Search
Search results
Too weird for me
The girls of the sorority house are a close-knit--if not particularly happy--group. That is until Margot's death. When she's found dead in the house, it changes things, and each girl must deal with Margot's passing and its aftermath in her own way.
Well, this was a weird one. I'm not sure what I was expecting, but it wasn't this. We are introduced to the sorority girls in the first chapter by a "chorus," who tells us who lives in each room and a small bit about each one. Except for Margot's room, we're told; Margot is dead.
Then the following chapters detail a snippet of time in each girls' life. Some chapters may take place before Margot's death; others take place after. I was really glad I was reading a hardcopy, because at the start of each chapter, I had to flip back to that first chapter about all of the girls and find that girl's little paragraph or so blurb that introduced them. I could never keep any of them straight--perhaps because there was so many or maybe because most them didn't really stand out to me.
Because yes: I didn't really love this one. The short bits of time spent with each character make it hard to get attached to anyone. While we are technically following the thread of Margot's death, there's really no arc to the story. The book probably speaks to some higher meaning that I just didn't get. Instead it's a bit disturbing (some of the chapters are really awful), and no one is happy at all, which was really depressing. Sure, some of these dark glimpses into people's lives can be a little oddly fascinating, but honestly, it was often horrifying too. For me, it felt like the book was trying to be literary and clever and it just didn't work for me (or, more likely, I'm just not a good candidate for literary, smart books, ha).
For instance, was this one praising or mocking sororities? I really don't know. Margot's death seemed so pointless, so it certainly didn't seem to be doing the idea of sororities any favors. A lot of the book didn't seem to show the sisterhood in a good light. Yeah, I just didn't get it. I'm not sure exactly why I slogged through it, except that the full details of Margot's death aren't completely revealed until the end. I actually liked Margot the best, but she was dead, and yes, that probably sums up this book the best for me.
Overall, this one was too weird for me. I can do dark, but dark, strange, no real plot, and few characters with any redeemable value--it just didn't work for me. I'm sure it is enjoyable for others, especially those that don't need a real plot arc. And I do feel the need to point out that there's a trigger for self-harm, suicide, and eating disorders in this novel.
Well, this was a weird one. I'm not sure what I was expecting, but it wasn't this. We are introduced to the sorority girls in the first chapter by a "chorus," who tells us who lives in each room and a small bit about each one. Except for Margot's room, we're told; Margot is dead.
Then the following chapters detail a snippet of time in each girls' life. Some chapters may take place before Margot's death; others take place after. I was really glad I was reading a hardcopy, because at the start of each chapter, I had to flip back to that first chapter about all of the girls and find that girl's little paragraph or so blurb that introduced them. I could never keep any of them straight--perhaps because there was so many or maybe because most them didn't really stand out to me.
Because yes: I didn't really love this one. The short bits of time spent with each character make it hard to get attached to anyone. While we are technically following the thread of Margot's death, there's really no arc to the story. The book probably speaks to some higher meaning that I just didn't get. Instead it's a bit disturbing (some of the chapters are really awful), and no one is happy at all, which was really depressing. Sure, some of these dark glimpses into people's lives can be a little oddly fascinating, but honestly, it was often horrifying too. For me, it felt like the book was trying to be literary and clever and it just didn't work for me (or, more likely, I'm just not a good candidate for literary, smart books, ha).
For instance, was this one praising or mocking sororities? I really don't know. Margot's death seemed so pointless, so it certainly didn't seem to be doing the idea of sororities any favors. A lot of the book didn't seem to show the sisterhood in a good light. Yeah, I just didn't get it. I'm not sure exactly why I slogged through it, except that the full details of Margot's death aren't completely revealed until the end. I actually liked Margot the best, but she was dead, and yes, that probably sums up this book the best for me.
Overall, this one was too weird for me. I can do dark, but dark, strange, no real plot, and few characters with any redeemable value--it just didn't work for me. I'm sure it is enjoyable for others, especially those that don't need a real plot arc. And I do feel the need to point out that there's a trigger for self-harm, suicide, and eating disorders in this novel.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Favorite Sister in Books
Apr 9, 2019
Goal Diggers is a reality TV show based on women entrepreneurs. These women have made their own way in life without the help of a man. The story centers around two characters on the show, Brett and Stephanie. Brett is the lesbian who doesn't care about what others things about her, with the bike riding studio who donates proceeds from her studios to women in Morocco who have to walk miles for water. They use the money to purchase bikes for these women. Stephanie is just the opposite refusing to film without a full face of makeup and she has written a few novels and now is on tour for her first "memoir". The other 2 characters on the show are Jen and Lauren, who don't really get along with the rest of the cast, and joining them this season is Kelly, Brett's older sister. Is reality TV really real? Are what is going on in these women's lives really happening or is it played up for the audience. This book takes us from Pre-Production on the show to Post-Production for one of the most explosive seasons. Are you ready for the ride?
Thank you to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for the opportunity to read and review this book.
Getting into this book was hard. It took me 10 days to read it and I thought I would get through it pretty quickly. I love the Real Housewives series with my favorites being Atlanta, and Beverly Hills and this book I thought was going to be like taking a behind the scenes look at a show like that. It was, but for me it fell a little short.
The book starts with Kelly talking about Brett's death. But we have to go through the whole season of filming to see how that all plays out. Each woman has a secret to keep with one being bigger and juicier than the next. So from the start I was intrigued and I had to find out how Brett died, but it just took so long to get there. Back stories and front stories, and Interviews and lies. It's all a complete mess. The best part of the book for me was the last 10%.
Do you watch Reality TV? My husband calls it mind polluting. But he watches a couple of them with me. I've always wanted to know if the show was scripted and if these women were all either enemies or best friends when the cameras go off. You get a glimpse of that in this book. They take us through an entire filming season before the audience gets to see what happens. Producers sending texts to cast members before they are going to meet up with certain people to remind them of last filmed conversations? I need to ask Andy Cohen if that really happens. But with so much drama going on, whose lies do you believe?
Thank you to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for the opportunity to read and review this book.
Getting into this book was hard. It took me 10 days to read it and I thought I would get through it pretty quickly. I love the Real Housewives series with my favorites being Atlanta, and Beverly Hills and this book I thought was going to be like taking a behind the scenes look at a show like that. It was, but for me it fell a little short.
The book starts with Kelly talking about Brett's death. But we have to go through the whole season of filming to see how that all plays out. Each woman has a secret to keep with one being bigger and juicier than the next. So from the start I was intrigued and I had to find out how Brett died, but it just took so long to get there. Back stories and front stories, and Interviews and lies. It's all a complete mess. The best part of the book for me was the last 10%.
Do you watch Reality TV? My husband calls it mind polluting. But he watches a couple of them with me. I've always wanted to know if the show was scripted and if these women were all either enemies or best friends when the cameras go off. You get a glimpse of that in this book. They take us through an entire filming season before the audience gets to see what happens. Producers sending texts to cast members before they are going to meet up with certain people to remind them of last filmed conversations? I need to ask Andy Cohen if that really happens. But with so much drama going on, whose lies do you believe?
Paul Kellett (118 KP) rated Shadows of Malice in Tabletop Games
May 8, 2019
Great framework for narrating an adventure (2 more)
Good solo game
Interesting mechanisms
A lot of fiddly tokens (1 more)
Slightly heavy rules
A different take on the adventure board game
Shadows of Malice is an interesting take on the adventure game. Aside from the introduction explaining that you are heroes on a quest to find and activate mystical light wells and defeat the demon and his shadows before they can break through from the shadow realm and capture the wells for evil, there is no fancy artwork, immersive flavour text or even the well known fantasy monsters.
Instead, you get plain cards with simple line art and either just an icon/dice modifier or a short line of text explaining the effect. These cards are items of armour, weapons or other loot, potions, skill masteries, fate effects or abilities. A selection of these make up your character. Again, there are no defined heroes, you can be whatever you fancy being.
When you encounter a monster you roll 3d6 against a chart which will define the creature's species and its strength. Creature types are things like "Avian" and "Reptilian" so you can imagine fighting a dinosaur, a giant eagle or whatever fantastic creature you desire.
This makes the game a great framework to roleplay in. You are never stuck encountering the same things again and again. On the minus side, if you don't have a good imagination, it boils down to just rolling dice and beating target numbers. If you want a game to give you a story to follow, SoM is not that game.
The rules are good, if a little heavy but after a game or two it should soon click and it's mostly straight forward. The designer has recently just uploaded a revised rulebook to BGG which streamlines a number of things.
SoM comes with 4 large landscape hex tiles plus a shadow realm tile and you can choose any number of tiles to arrange in any position around the shadow realm tile. Each tile is divided into a number of smaller hexes with varying terrain and locations printed on them. This is the world you will be exploring and, despite being tiny compared to other game boards, each tile adds about an hour to the play time.
Gameplay involves exploring the land fighting creatures, gaining loot, visiting cities to trade goods or mystic seers to buy potions while searching for the special light wells that you must take control of.
In between player turns, the shadows act. They begin confined to the shadow realm but as the rounds progress, barriers fall and the shadows are more likely to find a way out to manifest in the land. Once there they start searching for the light wells and it's game over if they get to them first .
This makes for a tense cat and mouse with your heroes racing to either get to a well or intercept the demons on route.
Instead, you get plain cards with simple line art and either just an icon/dice modifier or a short line of text explaining the effect. These cards are items of armour, weapons or other loot, potions, skill masteries, fate effects or abilities. A selection of these make up your character. Again, there are no defined heroes, you can be whatever you fancy being.
When you encounter a monster you roll 3d6 against a chart which will define the creature's species and its strength. Creature types are things like "Avian" and "Reptilian" so you can imagine fighting a dinosaur, a giant eagle or whatever fantastic creature you desire.
This makes the game a great framework to roleplay in. You are never stuck encountering the same things again and again. On the minus side, if you don't have a good imagination, it boils down to just rolling dice and beating target numbers. If you want a game to give you a story to follow, SoM is not that game.
The rules are good, if a little heavy but after a game or two it should soon click and it's mostly straight forward. The designer has recently just uploaded a revised rulebook to BGG which streamlines a number of things.
SoM comes with 4 large landscape hex tiles plus a shadow realm tile and you can choose any number of tiles to arrange in any position around the shadow realm tile. Each tile is divided into a number of smaller hexes with varying terrain and locations printed on them. This is the world you will be exploring and, despite being tiny compared to other game boards, each tile adds about an hour to the play time.
Gameplay involves exploring the land fighting creatures, gaining loot, visiting cities to trade goods or mystic seers to buy potions while searching for the special light wells that you must take control of.
In between player turns, the shadows act. They begin confined to the shadow realm but as the rounds progress, barriers fall and the shadows are more likely to find a way out to manifest in the land. Once there they start searching for the light wells and it's game over if they get to them first .
This makes for a tense cat and mouse with your heroes racing to either get to a well or intercept the demons on route.
Paul Kellett (118 KP) rated This War of Mine: The Board Game in Tabletop Games
May 27, 2019
Very immersive experience (4 more)
Great solo game
Stands out as a piece of art
Great teaching tool
Great storytelling game
Brutally hard (1 more)
Adult and disturbing depictions of war
Brutal Survival game
This War of Mine is a game of civilians struggling to survive in the middle of a war. It is harsh, brutal and contains scenes that some players might find distressing.
It is gritty, realistic and very hard. It's a remarkable game that really makes you think and can stand as a piece of art, capable of teaching about the harsh realities of war and humanity.
You play as a group of 3 (or 4) civilians trying to survive. You have to rebuild your shelter to try and barricade against the cold and other raiding groups.
A fully cooperative game, no player controls a single character but takes turns deciding what the group will do and resolving situations.
Split into phases, you spend the day building up your shelter, adding beds, workshops and other items that might ease your struggles.
You will try different combinations of things to try and work out the most efficient and vital components to build first. Depending on the whim of the various encounter and event cards as to how well these things will work.
The night phase is the main part of the game. You need to send people out to scavenge the nearby ruined buildings, post a guard to protect your shelter and try to get some rest. This is a fine balancing act and you will be forced to push the survivors to breaking point in order to do any of these things.
Scavenging brings danger from snipers, soldiers and other aggressive survivors trying to defend their property.
You pick one of 3 locations to investigate and build an encounter deck. As you explore, you reveal cards, find valuable resources, food, medicine, bandages, weapons and parts crucial to building better items in your shelter.
While scavenging, you will be told to reference numbered paragraphs in the Book of Scripts. This tells the story of what and who you find and it is this that brings home the grim reality of what you are doing.
You will have to make some terrible decisions - do you return home empty handed and risk one of your group dying from hunger or illness or do you steal the supplies you need from the old couple you found hiding in the ruined apartment?
This game is definitely not for everyone but I firmly believe that everyone should experience it at least once.
I borrowed a copy from someone in my game group and played a couple of short games before handing it back but I found myself thinking about it a lot afterwards and ended up buying it myself.
This War of Mine is definitely much more than just a boardgame. It is art. It is a lesson in humanity and the harsh reality of war.
It is gritty, realistic and very hard. It's a remarkable game that really makes you think and can stand as a piece of art, capable of teaching about the harsh realities of war and humanity.
You play as a group of 3 (or 4) civilians trying to survive. You have to rebuild your shelter to try and barricade against the cold and other raiding groups.
A fully cooperative game, no player controls a single character but takes turns deciding what the group will do and resolving situations.
Split into phases, you spend the day building up your shelter, adding beds, workshops and other items that might ease your struggles.
You will try different combinations of things to try and work out the most efficient and vital components to build first. Depending on the whim of the various encounter and event cards as to how well these things will work.
The night phase is the main part of the game. You need to send people out to scavenge the nearby ruined buildings, post a guard to protect your shelter and try to get some rest. This is a fine balancing act and you will be forced to push the survivors to breaking point in order to do any of these things.
Scavenging brings danger from snipers, soldiers and other aggressive survivors trying to defend their property.
You pick one of 3 locations to investigate and build an encounter deck. As you explore, you reveal cards, find valuable resources, food, medicine, bandages, weapons and parts crucial to building better items in your shelter.
While scavenging, you will be told to reference numbered paragraphs in the Book of Scripts. This tells the story of what and who you find and it is this that brings home the grim reality of what you are doing.
You will have to make some terrible decisions - do you return home empty handed and risk one of your group dying from hunger or illness or do you steal the supplies you need from the old couple you found hiding in the ruined apartment?
This game is definitely not for everyone but I firmly believe that everyone should experience it at least once.
I borrowed a copy from someone in my game group and played a couple of short games before handing it back but I found myself thinking about it a lot afterwards and ended up buying it myself.
This War of Mine is definitely much more than just a boardgame. It is art. It is a lesson in humanity and the harsh reality of war.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Somewhat misleading but thrilling nonetheless
It’s best to start off this review as honest as possible. If you’re expecting a fully-fledged sequel or even a prequel to Matt Reeves’ brilliant monster horror, Cloverfield in 10 Cloverfield Lane, you’ll be very disappointed.
But, if you’re expecting a superbly written, well-acted and claustrophobic thriller, then this is definitely the film for you. Dan Trachtenberg, who makes his directorial debut with this feature, has crafted a taut film that has no real connection with the 2008 hit. So is it as good?
10 Cloverfield Lane follows Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) as she embarks on a new chapter in her life after a break-up. Unfortunately, a car crash leaves her seriously injured and unconscious. After waking up in an underground bunker, she meets her saviour in Howard (John Goodman), and as the story progresses, Michelle and fellow resident Emmett, try to make a bid for freedom.
The performances by the cast of three are terrific with Winstead coming on leaps and bounds since her role in Final Destination 3 and John Goodman is absolutely incredible. Cloverfield utilised its monster very well, but Goodman is more than a match with a simple shaking of his fists – his booming voice and burly frame mean he was a perfect casting choice and a human as psychotic as Howard is infinitely more terrifying to me than any monster.
It’s all very Hitchcockian, claustrophobic and exceptionally tense. Director Dan Trachtenberg has a real eye for the smaller details and the underground bunker setting is the perfect location to craft this kind of film. The use of jagged camera angles and low shots help aid the enclosed feeling and you can’t help but become panicked with Michelle, as she desperately tries to figure out a way to freedom.
After the bloated mess of London Has Fallen and the overlong Allegiant, it’s nice to see a film that doesn’t dwell more than it needs to. At 103 minutes, 10 Cloverfield Lane is relatively short and all the better for it. Despite only having three characters and being confined to a few small rooms for the majority of the running time, it never drags or becomes dull.
Unfortunately, the final third unravels a little of this good work, coming across like the ending to a completely different film; but Trachtenberg’s ideas and reasoning behind the finale are clear throughout, despite the lack of connection to the two acts that preceded it.
Overall, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a smart and well-thought out thriller that is related to Cloverfield in name only. That’s no bad thing, as the film we are left with is one of the best directorial debuts in years, even though its muddled ending leaves somewhat of a sour taste.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/20/somewhat-misleading-but-thrilling-nonetheless-10-cloverfield-lane-review/
But, if you’re expecting a superbly written, well-acted and claustrophobic thriller, then this is definitely the film for you. Dan Trachtenberg, who makes his directorial debut with this feature, has crafted a taut film that has no real connection with the 2008 hit. So is it as good?
10 Cloverfield Lane follows Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) as she embarks on a new chapter in her life after a break-up. Unfortunately, a car crash leaves her seriously injured and unconscious. After waking up in an underground bunker, she meets her saviour in Howard (John Goodman), and as the story progresses, Michelle and fellow resident Emmett, try to make a bid for freedom.
The performances by the cast of three are terrific with Winstead coming on leaps and bounds since her role in Final Destination 3 and John Goodman is absolutely incredible. Cloverfield utilised its monster very well, but Goodman is more than a match with a simple shaking of his fists – his booming voice and burly frame mean he was a perfect casting choice and a human as psychotic as Howard is infinitely more terrifying to me than any monster.
It’s all very Hitchcockian, claustrophobic and exceptionally tense. Director Dan Trachtenberg has a real eye for the smaller details and the underground bunker setting is the perfect location to craft this kind of film. The use of jagged camera angles and low shots help aid the enclosed feeling and you can’t help but become panicked with Michelle, as she desperately tries to figure out a way to freedom.
After the bloated mess of London Has Fallen and the overlong Allegiant, it’s nice to see a film that doesn’t dwell more than it needs to. At 103 minutes, 10 Cloverfield Lane is relatively short and all the better for it. Despite only having three characters and being confined to a few small rooms for the majority of the running time, it never drags or becomes dull.
Unfortunately, the final third unravels a little of this good work, coming across like the ending to a completely different film; but Trachtenberg’s ideas and reasoning behind the finale are clear throughout, despite the lack of connection to the two acts that preceded it.
Overall, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a smart and well-thought out thriller that is related to Cloverfield in name only. That’s no bad thing, as the film we are left with is one of the best directorial debuts in years, even though its muddled ending leaves somewhat of a sour taste.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/03/20/somewhat-misleading-but-thrilling-nonetheless-10-cloverfield-lane-review/
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated Unravelling Oliver in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Why must I be disappointed by books I’m so eager to read? I didn’t end up loving this novel as much as I would have liked to, but I didn’t exactly hate it.
This novel started strong. It’s first line, “I expected more of a reaction the first time I hit her“, is brutal and shocking, it lures you in in an instant. What I expected to follow was a taut, heart racing novel about why such a “loving husband” would beat his wife into a coma. And, I guess I got the “why” bit, but I didn’t get the taut, heart racing bit. It was snail pace and didn’t really get exciting until the very end.
I saw another reviewer talk about the lack of character in the characters in the novel and she’s right. Considering this whole book was a character study, the people we got to study weren’t that special. I was most interested in Veronique so I was glad she had a good few chapters to herself, but I wasn’t particularly interested in reading about what other people thought of Oliver. Even Oliver’s own chapters could get irritating.
I can’t fault the writing in this one. For a debut, it’s really good! If you connected with the characters, the writing could definitely put you in their shoes and make you feel exactly how they felt, but because I didn’t connect with anyone, I didn’t get that pleasure. All I know is that the descriptions were realistic and insightful.
Obviously the plot for this one was what interested me and it sounded like a great story. Unfortunately it was too slow in revealing it’s secrets to keep my interest high, and so I began losing interest about the halfway mark. This was a short book but it felt long. I know we were supposed to get to know Oliver and all his troubles and worries in life, but it all felt like waffle. There were no definitive markers in this book to signify any sort of middle event that would lead us to the end event and so until the plot finally revealed itself this felt like one long biography of Oliver, with not a lot going on.
To give this novel credit, elements of the plot and the reveal are very unique to other books I’ve read. And I read a lot of this kinds of books. I suppose you could say the “why” in this book isn’t as dark as you would originally think. It’s almost trivial, I guess.
I sound a bit negative in this review but that’s just because I was so excited about reading it in the first place. In the end, a 3 star rating isn’t the worst thing ever, it’s just not great.
<i>Thank you so much to Ali @The Sunday Feeling for sending me your copy to read!</i>
This novel started strong. It’s first line, “I expected more of a reaction the first time I hit her“, is brutal and shocking, it lures you in in an instant. What I expected to follow was a taut, heart racing novel about why such a “loving husband” would beat his wife into a coma. And, I guess I got the “why” bit, but I didn’t get the taut, heart racing bit. It was snail pace and didn’t really get exciting until the very end.
I saw another reviewer talk about the lack of character in the characters in the novel and she’s right. Considering this whole book was a character study, the people we got to study weren’t that special. I was most interested in Veronique so I was glad she had a good few chapters to herself, but I wasn’t particularly interested in reading about what other people thought of Oliver. Even Oliver’s own chapters could get irritating.
I can’t fault the writing in this one. For a debut, it’s really good! If you connected with the characters, the writing could definitely put you in their shoes and make you feel exactly how they felt, but because I didn’t connect with anyone, I didn’t get that pleasure. All I know is that the descriptions were realistic and insightful.
Obviously the plot for this one was what interested me and it sounded like a great story. Unfortunately it was too slow in revealing it’s secrets to keep my interest high, and so I began losing interest about the halfway mark. This was a short book but it felt long. I know we were supposed to get to know Oliver and all his troubles and worries in life, but it all felt like waffle. There were no definitive markers in this book to signify any sort of middle event that would lead us to the end event and so until the plot finally revealed itself this felt like one long biography of Oliver, with not a lot going on.
To give this novel credit, elements of the plot and the reveal are very unique to other books I’ve read. And I read a lot of this kinds of books. I suppose you could say the “why” in this book isn’t as dark as you would originally think. It’s almost trivial, I guess.
I sound a bit negative in this review but that’s just because I was so excited about reading it in the first place. In the end, a 3 star rating isn’t the worst thing ever, it’s just not great.
<i>Thank you so much to Ali @The Sunday Feeling for sending me your copy to read!</i>
Merissa (11950 KP) rated In Pain and Blood (Spellster #1) in Books
Jun 15, 2018
In Pain and Blood (Spellster #1) by Aldrea Alien
In Pain and Blood is the first book in the Spellster series, and has all the hallmarks of everything I enjoy - epic fantasy, m/m, romance, action, and adventure. Dylan has spent his life in 'the Tower' learning how to be a spellster. Magic comes easily to him, but his guardian keeps on telling him to stay safe in the tower, and not to make waves. However, one event shoves him to the forefront, and he sees more of life than he expected. Trying to make his way back to the Tower, he becomes part of a ragtag group and sees life in a completely different way.
This should have been a good book. I really wanted it to be a good book, but it fell short for me on a number of different levels. First of all, it's long. And I mean REALLY long. Now don't get me wrong, I love epic fantasy, and regularly read books of a thick volume. However, for this book, it felt like it needed some serious editing to get some of the monotonous repetition removed. Also, this land is supposed to be under attack, but they manage to completely miss any and every member of either army on their two month trek across the land - which we hear about in great detail. How this book started actually had me going back to check on the blurb as I thought I was reading a completely different book. It does change and become the story the blurb describes, but only after a long start. It is only the two main characters who we really meet, and I wouldn't say I 'know' them very well. Even their companions, who they spend so much time with, aren't really fleshed out. It didn't help when one of the main characters spoke to everyone as 'my dear hunter/my dear warrior/my dear spellster'. I know this was supposed to be one of his quirks, but I got it after the first dozen times. It really didn't need repeating multiple times on every page. The ending, such as it was, is the only thing in the book that felt rushed. Big events happen, something life-changing happens to a supporting character, opinions change, a lifetime's enduring love is pronounced, and it happens at the speed of light.
I struggled to finish this book. It was only my sheer stubborn nature and optimistic belief that it would get better (and if I finished it before it ended, I would never know) that kept me turning the pages to the very end. I am glad I've read it, but I wouldn't recommend it.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
This should have been a good book. I really wanted it to be a good book, but it fell short for me on a number of different levels. First of all, it's long. And I mean REALLY long. Now don't get me wrong, I love epic fantasy, and regularly read books of a thick volume. However, for this book, it felt like it needed some serious editing to get some of the monotonous repetition removed. Also, this land is supposed to be under attack, but they manage to completely miss any and every member of either army on their two month trek across the land - which we hear about in great detail. How this book started actually had me going back to check on the blurb as I thought I was reading a completely different book. It does change and become the story the blurb describes, but only after a long start. It is only the two main characters who we really meet, and I wouldn't say I 'know' them very well. Even their companions, who they spend so much time with, aren't really fleshed out. It didn't help when one of the main characters spoke to everyone as 'my dear hunter/my dear warrior/my dear spellster'. I know this was supposed to be one of his quirks, but I got it after the first dozen times. It really didn't need repeating multiple times on every page. The ending, such as it was, is the only thing in the book that felt rushed. Big events happen, something life-changing happens to a supporting character, opinions change, a lifetime's enduring love is pronounced, and it happens at the speed of light.
I struggled to finish this book. It was only my sheer stubborn nature and optimistic belief that it would get better (and if I finished it before it ended, I would never know) that kept me turning the pages to the very end. I am glad I've read it, but I wouldn't recommend it.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Incredibles 2 (2018) in Movies
Jul 16, 2018 (Updated Jul 17, 2018)
Worthy sequel, although a bit patchy in places
Contains spoilers, click to show
It's hard to believe that the original Incredibles movie is now 14 years old. It was, and still is, a fun, original and highly enjoyable superhero movie that was always deserving of a sequel. I re-watched it recently with my daughter who had never seen it, and despite it's age, and the fact that we've now had a decade of non-stop Marvel superhero movies since it was made, it still holds up 'incredibly' well.
The sequel picks up right where the original finished off, with The Incredibles battling supervillain The Underminer. It's the first of many impressive battle sequence, and does a good job of reminding us of the skills and abilities of each individual family member, not to mention how well they all work together as a team. The advances in animation quality over the last 14 years are obvious, while still managing to retain the unique look and feel of the original.
Unfortunately, the Parr's attempts to save the city don't quite go to plan, leading once again to their helpfulness being questioned by the US Government. They find themselves in a motel, contemplating their futures, until they are approached by Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk). He claims that the public have only seen the negative side of superheroes that is portrayed by the government, and wants to provide microscopic cameras embedded within the superhero costumes so that they can capture what they see. By showing the hero's side of the story, Winston plans to generate enough good publicity to start winning over the general public once again and hopefully reverse the law that makes superheroes illegal. Elastigirl is chosen to kick things off, largely due to the minimal government damage she's likely to cause in comparison to her husband! As a result, Mr Incredible is left at home to care for the kids, while Elastigirl is out having fun and saving the world.
The domestic comedy with Mr Incredible stuck at home is just brilliant. Not only does he have to try and get to grips with 'New Math' homework for son Dash, but also with daughter Violet and her boyfriend trouble. Not to mention the discovery that baby Jack-Jack has a set of impressive and highly unpredictable superpowers of his own. Meanwhile, the plan involving Elastigirl is working so well, that plans to make superheroes legal again get underway. But then mysterious new villain Screenslaver begins causing hypnotic chaos around town, and the family must band together once again in order to save the day.
Aside from the impressive action, and the hilarious scenes involving Jack-Jack, the rest of the movie in comparison does feel a little flat in places. In my opinion it falls slightly short of matching the original, although still a highly enjoyable and worthy sequel.
The sequel picks up right where the original finished off, with The Incredibles battling supervillain The Underminer. It's the first of many impressive battle sequence, and does a good job of reminding us of the skills and abilities of each individual family member, not to mention how well they all work together as a team. The advances in animation quality over the last 14 years are obvious, while still managing to retain the unique look and feel of the original.
Unfortunately, the Parr's attempts to save the city don't quite go to plan, leading once again to their helpfulness being questioned by the US Government. They find themselves in a motel, contemplating their futures, until they are approached by Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk). He claims that the public have only seen the negative side of superheroes that is portrayed by the government, and wants to provide microscopic cameras embedded within the superhero costumes so that they can capture what they see. By showing the hero's side of the story, Winston plans to generate enough good publicity to start winning over the general public once again and hopefully reverse the law that makes superheroes illegal. Elastigirl is chosen to kick things off, largely due to the minimal government damage she's likely to cause in comparison to her husband! As a result, Mr Incredible is left at home to care for the kids, while Elastigirl is out having fun and saving the world.
The domestic comedy with Mr Incredible stuck at home is just brilliant. Not only does he have to try and get to grips with 'New Math' homework for son Dash, but also with daughter Violet and her boyfriend trouble. Not to mention the discovery that baby Jack-Jack has a set of impressive and highly unpredictable superpowers of his own. Meanwhile, the plan involving Elastigirl is working so well, that plans to make superheroes legal again get underway. But then mysterious new villain Screenslaver begins causing hypnotic chaos around town, and the family must band together once again in order to save the day.
Aside from the impressive action, and the hilarious scenes involving Jack-Jack, the rest of the movie in comparison does feel a little flat in places. In my opinion it falls slightly short of matching the original, although still a highly enjoyable and worthy sequel.
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Stonehearst Asylum (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
In the late 19th century in England, medicine was by today’s standards primitive and at times barbaric. The nature of psychiatric care of the times was even more frightening as maladies that today are treated with medication often resulted in a lifetime of confinement in an Asylum where all manner of treatments which today would be considered torture were used.
In the new thriller “Stonehearst Asylum” a young doctor named Edward Newgate (Jim Sturgess), travels to a remote asylum on Christmas Eve to being a practical study following his time at Oxford.
He is greeted upon his arrival by Silas Lamb (Ben Kingsley, who is eager to size up the new assistant upon his arrival.
Newgate is fascinated by the patients especially one named Eliza (Kate Beckinsale), who shows a grace and range of talents not normally associated with those who have been committed. It is explained that all of those assigned to Stonehearts are from the upper class of society and as such, their maladies have made them outcasts from polite society.
Edward begins to have concerns when he is told by Eliza that he must leave immediately and not return and despite her warnings, he remains and soon makes a startling discovery.
It is learned that a patient named Salt (Michael Caine) is actually the man in charge of the facility and that Lamb is a dangerous psychopath who has imprisoned or killed the asylum staff and has replaced them with his fellow inmates.
Trapped in a world gone mad, Edward must strive to do his duty as a physician to care for those in need, while trying to walk the line between the madness of Lamb and his fellow inmates.
The film is a well-cast and exciting thriller that keeps you entertained without resorting to the standard scares and tricks of other suspense films.
The characters have a complexity and compassion to them as you will find yourself engrossed by the various characters and their situations.
Director Brad Anderson is no stranger to suspense and he has crafted a captivating take that is rich with the visuals of the era yet remaining a character based drama it its core.
The film is based on a short story by Edgar Allen Poe and Mel Gibson is one of the Producers attached to the film which helps underscore how they were able to assemble such a strong cast to the film despite the lack of a major studio to finance or distribute the film.
The film does have some moments that at times make you wonder why some characters did not take more obvious courses of action but yet the film works in spite of this.
In the end the haunting setting and subject matter mesh well with the characters to create a thrilling and entertaining drama that is one of the more enjoyable surprises of the year.
http://sknr.net/2014/10/24/stonehearst-asylum/
In the new thriller “Stonehearst Asylum” a young doctor named Edward Newgate (Jim Sturgess), travels to a remote asylum on Christmas Eve to being a practical study following his time at Oxford.
He is greeted upon his arrival by Silas Lamb (Ben Kingsley, who is eager to size up the new assistant upon his arrival.
Newgate is fascinated by the patients especially one named Eliza (Kate Beckinsale), who shows a grace and range of talents not normally associated with those who have been committed. It is explained that all of those assigned to Stonehearts are from the upper class of society and as such, their maladies have made them outcasts from polite society.
Edward begins to have concerns when he is told by Eliza that he must leave immediately and not return and despite her warnings, he remains and soon makes a startling discovery.
It is learned that a patient named Salt (Michael Caine) is actually the man in charge of the facility and that Lamb is a dangerous psychopath who has imprisoned or killed the asylum staff and has replaced them with his fellow inmates.
Trapped in a world gone mad, Edward must strive to do his duty as a physician to care for those in need, while trying to walk the line between the madness of Lamb and his fellow inmates.
The film is a well-cast and exciting thriller that keeps you entertained without resorting to the standard scares and tricks of other suspense films.
The characters have a complexity and compassion to them as you will find yourself engrossed by the various characters and their situations.
Director Brad Anderson is no stranger to suspense and he has crafted a captivating take that is rich with the visuals of the era yet remaining a character based drama it its core.
The film is based on a short story by Edgar Allen Poe and Mel Gibson is one of the Producers attached to the film which helps underscore how they were able to assemble such a strong cast to the film despite the lack of a major studio to finance or distribute the film.
The film does have some moments that at times make you wonder why some characters did not take more obvious courses of action but yet the film works in spite of this.
In the end the haunting setting and subject matter mesh well with the characters to create a thrilling and entertaining drama that is one of the more enjoyable surprises of the year.
http://sknr.net/2014/10/24/stonehearst-asylum/
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Rosemary's Baby (1968) in Movies
Jan 13, 2019
Good...Not Great
Rosemary’s Baby takes you down a rabbit hole and you have no idea what’s waiting for you at the other end. It drove me mad at times as I tried to figure out just what exactly was going on. The story follows a couple and the strange happenings that ensure when they move into a new apartment complex.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
I’m watching this movie as I write this as I typically try and do when I write reviews. The beginning is intriguing because it’s chocked full of foreshadowing. Hints are dropped here and there and you recognize almost instantly that something is off. Great job here of being subtle without being overbearing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The film succeeds with a visual jarring aspect where you never really gain your footing. You spend most of the film trying to figure out up from down and that’s in large part due to the fact that nothing really seems out of sorts…except for a few things here and there. Director Roman Polanski is like a cat owner with a laser pointer directing your attention in the right place for a bit then redirecting. Everything is under the surface waiting to boil over.
Conflict: 8
As the film progresses and Rosemary (Mia Farrow) descends into madness, you are hoping she can unravel the mystery of what exactly is happening. The conflict comes in the tension of the movements, the things moving under the surface that you know are there. Every new occurrence brings you closer to the truth and makes things more tense.
Genre: 4
This was probably a solid pass for the 1960’s, but it’s honestly pretty tame for today’s standards. I might catch some heat for not respecting the time period it was filmed in, but if we are identifying this as a horror film, then it pales in comparison to some of the horror that has kept me up at night. Also, when I compare it to a film like The Birds from the same period, it comes up short for me.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 7
Things move quickly enough, especially after the famous “dream sequence” that occurs. The pace is driven by the mystery of all the craziness unfolding. You are looking for answers along with Rosemary. A handful of scenes could have been shortened, but things never really drag on for the most part.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
Probably my biggest issue with the film. I won’t ruin it, but after everything that transpired, I was looking for a bit more hope for Rosemary. A few tweaks here and there may have altered my opinion of the entire film as a whole.
Overall: 74
Great cinematic storytelling isn’t quite enough to elevate Rosemary’s Baby to a classic in my opinion. Intriguing but not earth-shattering. Worth a one-time watch.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 8
I’m watching this movie as I write this as I typically try and do when I write reviews. The beginning is intriguing because it’s chocked full of foreshadowing. Hints are dropped here and there and you recognize almost instantly that something is off. Great job here of being subtle without being overbearing.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 8
The film succeeds with a visual jarring aspect where you never really gain your footing. You spend most of the film trying to figure out up from down and that’s in large part due to the fact that nothing really seems out of sorts…except for a few things here and there. Director Roman Polanski is like a cat owner with a laser pointer directing your attention in the right place for a bit then redirecting. Everything is under the surface waiting to boil over.
Conflict: 8
As the film progresses and Rosemary (Mia Farrow) descends into madness, you are hoping she can unravel the mystery of what exactly is happening. The conflict comes in the tension of the movements, the things moving under the surface that you know are there. Every new occurrence brings you closer to the truth and makes things more tense.
Genre: 4
This was probably a solid pass for the 1960’s, but it’s honestly pretty tame for today’s standards. I might catch some heat for not respecting the time period it was filmed in, but if we are identifying this as a horror film, then it pales in comparison to some of the horror that has kept me up at night. Also, when I compare it to a film like The Birds from the same period, it comes up short for me.
Memorability: 5
Pace: 7
Things move quickly enough, especially after the famous “dream sequence” that occurs. The pace is driven by the mystery of all the craziness unfolding. You are looking for answers along with Rosemary. A handful of scenes could have been shortened, but things never really drag on for the most part.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 4
Probably my biggest issue with the film. I won’t ruin it, but after everything that transpired, I was looking for a bit more hope for Rosemary. A few tweaks here and there may have altered my opinion of the entire film as a whole.
Overall: 74
Great cinematic storytelling isn’t quite enough to elevate Rosemary’s Baby to a classic in my opinion. Intriguing but not earth-shattering. Worth a one-time watch.
