and sets up Carl’s character perfectly.
Characters: 10
Life has turned Carl into a cranky old man whose everything hurts all the time. He takes no guff and, at the end of the day, just wants to be left alone. He is one of numerous rich characters than shine throughout the movie, both animal and human alike. Young boyscout Russell (Jordan Nagai) puts a smile on my face with every single scene that he’s in. He’s always willing to go above and beyond to help. So inquisitive, yet so clueless. Throw in Doug the talking dog and the awesome Snipe and you have the perfect mix of original characters you want to root for.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
I was blown away by the amazing visuals Up has to offer. So many colors shoot out at you as you see the balloons hovering over Carl’s house for the first time. The house floats into Paradise Falls after surviving a wicked storm and you’re treated to just that—Paradise. Canyons and a tropical rainforest full of lush greenery. The detail that went into this animation is outstanding.
Conflict: 10
There is plenty of action to be had on this great adventure. What starts as an innocent trip is quickly disrupted by a storm that turns everything upside down. The adventure soars to new heights after that, never really slowing down much for you to check on the time. Beginnings are important, but middles even moreso, and the events that unfold during the meat of the film are fun and harrowing at the same time.
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Up is like riding a smooth wave. Some moments are more intense than others, but you’re always headed towards an end goal of sorts. Bad pacing is filled with road blocks and unnecessary scenes, but Up manages to maximize its full runtime by making every single moment count.
Plot: 10
A beautiful story that couldn’t have been told in a more beautiful way. It’s fun and unique, definitely something you haven’t seen before. I honestly can’t think of a better way it could have been done.
Resolution: 10
I’m one of the few weirdos who was touched just as much by the ending as I was the beginning. It makes you happy to see what befalls the characters, yet a bit sad as you realize the movie is reaching its conclusion. At the end, Up doesn’t linger. It does what it needs to do and concludes perfectly.
Overall: 100
There is a reason Up is one of three animated movies nominated for Best Picture. It is one of the greatest movies ever made and tops my all-time list as of 5/30/2019. Noticed I didn’t say “one of the greatest animated movies”, but one of the greatest MOVIES. It’s an all-timer driven by great character relationships and powerful, emotion-filled scenes.
Kyera (8 KP) rated The 5th Wave: Book 1 in Books
Jan 31, 2018
What do you do when the Others come? You can't trust your senses, you can't trust anyone. Your only goal is to survive and maybe keep some of your humanity intact. When you can't trust anything or anyone - do you shoot first or take the chance when that hesitation will probably mean your life?
When the first wave comes, all technology is gone in a moment. An EMP takes everything out. The second wave caused massive tsunamis and destroyed the coasts of the world. The third wave infected and killed 97% of the remaining population in brutal fashion. The fourth wave destroyed all trust in humanity and introduced the constant threat of drones. The wave that makes you question every action... and the fifth wave... is us.
Cassie must survive in this strange world with no mother, father or brother to care for anymore - fighting and living because if she is the last human on Earth she refuses to go out with a whimper. She will fight until she can fight no longer. But she is not the only body left, even if she may be the only one with her own mind left. It is possible that one in every three people left is an Other. A Silencer. An Imposter. Has your mind and body been hacked? Do they look like us or can they make themselves look like us? Or maybe they've been here all along. Waiting. That's when you can't trust your eyes. You may be looking at an Other and not even realize it.
We next meet Ben, who must rediscover his fighting spirit if he wants to survive and survive he must. After not succumbing to the virus that infected him, he cannot give up. Taught to fight and given a new name, he must battle for his place.
Part III shows us a new perspective, an Other awakened in a human body and given a mission. To kill. To finish the human race, one by one. He has been tracking Cassie for a while and takes aim. Shoots. Traps her, but for some reason cannot bring himself to finish her.
Hunted. Shot. Then saved? Cassie wakes up being tended to by Evan on the family farm. He is the only one left of his family. Evan helps to nurse her back to health, bakes bread, carves walking sticks and wants to help her rescue her brother Sammy. What can't this farm boy do? And why does this make us so suspicious? Even Cassie can't quite bring herself to trust him. There are just little things that seem off, like a life-long farm boy with smooth hands and perfect cuticles. No callouses to be found. There's a small nagging feeling in her mind that asks- what if he's an Other?
The characters are well written and believable. You feel for them. Root for their successes and hurt when they fail. You wish for their survival despite the current chaos and destruction of the world. The world is familiar and yet fundamentally altered by the Others.
The book draws you in from the start and you puzzle over people and motives. Who will survive and if the human race survives this destruction, how will this ordeal fundamentally change the survivors? I am constantly questioning my conclusions and re-evaluating what I believe i happening. A great book is able to reveal just enough that the entire plot is not given away by page ten. This post-apocalyptic, alien-invasion novel is highly recommenede, especially if you plan to watch the movie. I cannot wait to read the next book, Infinite Sea!
When the first wave comes, all technology is gone in a moment. An EMP takes everything out. The second wave caused massive tsunamis and destroyed the coasts of the world. The third wave infected and killed 97% of the remaining population in brutal fashion. The fourth wave destroyed all trust in humanity and introduced the constant threat of drones. The wave that makes you question every action... and the fifth wave... is us.
Cassie must survive in this strange world with no mother, father or brother to care for anymore - fighting and living because if she is the last human on Earth she refuses to go out with a whimper. She will fight until she can fight no longer. But she is not the only body left, even if she may be the only one with her own mind left. It is possible that one in every three people left is an Other. A Silencer. An Imposter. Has your mind and body been hacked? Do they look like us or can they make themselves look like us? Or maybe they've been here all along. Waiting. That's when you can't trust your eyes. You may be looking at an Other and not even realize it.
We next meet Ben, who must rediscover his fighting spirit if he wants to survive and survive he must. After not succumbing to the virus that infected him, he cannot give up. Taught to fight and given a new name, he must battle for his place.
Part III shows us a new perspective, an Other awakened in a human body and given a mission. To kill. To finish the human race, one by one. He has been tracking Cassie for a while and takes aim. Shoots. Traps her, but for some reason cannot bring himself to finish her.
Hunted. Shot. Then saved? Cassie wakes up being tended to by Evan on the family farm. He is the only one left of his family. Evan helps to nurse her back to health, bakes bread, carves walking sticks and wants to help her rescue her brother Sammy. What can't this farm boy do? And why does this make us so suspicious? Even Cassie can't quite bring herself to trust him. There are just little things that seem off, like a life-long farm boy with smooth hands and perfect cuticles. No callouses to be found. There's a small nagging feeling in her mind that asks- what if he's an Other?
The characters are well written and believable. You feel for them. Root for their successes and hurt when they fail. You wish for their survival despite the current chaos and destruction of the world. The world is familiar and yet fundamentally altered by the Others.
The book draws you in from the start and you puzzle over people and motives. Who will survive and if the human race survives this destruction, how will this ordeal fundamentally change the survivors? I am constantly questioning my conclusions and re-evaluating what I believe i happening. A great book is able to reveal just enough that the entire plot is not given away by page ten. This post-apocalyptic, alien-invasion novel is highly recommenede, especially if you plan to watch the movie. I cannot wait to read the next book, Infinite Sea!
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Lies She Told in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Liza is a struggling writer given an ultimatum by her editor: write a thriller for me in a month. It's been ages since Liza was on the bestseller list (truly, only her first novel was a real success). Meanwhile, she's a mess of fertility drugs and hormones, as she and her lawyer husband, David, are trying to start a family--and getting nowhere. Even worse, David's best friend and business partner, Nick, has been missing for over a month. David is increasingly frantic and distracted, and the police have no leads. So Liza pours her heart and soul into the story of Beth, a new mom who suspects her own lawyer husband of cheating on her. Beth catches him the act and makes a split-second decision that will change their lives forever. As Liza continues to write, the lines between fact and fiction become increasingly blurred.
I was excited to finally pick this one up, as so many of my friends had enjoyed it, but alas, I'm going to be the killjoy here <i>who stands against the popular wave of public opinion.</i> Please note that most people really loved this book and who knows, maybe I'm just getting cranky in my old age. ;) Or maybe I got too caught up in all the hype.
Either way, this one was a let down for me. <i> The clues left along in the story for the reader stand out as huge glaring red flags, basically just screaming the plot twists out</i>. Nothing came as a surprise, I had the entire thing worked out in about the first 15 minutes. Now, I won't lie, this is still an incredibly readable book - <i>it's a fast read</i> for sure. You immediately realize that Liza is an unreliable narrator and a ticking time bomb. I never really warmed to her, but she's somewhat fascinating in trying to figure out what she's up to and what's truly happening.
I've seen some complaints about it being hard to figure out what chapters were Liza's and which were Beth's--I didn't have that problem. They alternate and in my version, Liza's were marked. I occasionally had to remind myself who had which backstory, but I believe that was part of the idea--of Liza blurring the reality around her. And, truly, it was a great idea in concept.
Unfortunately, I found both women to be somewhat frustrating and didn't really buy all of their actions or relationships. Liza's quick attachment to Trevor, for instance, or some of Beth's bizarre decisions. That made it harder to root for them. And, again, absolutely nothing that occurred was a surprise. That was my biggest issue. I want my thriller to surprise me, but none of the twists were shocking whatsoever, right up to the end. Sigh.
Still, as I said, it's an oddly compelling read with the blurred parallels between Liza and Beth and you "wondering" what happened to Nick. At the end, I pondered for a moment whether it was brilliant or awful, but I just couldn't enjoy something I found so predictable, even if it was a page-turner at times. But, I'm certainly in the minority here, so take my review with a grain of salt!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review. It's available everywhere as of 09/12/2017.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.instagram.com/justacatandabook/">Instagram</a>; </center>
I was excited to finally pick this one up, as so many of my friends had enjoyed it, but alas, I'm going to be the killjoy here <i>who stands against the popular wave of public opinion.</i> Please note that most people really loved this book and who knows, maybe I'm just getting cranky in my old age. ;) Or maybe I got too caught up in all the hype.
Either way, this one was a let down for me. <i> The clues left along in the story for the reader stand out as huge glaring red flags, basically just screaming the plot twists out</i>. Nothing came as a surprise, I had the entire thing worked out in about the first 15 minutes. Now, I won't lie, this is still an incredibly readable book - <i>it's a fast read</i> for sure. You immediately realize that Liza is an unreliable narrator and a ticking time bomb. I never really warmed to her, but she's somewhat fascinating in trying to figure out what she's up to and what's truly happening.
I've seen some complaints about it being hard to figure out what chapters were Liza's and which were Beth's--I didn't have that problem. They alternate and in my version, Liza's were marked. I occasionally had to remind myself who had which backstory, but I believe that was part of the idea--of Liza blurring the reality around her. And, truly, it was a great idea in concept.
Unfortunately, I found both women to be somewhat frustrating and didn't really buy all of their actions or relationships. Liza's quick attachment to Trevor, for instance, or some of Beth's bizarre decisions. That made it harder to root for them. And, again, absolutely nothing that occurred was a surprise. That was my biggest issue. I want my thriller to surprise me, but none of the twists were shocking whatsoever, right up to the end. Sigh.
Still, as I said, it's an oddly compelling read with the blurred parallels between Liza and Beth and you "wondering" what happened to Nick. At the end, I pondered for a moment whether it was brilliant or awful, but I just couldn't enjoy something I found so predictable, even if it was a page-turner at times. But, I'm certainly in the minority here, so take my review with a grain of salt!
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you!) in return for an unbiased review. It's available everywhere as of 09/12/2017.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.instagram.com/justacatandabook/">Instagram</a>; </center>