Search
Search results
Isabel Smith (34 KP) rated Obscura in Books
Jun 28, 2018
A fine example of genre-blending!
Joe Hart’s Obscura is a must-read for fans of science fiction and space travel. Dr. Gillian Ryan, a neural radiologist, is down on her luck. Ever since losing her husband to the mysterious new form of dementia called Losian’s, she has been working hard to find a cure for the disease that is now afflicting her only daughter. She’s so close to locating the exact neurons in the hippocampus that are affected by the disease when she gets word that her funding has been cut. With all the stress she is undergoing, it’s no wonder her opioid addiction makes a reappearance.
When an old colleague that now works for NASA offers her the opportunity to continue her Losian’s research with unlimited funding, she’s hesitant to take him up on the proposition because he wants something from her in return: to accompany a group into space and study the inhabitants of a United Nations space station who are experiencing neurological side effects due to working on a top-secret NASA project. Even though she hates the idea of leaving her daughter behind for six months, she knows she can’t pass up an opportunity like this and so she agrees to the terms.
Almost from the moment she steps off the space shuttle and onto the space station (or is it?) things begin to feel off. Her research assistant, Birk Lindqvist, starts experiencing major hallucinations and she is sedated once she discovers a startling truth that was initially kept hidden from her. Everything is called into question and nothing is at it seems. What’s really going on? Where is the station they’re supposed to be rendezvousing with? And why does it feel like there is a hidden presence on board with her after everyone goes into stasis?
Obscura is a heart-pounding, adrenaline-filled thriller set in the vastness of space. Is that great or what? The prospect of reading a psychological thriller combined with a space mission story is what initially attracted me to the novel. Joe Hart does not disappoint with his ability to blend the two genres seamlessly. He even tossed in the element of the ‘unreliable narrator’ with Gillian for a little while there during her opioid abuse and withdrawal periods where readers couldn’t judge which of her experiences were real and which ones weren’t. Genius! I loved every bit of it: the deception, the uncertainty, the space travel, the action scenes, the startling discoveries…everything!
When an old colleague that now works for NASA offers her the opportunity to continue her Losian’s research with unlimited funding, she’s hesitant to take him up on the proposition because he wants something from her in return: to accompany a group into space and study the inhabitants of a United Nations space station who are experiencing neurological side effects due to working on a top-secret NASA project. Even though she hates the idea of leaving her daughter behind for six months, she knows she can’t pass up an opportunity like this and so she agrees to the terms.
Almost from the moment she steps off the space shuttle and onto the space station (or is it?) things begin to feel off. Her research assistant, Birk Lindqvist, starts experiencing major hallucinations and she is sedated once she discovers a startling truth that was initially kept hidden from her. Everything is called into question and nothing is at it seems. What’s really going on? Where is the station they’re supposed to be rendezvousing with? And why does it feel like there is a hidden presence on board with her after everyone goes into stasis?
Obscura is a heart-pounding, adrenaline-filled thriller set in the vastness of space. Is that great or what? The prospect of reading a psychological thriller combined with a space mission story is what initially attracted me to the novel. Joe Hart does not disappoint with his ability to blend the two genres seamlessly. He even tossed in the element of the ‘unreliable narrator’ with Gillian for a little while there during her opioid abuse and withdrawal periods where readers couldn’t judge which of her experiences were real and which ones weren’t. Genius! I loved every bit of it: the deception, the uncertainty, the space travel, the action scenes, the startling discoveries…everything!
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Stone of Destiny: A Sherlock Holmes Adventure in Books
Jul 30, 2018
Fans of Sherlock Holmes, fans of mystery, fans of adventure and suspense - this might be your next favorite book! Now, I have never read a Sherlock Holmes book before, so I can’t compare this book to the original books from Arthur Conan Doyle. But, what I will do for you is tell you all I thought about this book!
The story begins when during the funeral of Queen Victoria, a group of Irish separatists steal the Coronation Stone, on which every royal has been crowned. To retrieve this important object, the royals will hire Sherlock Holmes to solve the mystery. Holmes and his friend Watson travel to Ireland and try to infiltrate the Irish Republican Brotherhood, a group they think is responsible for all that happened.
Even though this is a Sherlock Holmes book, we actually unravel the story through a Watson-first-person point of view. He, to me, is a very interesting character, even though he follows Holmes like a puppy and doesn’t seem to have a personal opinion.
As for Sherlock Holmes, even though I really like the mysterious aura about him, and how smart he can be - I also see him as one of the rude aristocrats that refuse to speak to other people that seem to be lower in the hierarchy to them. This is of course, not presented in the book in any way - but I simply had that impression.
I loved the beginning, and I loved the mystery and suspense throughout the whole book. I was never ahead of the book, and my assumptions were never correct. I loved how the author kept us in the dark right until the end.
The small things I didn’t like though, were the slow pace - I have to admit, the pace was really slow for me, and I couldn’t wait until a chapter is finished to see if there would be more action. Then, even the action scenes weren’t as thrilling as I would expect them to be. And finally, there were no big plot twists, which I think we might have used in the book.
But - we did have a lovely mystery solving story, and we had a lot of history information floating around. We also had another book with Sherlock Holmes, that for you - lovers of the Sherlock Holmes books will of course be something you enjoy.
I greatly recommend it to you if you love the good old Sherlock Holmes adventures!
Many thanks to the author, Richard T. Ryan, for sending me an e-copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
The story begins when during the funeral of Queen Victoria, a group of Irish separatists steal the Coronation Stone, on which every royal has been crowned. To retrieve this important object, the royals will hire Sherlock Holmes to solve the mystery. Holmes and his friend Watson travel to Ireland and try to infiltrate the Irish Republican Brotherhood, a group they think is responsible for all that happened.
Even though this is a Sherlock Holmes book, we actually unravel the story through a Watson-first-person point of view. He, to me, is a very interesting character, even though he follows Holmes like a puppy and doesn’t seem to have a personal opinion.
As for Sherlock Holmes, even though I really like the mysterious aura about him, and how smart he can be - I also see him as one of the rude aristocrats that refuse to speak to other people that seem to be lower in the hierarchy to them. This is of course, not presented in the book in any way - but I simply had that impression.
I loved the beginning, and I loved the mystery and suspense throughout the whole book. I was never ahead of the book, and my assumptions were never correct. I loved how the author kept us in the dark right until the end.
The small things I didn’t like though, were the slow pace - I have to admit, the pace was really slow for me, and I couldn’t wait until a chapter is finished to see if there would be more action. Then, even the action scenes weren’t as thrilling as I would expect them to be. And finally, there were no big plot twists, which I think we might have used in the book.
But - we did have a lovely mystery solving story, and we had a lot of history information floating around. We also had another book with Sherlock Holmes, that for you - lovers of the Sherlock Holmes books will of course be something you enjoy.
I greatly recommend it to you if you love the good old Sherlock Holmes adventures!
Many thanks to the author, Richard T. Ryan, for sending me an e-copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Favourite (2018) in Movies
Jan 24, 2019
Quirky and original with strong performances and direction
Greek Director Yorgos Lanthimos is the director of such quirky, bizarre comedy/dramas as DOGTOOTH, THE LOBSTER and KILLING OF A SACRED DEER and his latest, THE FAVOURITE is no different, so when it was nominated for 10 Oscars, I thought I'd better go see what all the fuss was all about.
And I'm glad I did for THE FAVOURITE is a biting, funny, sarcastic, bizarre, intense and interesting Royal Court drama about the inner workings, back channel dealings and backstabbing social climbing in Queen Anne's court in England in the early 18th Century as seen through Lanthimos' camera lens - a lens that is different indeed.
Starring Oscar winners Rachel Weisz (THE CONSTANT GARDNER) and Emma Stone (LA LA LAND) in their Oscar nominated turns as cousins who vie for the attentions of Queen Anne (Olivia Colman, also Oscar nominated), it is the rare film that features 3 strong women who play off each other well and where each one is a full character in and of themselves - all 3 with strengths and weaknesses that make them real and compelling and performed by 3 strong actresses. Needless to say that each Oscar nod is well deserved.
But the real star of this film is the sensibilities and camera work of Lanthimos. He uses unusual camera angles, unusual angles and bizarre imagery to show the unreality of the court in relation to the real world around them and is a commentary on these people as much as it shows the action on the screen. This film is an artist with a true, unique vision and is one that, while not for everyone, is one that worked for me.
Lanthimos layers on a rich tapestry of story (by Oscar nominated Screenplay writers Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara) locations (by Oscar nominated Production Designers Fijona Crombie and Alice Felton), Costumes (by Oscar nominated costumer Sandy Powell) , editing (by Oscar nominated Yorgos Mavropsaridis), Cinematography (by Oscar nominated Robbie Ryan) and performances, direction and film.
I think you get the point - this film has become (rightfully so) a darling of the Awards season and is well worth checking out - while this film is not entirely successful in what it attempts to do, it is fun to watch the attempt and the strong performances, characters, direction, costumes, cinematography, etc...which more than makes up for any shortcomings in the story (especially the final act of the film).
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And I'm glad I did for THE FAVOURITE is a biting, funny, sarcastic, bizarre, intense and interesting Royal Court drama about the inner workings, back channel dealings and backstabbing social climbing in Queen Anne's court in England in the early 18th Century as seen through Lanthimos' camera lens - a lens that is different indeed.
Starring Oscar winners Rachel Weisz (THE CONSTANT GARDNER) and Emma Stone (LA LA LAND) in their Oscar nominated turns as cousins who vie for the attentions of Queen Anne (Olivia Colman, also Oscar nominated), it is the rare film that features 3 strong women who play off each other well and where each one is a full character in and of themselves - all 3 with strengths and weaknesses that make them real and compelling and performed by 3 strong actresses. Needless to say that each Oscar nod is well deserved.
But the real star of this film is the sensibilities and camera work of Lanthimos. He uses unusual camera angles, unusual angles and bizarre imagery to show the unreality of the court in relation to the real world around them and is a commentary on these people as much as it shows the action on the screen. This film is an artist with a true, unique vision and is one that, while not for everyone, is one that worked for me.
Lanthimos layers on a rich tapestry of story (by Oscar nominated Screenplay writers Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara) locations (by Oscar nominated Production Designers Fijona Crombie and Alice Felton), Costumes (by Oscar nominated costumer Sandy Powell) , editing (by Oscar nominated Yorgos Mavropsaridis), Cinematography (by Oscar nominated Robbie Ryan) and performances, direction and film.
I think you get the point - this film has become (rightfully so) a darling of the Awards season and is well worth checking out - while this film is not entirely successful in what it attempts to do, it is fun to watch the attempt and the strong performances, characters, direction, costumes, cinematography, etc...which more than makes up for any shortcomings in the story (especially the final act of the film).
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) in Movies
Aug 5, 2019 (Updated Aug 6, 2019)
Genocide, Shmenocide.
Hobbs and Shaw had an easy job, we have these two great characters that have already been set up for us in other movies so all they needed to do was let them loose in an over the top action spectacle that knows exactly what it is. So why does what we actually got feel like an overlong, overstuffed film with characters (the reason why we are here) that aren't likeable anymore?. Is it the banter thats either worn thin or feels like its trying to hard, the scenes full of characters constantly explaining the plot or whats going to happen, the paint by numbers villain with generic motives or the many random nods to pop culture and other popular things that people like that didnt do anything but make me feel like a carrot is being dangled in front of us the entire time or im watching a peter kay stand up. Answer is im not sure but i know one thing, for every part of this movie i found cool or fun two more things popped up and dragged my enjoyment down. Action set pieces are really cool and well very well filmed with great scale/destruction and the movie overall has a 90s/commando action movie style i really enjoyed which might of worked at an hour and a half but just when you think its over another useless 40 minutes are then tagged on the end and the film becomes basically a big Dwayne Johnson advertisement. Yes i get it he has roots and the tribe thing going on, he has big muscles, he was a wrestler and he has a big tribal tattoo but why does that have to be an integral part of every films plot that he's in nowadays?. I'm just bored of seeing it now and id rather they cut the movie shorter and had a tighter film overall or explored the villain a bit more to be honest. I really did say find some enjoyment in Hobbs and Shaw (especially the action) but it was let down to often elsewhere. Statham steals the show here and clearly tries to have fun with his character but Idris Elba feels wasted as a villain and theres no tension or threat at all when your two leads seem invincible. Ryan Reynolds and Kevin Heart were also totaly unnecessary as was that Italian Job connection. Id say see it for the action scene at about 1h 40m in but other than that is sadly very veru forgettable and a little boring.
Makr: Custom Design & Logos
Shopping and Lifestyle
App
Be your own designer with Makr, a universal creativity app for designing and printing custom goods....
Steven Spielberg: A Biography
Book
Steven Spielberg is responsible for some of the most successful films ever made: "Jaws", "Close...
Christs, Redeemers by The Body
8.0
Rate It
Album
It has been said by more than a few intrepid listeners that The Body is the most brutal band on the...
Sludge Metal Noise Drone
Darren (1599 KP) rated Art of Deception (2019) in Movies
Oct 2, 2019
Characters – Joseph Markham has been working for the CIA on a top-secret mind control project, it has reached the final stages with the final test being a success. He along with his wife soon become targets for the CIA who don’t want loose ends, which means Joseph will show his skills and training that his boss never knew he had, he will uses his training to stay alive and plan to expose the truth to the world. Valentina is the wife of Joseph, she is just as deadly, despite being held captive, she knows how the stay alive. Roland Smith is the project leader that wants to tie up any loose ends involved in the project, he doesn’t want anybody being able to spill the plans and puts all his effort into killing the Markham’s.
Performances – Richard Ryan in the leading role and on directing duties handles everything very well, with he combat scenes, showing his character’s deadly ability along with using the brains to stay ahead of the game. Jackie Nova brings us the feisty character that is the highlight of her screen time. Leon van Waas makes for the fun over the top villain through the film.
Story – The story here follows a couple that become targets of the CIA after their work for them, where they show their skills to survive and expose the truth about the project. This does follow everything we know from a late night action story, we have a skilled killer that must come out of his retired decision to protect himself, his wife and the world, when the moment comes for him to shine. We do have a villain that does following everything we are expecting to see with his evil plan that does need to be stopped. We can easily sit back and relax through this film, with the feisty dialogue being used through the film too.
Action – The action in the film is easy to watch, we deal with different fight scenes, with different fighting techniques being used to show skills behind the characters.
Settings – The film does keep the settings simple, we do have the CIA offices which sees the tight corridors when it comes to dealing with the fights and the secret locations where kidnapped people will be held.
Scene of the Movie – The plan to save the day.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have had more combat sequences from Valentina.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun late night action film that could be enjoyed by all the action junkies, it keeps most things simple, without being down as plain.
Overall: Fun Action Film.
Performances – Richard Ryan in the leading role and on directing duties handles everything very well, with he combat scenes, showing his character’s deadly ability along with using the brains to stay ahead of the game. Jackie Nova brings us the feisty character that is the highlight of her screen time. Leon van Waas makes for the fun over the top villain through the film.
Story – The story here follows a couple that become targets of the CIA after their work for them, where they show their skills to survive and expose the truth about the project. This does follow everything we know from a late night action story, we have a skilled killer that must come out of his retired decision to protect himself, his wife and the world, when the moment comes for him to shine. We do have a villain that does following everything we are expecting to see with his evil plan that does need to be stopped. We can easily sit back and relax through this film, with the feisty dialogue being used through the film too.
Action – The action in the film is easy to watch, we deal with different fight scenes, with different fighting techniques being used to show skills behind the characters.
Settings – The film does keep the settings simple, we do have the CIA offices which sees the tight corridors when it comes to dealing with the fights and the secret locations where kidnapped people will be held.
Scene of the Movie – The plan to save the day.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We could have had more combat sequences from Valentina.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun late night action film that could be enjoyed by all the action junkies, it keeps most things simple, without being down as plain.
Overall: Fun Action Film.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Churchill (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“We will bore them on the beaches”.
“Churchill” tells the story of the great leader’s extreme opposition to “Operation Overlord”, the Eisenhower-led invasion of Normandy in 1944 that ultimately led – more by luck that judgement perhaps – to the fall of the Third Reich in the following year.
I’m not a historian but am married to one, so know the importance of “sources” in the pursuit of “truth”: one man’s terrorist is after all another man’s freedom fighter from a different perspective. Some sources on the internet (here for example) certainly suggest the The British (led by Churchill as Prime Minister) might have sensibly promoted the acceleration of the Italian campaign to reach Berlin rather than the far riskier Channel crossing.
This film however paints Churchill as a man demonised by his decision to send young men to their deaths in the fateful Gallipoli beach landings of World War One, with this – rather than a sensible strategic one – being the primary reason for opposing the Normandy landings. To further paint him as a bumbling old fool that is “worked around” by his peers strikes you as borderline libellous.
So the film’s script, by novice Alex von Tunzelmann, immediately set the wrong tone with me, and the undeniably strong performances of Brian Cox (“The Bourne Identity”) as Churchill and the wonderful Miranda Richardson (“Harry Potter” and the soon to be released “Stronger”) as Clemmie can’t fill the gap.
Besides anything else, diretor Jonathan Teplitzky (“The Railway Man”) delivers a piece so dull and lifeless, and with so much brooding, that its not remotely enjoyable. You think the introduction of a bullied secretary – Ms Garrett (Ella Purnell) – with a strong personal connection to ‘Overlord’ will add dramatic colour? But this angle too seems to go nowhere in particular.
There are many tales of the Normandy landings that are fascinating, over and above the dramatic sweep of “The Longest Day” (which is surely well overdue for a remake?) and Spielberg’s fictionalisation of the Niland brothers in “Saving Private Ryan”. How about the 2 out of 29 American amphibious tanks that reached Omaha beach after ignoring British advice to not launch so far from shore in rough seas?
So, as a film, it might be “worthy”. But I didn’t remotely believe the depiction of Churchill and it astonished me that such a rivetingly exciting period of British history could deliver a film that bored me. So, sorry, can’t recommend this one. Perhaps Joe Wright will have a better go with Gary Oldman as Churchill in “Darkest Hour”…
I’m not a historian but am married to one, so know the importance of “sources” in the pursuit of “truth”: one man’s terrorist is after all another man’s freedom fighter from a different perspective. Some sources on the internet (here for example) certainly suggest the The British (led by Churchill as Prime Minister) might have sensibly promoted the acceleration of the Italian campaign to reach Berlin rather than the far riskier Channel crossing.
This film however paints Churchill as a man demonised by his decision to send young men to their deaths in the fateful Gallipoli beach landings of World War One, with this – rather than a sensible strategic one – being the primary reason for opposing the Normandy landings. To further paint him as a bumbling old fool that is “worked around” by his peers strikes you as borderline libellous.
So the film’s script, by novice Alex von Tunzelmann, immediately set the wrong tone with me, and the undeniably strong performances of Brian Cox (“The Bourne Identity”) as Churchill and the wonderful Miranda Richardson (“Harry Potter” and the soon to be released “Stronger”) as Clemmie can’t fill the gap.
Besides anything else, diretor Jonathan Teplitzky (“The Railway Man”) delivers a piece so dull and lifeless, and with so much brooding, that its not remotely enjoyable. You think the introduction of a bullied secretary – Ms Garrett (Ella Purnell) – with a strong personal connection to ‘Overlord’ will add dramatic colour? But this angle too seems to go nowhere in particular.
There are many tales of the Normandy landings that are fascinating, over and above the dramatic sweep of “The Longest Day” (which is surely well overdue for a remake?) and Spielberg’s fictionalisation of the Niland brothers in “Saving Private Ryan”. How about the 2 out of 29 American amphibious tanks that reached Omaha beach after ignoring British advice to not launch so far from shore in rough seas?
So, as a film, it might be “worthy”. But I didn’t remotely believe the depiction of Churchill and it astonished me that such a rivetingly exciting period of British history could deliver a film that bored me. So, sorry, can’t recommend this one. Perhaps Joe Wright will have a better go with Gary Oldman as Churchill in “Darkest Hour”…
Firefly - Season 1
9.3
Rate It
TV Season
Firefly is an American space western drama television series created by writer and director Joss...
Firefly Serenity Joss Whedon Browncoats TV Series Fox