Search
Search results
Merissa (11643 KP) rated The Hellion is Tamed (League of Lords #4) in Books
Sep 14, 2021
THE HELLION IS TAMED is the fourth book in the League of Lords series. We jump forward a few years in this one, to ensure Simon is now an adult. It is made very clear that he has spent the past years searching for a way to find, and bring back, Emma. Although, saying that, he is still hurt by her not coming back to him after stealing the stone from Sebastian. As for Emma, well, she did return but, being as she doesn't have full control of her gift, she caught Simon in a compromising situation and hightailed it out of there.
Miscommunication and avoidance are the two words I would use to describe this book. Now, of course, if love ran smoothly then there would be no romance books to read but Simon and Emma seemed to take it to the extreme.
The focus is also on Emma's gift, not so much Simon's. I would like to have learnt more about him and his gift. How the ghosts see him as their benefactor/protector. Why? How? What does he do? And how do they protect him in return? We saw one example but are there others?
I would definitely recommend reading this as a series, rather than a set of standalones as I do feel the other books help set the situation up for the next one along. And as Simon and Emma are fourth, then it was good to have some background information on them, and the world they inhabit.
Still, a good addition to the series that I 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, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Miscommunication and avoidance are the two words I would use to describe this book. Now, of course, if love ran smoothly then there would be no romance books to read but Simon and Emma seemed to take it to the extreme.
The focus is also on Emma's gift, not so much Simon's. I would like to have learnt more about him and his gift. How the ghosts see him as their benefactor/protector. Why? How? What does he do? And how do they protect him in return? We saw one example but are there others?
I would definitely recommend reading this as a series, rather than a set of standalones as I do feel the other books help set the situation up for the next one along. And as Simon and Emma are fourth, then it was good to have some background information on them, and the world they inhabit.
Still, a good addition to the series that I 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, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Hearts of Stone in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Simon Scarrow brings to life the horrors of World War II in his latest novel <i>Hearts of Stone</i>. In 2013, Anna Thesskoudiss, a history teacher is contacted by a German research student, Dieter Muller who is interested in talking to her grandmother Eleni. He explains that he is the grandson of Peter Muller who was friends with her grandmother whilst staying on the Greek island of Lefkas until the war made them enemies.
Dieter Muller’s introduction implies that the story is going to be about the relationship between Eleni and Peter, which gets destroyed when Peter returns to the island as an enemy intelligence officer. The blurb for <i>Hearts of Stone</i> also implies this. However, the majority of the book focuses on their friend Andreas’ experience of the Navy and his role in the resistance. Scarrow goes into detail of every dangerous situation Andreas finds himself in, but this is not what the reader was expecting to learn about. Eventually the final chapters turn to Peter’s role in the war and the reason Eleni and he could no longer consider themselves friends.
Despite being full of action and war horrors, it gets a little boring reading about Andreas’ life. Although this narrative leads to what happens with Peter, it occasionally felt unnecessary, as it was the final stages that appeared to be the most important.
From an historical point of view it is refreshing to read a war story that is not focused on either Britain or Germany. <i>Hearts of Stone</i> reveals how Greece was affected even though they were not one of the main fighting bodies. It is shocking how many innocent people were killed purely for the Nazi’s to invoke fear in the hopes the natives would submit to their rule.
Hopefully the vast amount of mistakes and grammatical errors would have been corrected before the final – I read an uncorrected proof – publication. Admittedly <i>Hearts of Stone</i> was a bit of a disappointment as it was not exactly what it appeared to be. However it has educational value as well as entertainment for readers who enjoy war stories. Scarrow has also included maps of the Greek island of Lefkas and the Mediterranean during WWII as well as a character list to benefit readers as they take in the story.
Simon Scarrow brings to life the horrors of World War II in his latest novel <i>Hearts of Stone</i>. In 2013, Anna Thesskoudiss, a history teacher is contacted by a German research student, Dieter Muller who is interested in talking to her grandmother Eleni. He explains that he is the grandson of Peter Muller who was friends with her grandmother whilst staying on the Greek island of Lefkas until the war made them enemies.
Dieter Muller’s introduction implies that the story is going to be about the relationship between Eleni and Peter, which gets destroyed when Peter returns to the island as an enemy intelligence officer. The blurb for <i>Hearts of Stone</i> also implies this. However, the majority of the book focuses on their friend Andreas’ experience of the Navy and his role in the resistance. Scarrow goes into detail of every dangerous situation Andreas finds himself in, but this is not what the reader was expecting to learn about. Eventually the final chapters turn to Peter’s role in the war and the reason Eleni and he could no longer consider themselves friends.
Despite being full of action and war horrors, it gets a little boring reading about Andreas’ life. Although this narrative leads to what happens with Peter, it occasionally felt unnecessary, as it was the final stages that appeared to be the most important.
From an historical point of view it is refreshing to read a war story that is not focused on either Britain or Germany. <i>Hearts of Stone</i> reveals how Greece was affected even though they were not one of the main fighting bodies. It is shocking how many innocent people were killed purely for the Nazi’s to invoke fear in the hopes the natives would submit to their rule.
Hopefully the vast amount of mistakes and grammatical errors would have been corrected before the final – I read an uncorrected proof – publication. Admittedly <i>Hearts of Stone</i> was a bit of a disappointment as it was not exactly what it appeared to be. However it has educational value as well as entertainment for readers who enjoy war stories. Scarrow has also included maps of the Greek island of Lefkas and the Mediterranean during WWII as well as a character list to benefit readers as they take in the story.
Graham Massey recommended Flying Wonders by Homelife in Music (curated)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tennis and sex, but without the grunting.
Here’s a good test of someone’s age…. ask the question “Billie-Jean?”. Millennials will probably come back with “Huh?”; those in their 30’s or 40’s might come back with “Michael Jackson!”; those older than that will probably reply “King!”.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
This one seems to have received a very mixed reception among Trek fans, but I absolutely loved it when it first came out, giving it 4.5/5 in one of my early One Mann’s Movies reviews.
I find the pre-titles sequence on this one a real blast, both thrilling in content and enormously funny with the primitive stone age race trashing their previous relic in favour of their new Enterprise-shaped deity! And then the dramatic pseudo-blackmailing of Harewood, (an impressive Noel Clarke, when he was being given better roles that he is at the moment), to Michael Giacchino’s awesome “London Calling” music, is a truly memorable bit of movie-making.
The cast have all settled into their roles nicely. Chris Pine’s Kirk is still the arrogant ladies man (e.g. bedding twin aliens and chatting up the starfleet totty…. “Hi Ladies… Jim Kirk”), but learning the hard way that with great power comes at least a modicum of responsibility. He actually needs to act in this movie. And I find Scotty (Simon Pegg) slightly less grating in this outing (though his sidekick Keenser (Deep Roy) is still the annoying Jar Jar Binks of these films).
Benedict Cumberbatch adds great gravitas as the arch villain, and his announcement of his name was one of those “I am your father” movie-moments for me on first viewing.
It’s also the last screen appearance of Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime – indeed, his last movie appearance period. A nice and fitting way to bow out.
My rating here is a little lower than my previous OMM rating. It’s attempts to shoehorn-in scenes and dialogue from an earlier Trek movie are a misstep by the writers, and grate on repeat viewing. But it’s still a cracking episode in the Trek saga, and another of my personal favourites.
I find the pre-titles sequence on this one a real blast, both thrilling in content and enormously funny with the primitive stone age race trashing their previous relic in favour of their new Enterprise-shaped deity! And then the dramatic pseudo-blackmailing of Harewood, (an impressive Noel Clarke, when he was being given better roles that he is at the moment), to Michael Giacchino’s awesome “London Calling” music, is a truly memorable bit of movie-making.
The cast have all settled into their roles nicely. Chris Pine’s Kirk is still the arrogant ladies man (e.g. bedding twin aliens and chatting up the starfleet totty…. “Hi Ladies… Jim Kirk”), but learning the hard way that with great power comes at least a modicum of responsibility. He actually needs to act in this movie. And I find Scotty (Simon Pegg) slightly less grating in this outing (though his sidekick Keenser (Deep Roy) is still the annoying Jar Jar Binks of these films).
Benedict Cumberbatch adds great gravitas as the arch villain, and his announcement of his name was one of those “I am your father” movie-moments for me on first viewing.
It’s also the last screen appearance of Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime – indeed, his last movie appearance period. A nice and fitting way to bow out.
My rating here is a little lower than my previous OMM rating. It’s attempts to shoehorn-in scenes and dialogue from an earlier Trek movie are a misstep by the writers, and grate on repeat viewing. But it’s still a cracking episode in the Trek saga, and another of my personal favourites.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Dig (2021) in Movies
Jan 31, 2021
Acting from Fiennes and Mulligan - top notch (1 more)
Cinematography is gorgeous
Why make it so "man heavy" when history was otherwise? (1 more)
Found the asynchronous editing irritating
Archaeology with no fedora required
It’s 1939, and as World War 2 approaches, widower Edith Pretty (Carey Mulligan) hires rough and ready excavator Basil Brown (Ralph Fiennes) to dig into one of the ancient earth mounds on her property at the site that will become famous as Sutton Hoo in Suffolk. Requesting the help of her cousin Rory Lomax (Johnny Flynn) to photograph the effort, the site slowly gives up its Anglo-Saxon treasures attracting the attention of first the Ipswich museum and then the pompous Charles Phillips (Ken Stott) of the British Museum. A battle is on for both the control of the site and the resting place for the treasures found.
Against this backdrop there is a critical illness emerging, a son (Archie Barnes) and his attachment to the father figure of Brown and a potential romance between Rory and archaeologist Peggy Piggott, trapped in a loveless marriage.
Talent:
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Ralph Fiennes, Johnny Flynn, Lily James, Archie Barnes, Ken Stott, Monica Donlan.
Directed by: Simon Stone.
Written by: Moira Buffini (from the novel by John Preston).
Bullet points of my thoughts:
+ Superb acting by Mulligan and Fiennes – Oscar noms for both?
+ Young Archie Barnes impresses as the son Robert
+ Cinematography by Mike Eley shows the open Suffolk skies at their best
+ Based on fact, a fascinating historical record of the real excitement of uncovering the past
o The script deftly melds the archeology with the love story subplot: but was the latter really necessary?
– Curious “man heavy” script, replacing some of the historical female characters with men and making Peggy Piggott (Lily James) a bit of a klutz
– Asynchronous editing decision I found to be distracting and unnecessary.
For my full review, please see the video at https://youtu.be/m8Ad8B8dkSY .
Against this backdrop there is a critical illness emerging, a son (Archie Barnes) and his attachment to the father figure of Brown and a potential romance between Rory and archaeologist Peggy Piggott, trapped in a loveless marriage.
Talent:
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Ralph Fiennes, Johnny Flynn, Lily James, Archie Barnes, Ken Stott, Monica Donlan.
Directed by: Simon Stone.
Written by: Moira Buffini (from the novel by John Preston).
Bullet points of my thoughts:
+ Superb acting by Mulligan and Fiennes – Oscar noms for both?
+ Young Archie Barnes impresses as the son Robert
+ Cinematography by Mike Eley shows the open Suffolk skies at their best
+ Based on fact, a fascinating historical record of the real excitement of uncovering the past
o The script deftly melds the archeology with the love story subplot: but was the latter really necessary?
– Curious “man heavy” script, replacing some of the historical female characters with men and making Peggy Piggott (Lily James) a bit of a klutz
– Asynchronous editing decision I found to be distracting and unnecessary.
For my full review, please see the video at https://youtu.be/m8Ad8B8dkSY .
