Search
Merissa (12950 KP) rated Wild Fixation (Rebel Rockstars #2) in Books
May 13, 2025
WILD FIXATION is the second book in the Rebel Rockstars series. This time, it's lead singer Jacob's turn. He has been fixated on Seth, the bodyguard, since their tour with The Ten Hours. Of course, nothing can happen... which you immediately know means something will happen!
This is definitely a case of star-crossed lovers, at least to begin with. They both like each other, but both know they need to be professional. Sometimes though, that isn't enough. I did enjoy the push-and-pull between them both as they tried to do the right thing. The flirting disguised as teasing was fun to read.
I loved the support Jacob had from his friends/bandmates. It was nice to read a book about a band without the usual theatrics and infighting. I want to go back and read Keannen and Tim's story, but I'm also looking forward to Shawn's!!!
The one thing I didn't really understand was the whole Ryan situation. I know it was necessary for Seth and Jacob, but WHY?!?! Given his history, I wanted to know his reasons. Anyway, moving on...
This was a great book that I thoroughly enjoyed and have no hesitation in recommending.
** Same worded review will appear elsewhere. **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
May 13, 2025
This is definitely a case of star-crossed lovers, at least to begin with. They both like each other, but both know they need to be professional. Sometimes though, that isn't enough. I did enjoy the push-and-pull between them both as they tried to do the right thing. The flirting disguised as teasing was fun to read.
I loved the support Jacob had from his friends/bandmates. It was nice to read a book about a band without the usual theatrics and infighting. I want to go back and read Keannen and Tim's story, but I'm also looking forward to Shawn's!!!
The one thing I didn't really understand was the whole Ryan situation. I know it was necessary for Seth and Jacob, but WHY?!?! Given his history, I wanted to know his reasons. Anyway, moving on...
This was a great book that I thoroughly enjoyed and have no hesitation in recommending.
** Same worded review will appear elsewhere. **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
May 13, 2025
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Dark Lake in Books
Dec 24, 2017 (Updated Dec 24, 2017)
intriguing (2 more)
compelling
surprising
Rosalind Ryan, a popular yet mysterious teacher, is found dead by the local lake. She's been murdered, her body left floating with red roses surrounding her. Detective Sergeant Gemma Woodstock and her partner, Felix, are called in to investigate Rosalind's case. Nothing about Rosalind adds up--everyone seemed to like her, but no one really knew her. She lived in a cheap apartment, but clearly had expensive taste in wine and makeup. She was the youngest of four, with three brothers, one of with whom she'd quarreled recently. Her father, George, is ill and runs a large business conglomerate in Australia, yet seemed to adore his inscrutable daughter. As for Gemma, she has memories of Rosalind from their time together in high school, when the beautiful Rose seemed enigmatic even then. Gemma and Felix have their hands full, focusing on Rosalind's co-workers, students, family, and more. Who is responsible for the death of this lovely teacher?
This is an intriguing and compelling two part mystery, with the present-day case focusing on Rosalind, combined with flashes to Gemma's past, focusing on her history with her former boyfriend Jacob, who died as a teen. The majority of our story is told from Gemma's present-day point of view, but we get a few key snippets from the townspeople and occasionally Gemma's point of view flashes to the past.
I really liked Gemma as a narrator. The intersection of the case with her past was extremely well-done. I read some reviews where the readers didn't care for Gemma, but that wasn't the case for me, though I could understand, as the story wore on, how they came to that point of view. She doesn't always make the right decisions, and I'm intrigued to see what she'll be like in the next novel (Goodreads tell me this is the first book in the series). But for me, I identified with her in many ways and, because she was so well-written, really enjoyed the story from her point of view, even if I didn't always agree with her actions. It was also great to get to see a character dealing with the challenges of being female and a mother in a small police force--in a small town no less--in what seemed to be, overall, a fairly realistic fashion.
The story itself is great. There are several twists that really got me, so major kudos to Bailey. I read a lot of thrillers, and it's not always easy to surprise me! For a huge portion of this book, I had *no idea* where this was going to go, or who killed Rosalind. Several times I found myself genuinely shocked by the happenings and was completely enthralled by the story and Bailey's characters. (I also can't believe this is a debut novel - wow.) She does an excellent job at creating tension in the story and the characters, slowing unfurling plot points and details as we go along. This novel is truly a puzzle, the pieces fitting into place as we go along, and putting them together is a joy. It is so well-done and Bailey's weaving together the past and the present is excellent. I wound up really liking Gemma, and her boss Jonesy, and I'm quite excited this is a series. I can't wait to see where Bailey takes us (and Gemma) next. 4.5 stars.
This is an intriguing and compelling two part mystery, with the present-day case focusing on Rosalind, combined with flashes to Gemma's past, focusing on her history with her former boyfriend Jacob, who died as a teen. The majority of our story is told from Gemma's present-day point of view, but we get a few key snippets from the townspeople and occasionally Gemma's point of view flashes to the past.
I really liked Gemma as a narrator. The intersection of the case with her past was extremely well-done. I read some reviews where the readers didn't care for Gemma, but that wasn't the case for me, though I could understand, as the story wore on, how they came to that point of view. She doesn't always make the right decisions, and I'm intrigued to see what she'll be like in the next novel (Goodreads tell me this is the first book in the series). But for me, I identified with her in many ways and, because she was so well-written, really enjoyed the story from her point of view, even if I didn't always agree with her actions. It was also great to get to see a character dealing with the challenges of being female and a mother in a small police force--in a small town no less--in what seemed to be, overall, a fairly realistic fashion.
The story itself is great. There are several twists that really got me, so major kudos to Bailey. I read a lot of thrillers, and it's not always easy to surprise me! For a huge portion of this book, I had *no idea* where this was going to go, or who killed Rosalind. Several times I found myself genuinely shocked by the happenings and was completely enthralled by the story and Bailey's characters. (I also can't believe this is a debut novel - wow.) She does an excellent job at creating tension in the story and the characters, slowing unfurling plot points and details as we go along. This novel is truly a puzzle, the pieces fitting into place as we go along, and putting them together is a joy. It is so well-done and Bailey's weaving together the past and the present is excellent. I wound up really liking Gemma, and her boss Jonesy, and I'm quite excited this is a series. I can't wait to see where Bailey takes us (and Gemma) next. 4.5 stars.
One Wrong Word
5.0
Rate It
Book
A heart-racing new psychological thriller from USA Today bestselling and multiple award-winning...
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Hunt for Red October (1990) in Movies
Jul 15, 2020
Boring
I spent a minute trying to figure out a logline for this movie and I couldn’t quite get a grasp on how to put it into words. Something about a submarine led by a defective Soviet commander headed for American soil and special agent Jack Ryan (Alec Baldwin) having to hunt him down. That’s the best I can do.
Acting: 10
Performances were strong across the board and is not where the movie fell flat in the slightest. Alec Baldwin delivers as Ryan with a sharp charisma that makes the movie just slightly more bearable. I was also impressed with Sean Connery’s role as villain Marko Ramius. Definitely the type of guy you love to hate and Connery did a solid job of bringing him to life.
Beginning: 8
Wasn’t 100% bought in after the first ten minutes, but enough happened to make me want to watch more. While I have seen way better movies in my day, I have definitely seen way worse beginnings too. It gives you a bit of story while creating excitement and intrigue for the story.
Characters: 5
The acting was fine. The characters, on the other hand, bored the absolute hell out of me. None of their storylines or backgrounds compelled me to ultimately care about the story as a whole. How many times have I said bad characters breed bad movies? Couldn’t be truer here.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
This movie relies a lot on smoke and mirrors. First you see a submarine, then it disappears. You see a missile, then it’s gone. After awhile the parlor trick gets old and so does the story. It felt like their action sequences suffered from a lower budget.
Conflict: 5
The action was mediocre at best. For this to be a movie about dueling submarines, there certainly aren’t a lot of dueling submarines. I can’t think of a better way to say this: This movie is really boring. There is way too much close-quarters talk and not enough actually happening.
Entertainment Value: 6
For every solid moment The Hunt For Red October brings, it gives you more scenes of people just sitting around discussing strategy. The high points were few and far between. It’s not a total dumpster fire, but I was certainly hoping for more.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 2
Plot: 10
Resolution: 2
Overall: 57
Contrary to what you might think, I hate shitting on movies. Sometimes, as is the case for The Hunt For Red October, it’s unavoidable. With such a stellar cast, I was hoping for more.
Acting: 10
Performances were strong across the board and is not where the movie fell flat in the slightest. Alec Baldwin delivers as Ryan with a sharp charisma that makes the movie just slightly more bearable. I was also impressed with Sean Connery’s role as villain Marko Ramius. Definitely the type of guy you love to hate and Connery did a solid job of bringing him to life.
Beginning: 8
Wasn’t 100% bought in after the first ten minutes, but enough happened to make me want to watch more. While I have seen way better movies in my day, I have definitely seen way worse beginnings too. It gives you a bit of story while creating excitement and intrigue for the story.
Characters: 5
The acting was fine. The characters, on the other hand, bored the absolute hell out of me. None of their storylines or backgrounds compelled me to ultimately care about the story as a whole. How many times have I said bad characters breed bad movies? Couldn’t be truer here.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
This movie relies a lot on smoke and mirrors. First you see a submarine, then it disappears. You see a missile, then it’s gone. After awhile the parlor trick gets old and so does the story. It felt like their action sequences suffered from a lower budget.
Conflict: 5
The action was mediocre at best. For this to be a movie about dueling submarines, there certainly aren’t a lot of dueling submarines. I can’t think of a better way to say this: This movie is really boring. There is way too much close-quarters talk and not enough actually happening.
Entertainment Value: 6
For every solid moment The Hunt For Red October brings, it gives you more scenes of people just sitting around discussing strategy. The high points were few and far between. It’s not a total dumpster fire, but I was certainly hoping for more.
Memorability: 4
Pace: 2
Plot: 10
Resolution: 2
Overall: 57
Contrary to what you might think, I hate shitting on movies. Sometimes, as is the case for The Hunt For Red October, it’s unavoidable. With such a stellar cast, I was hoping for more.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Basic Instinct (1992) in Movies
Apr 17, 2021
Love The Way You Lie
Basic Instinct- is a excellent erotic thriller. Both Micheal Douglas and Sharon Stone are excellent in it.
The plot: The mysterious Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone), a beautiful crime novelist, becomes a suspect when she is linked to the brutal death of a rock star. Investigated by homicide detective Nick Curran (Michael Douglas), Catherine seduces him into an intense relationship. Meanwhile, the murder case becomes increasingly complicated when more seemingly connected deaths occur and Nick's psychologist and lover, Beth Garner (Jeanne Tripplehorn), appears to be another suspect.
Douglas recommended Kim Basinger for the role of Catherine Tramell, but Basinger declined. He also proposed Julia Roberts, Greta Scacchi and Meg Ryan but they also turned down the role, as did Michelle Pfeiffer, Geena Davis, Kathleen Turner, Ellen Barkin, and Mariel Hemingway. Verhoeven considered Demi Moore.
She was paid $500,000, a low sum relative to the film's production budget. Michael Douglas was determined to have another A-list actress starring in the movie with him; worried to take the risk on his own, he was quoted as saying "I need someone to share the risks of this movie. [...] I don't want to be up there all by myself. There's going to be a lot of shit flying around.
Basic Instinct is rated R for "strong violence and sensuality, and for drug use and language". It was initially given a commercially restrictive NC-17 rating by the MPAA for “graphic depictions of extremely explicit violence, sexual content, and strong language”, but under pressure from TriStar and Carolco, Verhoeven cut 35–40 seconds to gain an R rating.
Its a excellent thriller and a must watch.
The plot: The mysterious Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone), a beautiful crime novelist, becomes a suspect when she is linked to the brutal death of a rock star. Investigated by homicide detective Nick Curran (Michael Douglas), Catherine seduces him into an intense relationship. Meanwhile, the murder case becomes increasingly complicated when more seemingly connected deaths occur and Nick's psychologist and lover, Beth Garner (Jeanne Tripplehorn), appears to be another suspect.
Douglas recommended Kim Basinger for the role of Catherine Tramell, but Basinger declined. He also proposed Julia Roberts, Greta Scacchi and Meg Ryan but they also turned down the role, as did Michelle Pfeiffer, Geena Davis, Kathleen Turner, Ellen Barkin, and Mariel Hemingway. Verhoeven considered Demi Moore.
She was paid $500,000, a low sum relative to the film's production budget. Michael Douglas was determined to have another A-list actress starring in the movie with him; worried to take the risk on his own, he was quoted as saying "I need someone to share the risks of this movie. [...] I don't want to be up there all by myself. There's going to be a lot of shit flying around.
Basic Instinct is rated R for "strong violence and sensuality, and for drug use and language". It was initially given a commercially restrictive NC-17 rating by the MPAA for “graphic depictions of extremely explicit violence, sexual content, and strong language”, but under pressure from TriStar and Carolco, Verhoeven cut 35–40 seconds to gain an R rating.
Its a excellent thriller and a must watch.
The Bone Code
Book
THE NEW SUNDAY TIMES BESTSELLER IN THE TEMPERANCE BRENNAN SERIES 'I await the next Kathy Reichs'...
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation - Season 15
6.0
Rate It
TV Season
Finlay finds her car rigged to explode ("The CSI Effect") as Sara and Greg are quarantined ("Bad...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Blade Runner 2049 (2017) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
It's 2049 and bioengineered humans are a mainstream part of society, essential to keep the human race going. Newer models have been created to obey humans, and K works for the LAPD as a blade runner. K's investigation leads him to a farm where he retires an old model replicant. While searching he finds a box buried beneath a tree that contains the bones of a human body, a woman who died in child birth. When the lab investigates the remains they discover that they are in fact of a female replicant, which leads to questions as replicants aren't supposed to be able to get pregnant.
K is told to destroy the evidence for fear that the knowledge is too dangerous, but he continues to investigate the replicant through the manufacturer's head quarters. This leads him on a trail, but unbeknown to him he's now not the only one looking for the answers.
I've been searching the depths of my brain... it's pretty scary down there... but I'm almost certain that I haven't seen the first Blade Runner. But having seen this one I'm fairly confident that you don't miss anything if that happens to be the case. Obviously, with Harrison Ford in this one as his older self there are some moments that appear to reflect his past, but through the context of the scenes everything seems to make sense.
The film sits at around the 2 hours 45 minutes mark, and I was a little concerned that it was going to feel long. During movies I tend to check the time the first time I get a little distracted, and I went for my phone thinking I must be only an hour or so in... and there were only 30 minutes left. Honestly, it was a great movie. At no point did I really get bored and look off round the cinema, which is one of my usual habits.
As my Unlimited card has gone premium and I get 3D tickets for free I went to see that showing as it was the handiest one. Yet again, I'm left wondering what the point of the 3D was. I am really not sold on it at all, I haven't seen a film where I was wowed by it. My only reaction has been "this was terrible and unwatchable" (see Valerian) or when I get up to leave when it's over "oh yeah, I've got 3D glasses on. Huh."
Ryan Gosling... much to my friend's shock, I have worked out that I've never seen him in any film. And he doesn't really do it for me, I'm all about the other Ryan... the best one. He was good in this though, he managed to play the part well, even through the points where he was in crisis. I probably wouldn't say no to seeing him in another film... apart from La La Land.
K is told to destroy the evidence for fear that the knowledge is too dangerous, but he continues to investigate the replicant through the manufacturer's head quarters. This leads him on a trail, but unbeknown to him he's now not the only one looking for the answers.
I've been searching the depths of my brain... it's pretty scary down there... but I'm almost certain that I haven't seen the first Blade Runner. But having seen this one I'm fairly confident that you don't miss anything if that happens to be the case. Obviously, with Harrison Ford in this one as his older self there are some moments that appear to reflect his past, but through the context of the scenes everything seems to make sense.
The film sits at around the 2 hours 45 minutes mark, and I was a little concerned that it was going to feel long. During movies I tend to check the time the first time I get a little distracted, and I went for my phone thinking I must be only an hour or so in... and there were only 30 minutes left. Honestly, it was a great movie. At no point did I really get bored and look off round the cinema, which is one of my usual habits.
As my Unlimited card has gone premium and I get 3D tickets for free I went to see that showing as it was the handiest one. Yet again, I'm left wondering what the point of the 3D was. I am really not sold on it at all, I haven't seen a film where I was wowed by it. My only reaction has been "this was terrible and unwatchable" (see Valerian) or when I get up to leave when it's over "oh yeah, I've got 3D glasses on. Huh."
Ryan Gosling... much to my friend's shock, I have worked out that I've never seen him in any film. And he doesn't really do it for me, I'm all about the other Ryan... the best one. He was good in this though, he managed to play the part well, even through the points where he was in crisis. I probably wouldn't say no to seeing him in another film... apart from La La Land.
Mike Wilder (20 KP) rated Evidence (2013) in Movies
May 30, 2018
A good "found footage" film
Contains spoilers, click to show
This is a film made in the style of "found footage". The whole film is made from the perspective of whoever is filming at the time. The style was made famous with The Blair Witch Project and perfected in Cloverfield. I saw the trailer for this and thought it could be good. After trying to track down the film I discovered it had just been released here. So I got hold of a copy and sat back.
The film is about a group of friends Ryan (Ryan McCoy), Brett (Brett Rosenberg), Abi (Abigail Richie) & Ashley (Ashley Bracken) who are out camping and making a documentary about the experience. They discover a strange creature and the trip quickly turns deadly. Soon they are on the run from strange creatures and anonymous military personnel intent on stopping the creatures.
You may have noticed in the above paragraph that the characters all have the same names as the actor playing them. This was either due to a very lazy writer, or as the writer was also Ryan McCoy one of the actors, an attempt to make the film feel more real and the friendships believable. I feel that the latter is the case as the group comes off as good friends. They interact with each other in a very realistic and genuine way. Especially the female stars. They manage to portray a wide range of emotions from playful happiness to annoyed and then terrified. The opening scenes are very well done. With most "found footage" films, the introduction to the characters and the plot are usually badly done, they are kind of a mess trying to get all the information out to the viewer. However this film is the exception to the rule. It's very well put together and the script and the pacing of the characters introductions are very good. The story starts of as a pretty standard you meet the characters, they go camping then the twist, they are not alone out there. The twist is where these type of films usually fail. But Evidence manages to succeed big time. You see a creature in the distance then during the night all hell lets loose. From this moment on the film is pure tension. I have not seen a film where for the whole last hour I was on edge. I was expecting something to happen at any moment. And it happens in so many different ways and at random times leaving you unable to let your guard down. Unlike many films in this genre, not even the camera operator is safe as the camera gets passed around for various reasons. The other great thing that I found was there was also a good reason to have the camera still on while they were running for their lives. Usually this is overlooked and we are meant to ignore that but here the reason is good and helps to make the film believable.
However with all the shocks and surprises, the film makers fail in trying to do too much. Towards the end the characters encounter many different types of creatures and I felt this was a little over the top. If they had kept to one or two different creatures it would have made a little more sense. As it was you are left very confused at the end with little or no answers as to what was going on. It worked with Cloverfield but here it missed the mark. Not by much and the film as a whole more than makes up for it.
There are a few plot holes but most can be explained away. However this is still a great addition to the "found film" genre. There have been many attempts to recreate these types of films and many fail. However people will continue to try and sometimes out of all the attempts you find something a little different, one that stands out from the rest. That one is called Evidence.
The film is about a group of friends Ryan (Ryan McCoy), Brett (Brett Rosenberg), Abi (Abigail Richie) & Ashley (Ashley Bracken) who are out camping and making a documentary about the experience. They discover a strange creature and the trip quickly turns deadly. Soon they are on the run from strange creatures and anonymous military personnel intent on stopping the creatures.
You may have noticed in the above paragraph that the characters all have the same names as the actor playing them. This was either due to a very lazy writer, or as the writer was also Ryan McCoy one of the actors, an attempt to make the film feel more real and the friendships believable. I feel that the latter is the case as the group comes off as good friends. They interact with each other in a very realistic and genuine way. Especially the female stars. They manage to portray a wide range of emotions from playful happiness to annoyed and then terrified. The opening scenes are very well done. With most "found footage" films, the introduction to the characters and the plot are usually badly done, they are kind of a mess trying to get all the information out to the viewer. However this film is the exception to the rule. It's very well put together and the script and the pacing of the characters introductions are very good. The story starts of as a pretty standard you meet the characters, they go camping then the twist, they are not alone out there. The twist is where these type of films usually fail. But Evidence manages to succeed big time. You see a creature in the distance then during the night all hell lets loose. From this moment on the film is pure tension. I have not seen a film where for the whole last hour I was on edge. I was expecting something to happen at any moment. And it happens in so many different ways and at random times leaving you unable to let your guard down. Unlike many films in this genre, not even the camera operator is safe as the camera gets passed around for various reasons. The other great thing that I found was there was also a good reason to have the camera still on while they were running for their lives. Usually this is overlooked and we are meant to ignore that but here the reason is good and helps to make the film believable.
However with all the shocks and surprises, the film makers fail in trying to do too much. Towards the end the characters encounter many different types of creatures and I felt this was a little over the top. If they had kept to one or two different creatures it would have made a little more sense. As it was you are left very confused at the end with little or no answers as to what was going on. It worked with Cloverfield but here it missed the mark. Not by much and the film as a whole more than makes up for it.
There are a few plot holes but most can be explained away. However this is still a great addition to the "found film" genre. There have been many attempts to recreate these types of films and many fail. However people will continue to try and sometimes out of all the attempts you find something a little different, one that stands out from the rest. That one is called Evidence.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Oxygen (2021) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
A taut mystery horror/thriller that goes off in surprising directions!
You can recognize a ‘lockdown-produced movie’ a mile off. Typically it focuses on a handful of players, who are mostly socially isolated. Here is a classic example. Yet by doing that, the director is forced to focus in on character and dialogue. As such, some of these ‘small’ movies that reign in the director’s excesses are far better as a result.
“Oxygen” is a case in point. When I saw that the film was directed by Alexandre Aja – the man behind the OTT “Piranha 3D” and the equally OTT popcorn-croc movie “Crawl” from 2 years ago, I feared the worst. But this an intriguing little movie that mystifies and jolts in equal measure.
There is probably no such thing anymore as a truly novel thriller or science fiction film. And this draws recognisably from a host of other movies: I personally recognised elements from “Room“, “Solaris”, “Moon” and “Gravity” in there. But the closest similarity is definitely to the Ryan Reynolds 2010 thriller “Buried” which features a very similar initial set-up. If “Oxygen” were to have pulled out an ending like that film (if you haven’t watched it yet – do so!) then it would have been a mini-classic.
Positives:
No spoilers here, but this is a ‘small’ mystery movie that goes off in a VERY surprising direction. The script is genuinely unpredictable.
Mélanie Laurent gives a strong performance as the heroine near the end of her tether.
Although this is a French film, don’t let that put you off. Netflix gives options of the original French, French with subtitles and an English dub. And the English dubbing is so good that it took me until some sub-titles for text written in French before I realised it was dubbed!
Negatives:
After the long drip-drip-drip of context, I found the ending to be something of a disappointment. Too twee.
I found something morally dubious about the ‘re-routing’ request near the end of the movie. (Although, I’m sure given the options, I would probably do the same!)
If you don’t like jump scares, you are likely to spill a lot of hot drinks while watching this one!
“Oxygen” is a case in point. When I saw that the film was directed by Alexandre Aja – the man behind the OTT “Piranha 3D” and the equally OTT popcorn-croc movie “Crawl” from 2 years ago, I feared the worst. But this an intriguing little movie that mystifies and jolts in equal measure.
There is probably no such thing anymore as a truly novel thriller or science fiction film. And this draws recognisably from a host of other movies: I personally recognised elements from “Room“, “Solaris”, “Moon” and “Gravity” in there. But the closest similarity is definitely to the Ryan Reynolds 2010 thriller “Buried” which features a very similar initial set-up. If “Oxygen” were to have pulled out an ending like that film (if you haven’t watched it yet – do so!) then it would have been a mini-classic.
Positives:
No spoilers here, but this is a ‘small’ mystery movie that goes off in a VERY surprising direction. The script is genuinely unpredictable.
Mélanie Laurent gives a strong performance as the heroine near the end of her tether.
Although this is a French film, don’t let that put you off. Netflix gives options of the original French, French with subtitles and an English dub. And the English dubbing is so good that it took me until some sub-titles for text written in French before I realised it was dubbed!
Negatives:
After the long drip-drip-drip of context, I found the ending to be something of a disappointment. Too twee.
I found something morally dubious about the ‘re-routing’ request near the end of the movie. (Although, I’m sure given the options, I would probably do the same!)
If you don’t like jump scares, you are likely to spill a lot of hot drinks while watching this one!