Search
Comeback Season (2006)
Movie
Walter Pearce (Liotta), a married man, tries to win back his wife (Headley) after cheating on her....
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Secret Place in Books
Feb 13, 2018
The fifth installment in Tana French's Dublin Murder Squad series reintroduces some familiar faces, notably Holly Mackey, Frank Mackey, and Stephen Moran from French's [b:Faithful Place|7093952|Faithful Place (Dublin Murder Squad, #3)|Tana French|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1291165900s/7093952.jpg|7350661]. Detective Moran is toiling away in Cold Cases, dreaming of joining the Murder Squad, when Holly shows up. She holds in her hand a card reading "I know who killed him," featuring a photo of Chris Harper, a handsome boy from a private school who was killed a year ago. Suddenly, Stephen finds himself inserted into the middle of St. Kilda's School, Holly's private all-girls' school, the neighborhood school to Chris', and the place where his body was found. Stephen joins up with the Murder Squad's Detective Antoinette Conway, one of the original leads on Chris' case, to find out what happened. But Stephen quickly realizes that Antoinette isn't a popular figure in the Squad, and that the girls of St. Kilda's are a tight-knit, complicated bunch whose interconnected relationships present Conway and Moran many obstacles in finding Chris' killer. Can they find the killer before the girls close ranks for good?
This was a typical Tana French mystery in many ways. This novel is compelling, as always, featuring thoughtful and reflective characters and a detailed, well-plotted mystery. The story is told in alternating chapters by Stephen (in the present-day) and then flashes back to various sections told by the girls of St. Kilda's, who are telling bits of the story leading up to Chris' death. It's an excellent technique because Stephen's portion covers basically 24 hours, as he and Antoinette rush to solve the crime before the girls can cover their tracks once and for all. But by going into the past, French effectively builds suspense and allows us to meet the various teens in her tale (about eight in all, which is a lot at times).
Overall, she does an good job of capturing teen culture: particularly, I'm sure, the culture of British teens in boarding school (shockingly, something I'm not too familiar with). While the descriptions of the girls gets a little tedious (a lot of blond, straightened hair), their personalities are clear and develop easily over the course of the novel. The commentary on the bonds of teen friendship is excellent. For me, Stephen wasn't one of my all-time favorite French protagonists, but I enjoyed the dynamic between him and Conway and how the window into their lives is basically less than 24 hours.
The mystery portion was a little less enjoyable for me than some of French's other novels and a bit of a let down at the end, but it was still a great read. One of my favorite things about French's books is how they easily transport you into another world while reading--you find yourself lost in the characters and their world--and this one was no exception. 3.5 strong stars. I'm looking forward to her next novel, which is supposed to feature Conway again.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/justacatandbook">Twitter</a>;
This was a typical Tana French mystery in many ways. This novel is compelling, as always, featuring thoughtful and reflective characters and a detailed, well-plotted mystery. The story is told in alternating chapters by Stephen (in the present-day) and then flashes back to various sections told by the girls of St. Kilda's, who are telling bits of the story leading up to Chris' death. It's an excellent technique because Stephen's portion covers basically 24 hours, as he and Antoinette rush to solve the crime before the girls can cover their tracks once and for all. But by going into the past, French effectively builds suspense and allows us to meet the various teens in her tale (about eight in all, which is a lot at times).
Overall, she does an good job of capturing teen culture: particularly, I'm sure, the culture of British teens in boarding school (shockingly, something I'm not too familiar with). While the descriptions of the girls gets a little tedious (a lot of blond, straightened hair), their personalities are clear and develop easily over the course of the novel. The commentary on the bonds of teen friendship is excellent. For me, Stephen wasn't one of my all-time favorite French protagonists, but I enjoyed the dynamic between him and Conway and how the window into their lives is basically less than 24 hours.
The mystery portion was a little less enjoyable for me than some of French's other novels and a bit of a let down at the end, but it was still a great read. One of my favorite things about French's books is how they easily transport you into another world while reading--you find yourself lost in the characters and their world--and this one was no exception. 3.5 strong stars. I'm looking forward to her next novel, which is supposed to feature Conway again.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/justacatandbook">Twitter</a>;
The Gigantic Beard That Was Evil
Book
es Stephen Collins was the winner of the Jonathan Cape/Observer Graphic Short Story Prize in 2010....
This is Not a Horror Movie
8.0
Rate It
Book
Emory Jones loves two things: horror movies and Connor Nichols. For the past four years, Emory,...
New Adult Rom-Com MM
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated FIRESTARTER (2022) in Movies
May 21, 2022
Commits the Biggest Film Crime - It's Boring
Sometimes, I watch a movie, so you don’t have to.
I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.
The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.
No such luck in this one.
Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.
But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.
What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.
Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.
The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.
But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.
And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!
After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).
Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.
Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)
3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.
The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.
No such luck in this one.
Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.
But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.
What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.
Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.
The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.
But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.
And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!
After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).
Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.
Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)
3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
Forensic Science: A Very Short Introduction
Book
Forensic science is a subject of wide fascination. What happens at a crime scene? How does DNA...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Conan the Barbarian (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Conan.
The name either evokes pictures of half naked body builders, and topless wenches, or a very tall man with red, quaffed hair. Well, hopefully the former is what you are all thinking about, because that is what you are going to get. Nobody goes to a Conan movie for the tall, red haired guy. Right?
Jason Momoa, who is not awful to look at for a couple of hours, plays Conan. Physically, he is much truer to the character in the original source material, than the former governor of California. He also has this interesting gravity that makes you sit up and pay attention. Or maybe that was because he was shirtless for most of the movie.
Conan’s story begins as a baby, who is “battle born” and whose first taste, a familiar narrator states, “is not his mother’s milk, but her blood.” He is better then many of his village’s best warrior candidates and joins in a test that ends up being a battle against savages. While the other candidates run back to camp; Conan stay and fights. Not only does he return to the camp having passed the test, but he carries three of the savage’s heads with him. His father (Ron Pearlman) decides it is time to forge a sword and begin to train, with the father imparting sage words like, “You cannot yield the sword until you understand it.”
Conan’s training is interrupted by the arrival of Khalar Zym (Stephen Lang), a ruthless warlord who brings death and destruction to Conan’s village. Zym’s on a a quest to to claim the final piece of a mask that will give him control of the magic of Asheron. Conan is left the sole survivor of his Cimmarian people, growing up to become a fierce warrior intent on avenging his father’s death. All the while, Zym and his daughter Marique continue on Zym’s quest to become a powerful god, in search of a “pureblood” – the one person whose blood will make the mask work. Inevitably, Zym and Conan’s paths cross again and swordfights ensue.
The best thing about this movie, for me, were the female leads. Rose McGowan as Marique and Rachel Nichols as Tamara (the pureblood) are both warriors. It was also excellent to have Conan acknowledge this in Tamara; even saying, “Cimmarian women are warriors, give her the leather and armor.” We would have never heard 1982’s Conan say anything like this.
Listening to people while leaving the movie I heard grumblings about how the Conan character never really had an origin story. This movie provides that, and because of this it also provides something that the original movies lacked: plot. Not that the plot is very rich, but again, nobody goes to a Conan movie for the story or the plot. Right?
The name either evokes pictures of half naked body builders, and topless wenches, or a very tall man with red, quaffed hair. Well, hopefully the former is what you are all thinking about, because that is what you are going to get. Nobody goes to a Conan movie for the tall, red haired guy. Right?
Jason Momoa, who is not awful to look at for a couple of hours, plays Conan. Physically, he is much truer to the character in the original source material, than the former governor of California. He also has this interesting gravity that makes you sit up and pay attention. Or maybe that was because he was shirtless for most of the movie.
Conan’s story begins as a baby, who is “battle born” and whose first taste, a familiar narrator states, “is not his mother’s milk, but her blood.” He is better then many of his village’s best warrior candidates and joins in a test that ends up being a battle against savages. While the other candidates run back to camp; Conan stay and fights. Not only does he return to the camp having passed the test, but he carries three of the savage’s heads with him. His father (Ron Pearlman) decides it is time to forge a sword and begin to train, with the father imparting sage words like, “You cannot yield the sword until you understand it.”
Conan’s training is interrupted by the arrival of Khalar Zym (Stephen Lang), a ruthless warlord who brings death and destruction to Conan’s village. Zym’s on a a quest to to claim the final piece of a mask that will give him control of the magic of Asheron. Conan is left the sole survivor of his Cimmarian people, growing up to become a fierce warrior intent on avenging his father’s death. All the while, Zym and his daughter Marique continue on Zym’s quest to become a powerful god, in search of a “pureblood” – the one person whose blood will make the mask work. Inevitably, Zym and Conan’s paths cross again and swordfights ensue.
The best thing about this movie, for me, were the female leads. Rose McGowan as Marique and Rachel Nichols as Tamara (the pureblood) are both warriors. It was also excellent to have Conan acknowledge this in Tamara; even saying, “Cimmarian women are warriors, give her the leather and armor.” We would have never heard 1982’s Conan say anything like this.
Listening to people while leaving the movie I heard grumblings about how the Conan character never really had an origin story. This movie provides that, and because of this it also provides something that the original movies lacked: plot. Not that the plot is very rich, but again, nobody goes to a Conan movie for the story or the plot. Right?
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Nov 11, 2019 (Updated Nov 12, 2019)
39 Years Later: Redrum aka Murder
Doctor Sleep- if you dont know is the sequel to the shining. I have been waiting for this movie to come out ever since it got announced. I read the book over two years again and i loved it. I didnt even know their was a sequel to the shining until i read the book. The book is phenomenal, it is acutally my first stephen king novel that i read and finshed, so to say at less, i was hyped and very anticpated, so what did i think. I thought it was good. I liked it alot.
Ewan McGregor was a perfect cast for Danny Torrance and Rebecca Ferguson was excellent as Rose The Hat and newcomer actress Kyliegh Curran was great as Abra Stone. Mike Flanagan was amazing choice for the dirctor. I liked his other movies that he directed and also loved The Haunting of Hill House which he created and directed.
The Recreated sences from the oringal film was intresting, i liked it not to bad. The hotel looks the same, old, crooked, haunted, scary, horrorfying and terrorfying. The replacements for Dick Hallorann, young Danny, Wendy and Llyod/Jack were intresting. I really liked the actress who played Wendy. As for Dick, i liked the actor who played him. As for young Danny he was good and Llyod/Jack the actor who played him was okay/bad, he just did a impression of Jack Nichoslon and looked like a young Jack Nicolson.
This is intresting, i just found this out: Danny Lloyd, who played Danny Torrance in The Shining, makes a cameo appearance as Bradley Trevor's father. Lloyd had been retired from acting for roughly 38 years, and was direct-messaged on Twitter by Flanagan to appear in the film. Producer Trevor Macy said of Lloyd's involvement, "[Lloyd] was excited to do [the cameo]. He hadn't acted since [the original]. He's a schoolteacher, and a very successful one at that, [who] like[s] making the world better. He came back for a day, and we were thrilled to have him." When pressed as to why the filmmakers did not extend the same offer to Jack Nicholson, Macy responded, "With Jack, I knew that they approached him for Ready Player One, and that he seems to be very serious about being retired. I had known that he was supportive [of the sequel] but retired." Flanagan admitted, "I didn't know how that would really work. Even if he were to come back, if he were appearing as a different character, I thought that would set people's hair on fire. He was absolutely a presence on set, though, whether he knew it or not."
So thats intresting. I would of loved to see Jack Nichloson come out of retirement and play old Jack Torrance.
Doctor Sleep was a great/excellent sequel to the shining and what Mike Flanagan did was perfect he toke elements from Stanley Kubrick's film and made it his own. The cast is great, the story is great, the hotel is great.
If you havent seen the shining than watch it and read it. If you havent seen this movie, than go watch it and read it.
Ewan McGregor was a perfect cast for Danny Torrance and Rebecca Ferguson was excellent as Rose The Hat and newcomer actress Kyliegh Curran was great as Abra Stone. Mike Flanagan was amazing choice for the dirctor. I liked his other movies that he directed and also loved The Haunting of Hill House which he created and directed.
The Recreated sences from the oringal film was intresting, i liked it not to bad. The hotel looks the same, old, crooked, haunted, scary, horrorfying and terrorfying. The replacements for Dick Hallorann, young Danny, Wendy and Llyod/Jack were intresting. I really liked the actress who played Wendy. As for Dick, i liked the actor who played him. As for young Danny he was good and Llyod/Jack the actor who played him was okay/bad, he just did a impression of Jack Nichoslon and looked like a young Jack Nicolson.
This is intresting, i just found this out: Danny Lloyd, who played Danny Torrance in The Shining, makes a cameo appearance as Bradley Trevor's father. Lloyd had been retired from acting for roughly 38 years, and was direct-messaged on Twitter by Flanagan to appear in the film. Producer Trevor Macy said of Lloyd's involvement, "[Lloyd] was excited to do [the cameo]. He hadn't acted since [the original]. He's a schoolteacher, and a very successful one at that, [who] like[s] making the world better. He came back for a day, and we were thrilled to have him." When pressed as to why the filmmakers did not extend the same offer to Jack Nicholson, Macy responded, "With Jack, I knew that they approached him for Ready Player One, and that he seems to be very serious about being retired. I had known that he was supportive [of the sequel] but retired." Flanagan admitted, "I didn't know how that would really work. Even if he were to come back, if he were appearing as a different character, I thought that would set people's hair on fire. He was absolutely a presence on set, though, whether he knew it or not."
So thats intresting. I would of loved to see Jack Nichloson come out of retirement and play old Jack Torrance.
Doctor Sleep was a great/excellent sequel to the shining and what Mike Flanagan did was perfect he toke elements from Stanley Kubrick's film and made it his own. The cast is great, the story is great, the hotel is great.
If you havent seen the shining than watch it and read it. If you havent seen this movie, than go watch it and read it.
Hadley (567 KP) rated Soul Drinker in Books
Jul 25, 2020
The writing (2 more)
No character development
No ending
One of the classic horror tropes is Heaven versus Hell, angels versus demons, good versus evil (like a boogeyman versus an innocent child, or a killer versus a group of teenagers, or even an evil spirit versus an exorcist) and we always know how it's going to end: good triumphs evil, every time. Some of the most well known films with this trope are Constantine (2005), the Exorcist (1973) and more recently, Stephen King's IT : Chapter 2 (2019).
That, along with a little romance, mystery, and historical elements make up this novel that features three main characters who are stuck in a struggle between good and evil while having to face mistakes from the past.
Welcome to the hellish world of Soul Drinker by newcomer, Matthew Yard.
Deep description is what makes up Yard's storytelling, so much so that the book is extremely hard to read. Only 132 pages long, Yard spends most paragraphs describing one single thing in many different ways, such as a young woman's hair, which only needs one sentence to tell such a detail, but instead, took an entire paragraph.
During an ancient civilization, a deity appeared named Destroyer, it found a way to break through the boundaries that separates realms and universes - - - finding our realm, Destroyer leaves his son Luther to build powerful followings through cults run by Pagans.
The novel's villain, Luther, isn't present enough to feel like a real threat for the reader. And the three main characters, other than their physical descriptions, are lifeless because of the extreme lack of character development.
Our main character, Devin, is a college student who constantly has nightmares of his best friend's murder. He also lives at house in the woods which he has no idea how he attained it and this is never explained. After Devin and a classmate named Vic have an encounter with a supernatural cloud, they end up at this house, where readers find out that Devin isn't the only one who has been having nightmares.
Vic is a beautiful, young woman, who Devin seems to be enamoured with, but she is still busy getting over her first love. A few chapters in, readers get flashbacks of Vic's father and mother before she was born. Vic's father was also haunted by this supernatural cloud, which seems to have had a tighter grip on him than Vic - - - her father's flashbacks are the most interesting part of this story.
Vic's father, Jacob, is fast asleep next to his wife when a giant face wakes him up, telling him that there is work to do. Jacob follows the face out into the hallway, when it begins to sway, as if through the eyes of a drunk. Jacob fights the urge to continue to the stairs, wanting to turn back and protect his sleeping wife.
A little while later, we find out that Jacob is psychic: he can see the dead and/or the past. But for anymore development on that interesting piece of information, readers get one glimpse of what Jacob sees - - - and that's it. Jacob's wife, Nina, is an even flatter character, which we only get to see in bed either asleep or waking up. Even Jacob's mental and spiritual fight with the 'face' is disappointingly short with no real tension, no climax, or feelings of betrayal when something finally happens in the end of that scene.
Love, the supernatural, and Pagan cults are what make up the plot of this book. The story jumps between Devin, Vic and Jacob, but the story gets caught up in moments that shouldn't be more than a paragraph, which caused me to become bored with the story. And Yard's writing made this book read like a fan fiction: a lot of inconsistencies throughout, tons of misspellings, and a major overuse of the same words, sometimes even in the same sentence.
Unfortunately, this book was almost unreadable, and the heavy descriptions were extremely off-putting, as was the end of the story- - - the book ended suddenly, and with no sequel in sight. I can't recommend this book to anyone.
That, along with a little romance, mystery, and historical elements make up this novel that features three main characters who are stuck in a struggle between good and evil while having to face mistakes from the past.
Welcome to the hellish world of Soul Drinker by newcomer, Matthew Yard.
Deep description is what makes up Yard's storytelling, so much so that the book is extremely hard to read. Only 132 pages long, Yard spends most paragraphs describing one single thing in many different ways, such as a young woman's hair, which only needs one sentence to tell such a detail, but instead, took an entire paragraph.
During an ancient civilization, a deity appeared named Destroyer, it found a way to break through the boundaries that separates realms and universes - - - finding our realm, Destroyer leaves his son Luther to build powerful followings through cults run by Pagans.
The novel's villain, Luther, isn't present enough to feel like a real threat for the reader. And the three main characters, other than their physical descriptions, are lifeless because of the extreme lack of character development.
Our main character, Devin, is a college student who constantly has nightmares of his best friend's murder. He also lives at house in the woods which he has no idea how he attained it and this is never explained. After Devin and a classmate named Vic have an encounter with a supernatural cloud, they end up at this house, where readers find out that Devin isn't the only one who has been having nightmares.
Vic is a beautiful, young woman, who Devin seems to be enamoured with, but she is still busy getting over her first love. A few chapters in, readers get flashbacks of Vic's father and mother before she was born. Vic's father was also haunted by this supernatural cloud, which seems to have had a tighter grip on him than Vic - - - her father's flashbacks are the most interesting part of this story.
Vic's father, Jacob, is fast asleep next to his wife when a giant face wakes him up, telling him that there is work to do. Jacob follows the face out into the hallway, when it begins to sway, as if through the eyes of a drunk. Jacob fights the urge to continue to the stairs, wanting to turn back and protect his sleeping wife.
A little while later, we find out that Jacob is psychic: he can see the dead and/or the past. But for anymore development on that interesting piece of information, readers get one glimpse of what Jacob sees - - - and that's it. Jacob's wife, Nina, is an even flatter character, which we only get to see in bed either asleep or waking up. Even Jacob's mental and spiritual fight with the 'face' is disappointingly short with no real tension, no climax, or feelings of betrayal when something finally happens in the end of that scene.
Love, the supernatural, and Pagan cults are what make up the plot of this book. The story jumps between Devin, Vic and Jacob, but the story gets caught up in moments that shouldn't be more than a paragraph, which caused me to become bored with the story. And Yard's writing made this book read like a fan fiction: a lot of inconsistencies throughout, tons of misspellings, and a major overuse of the same words, sometimes even in the same sentence.
Unfortunately, this book was almost unreadable, and the heavy descriptions were extremely off-putting, as was the end of the story- - - the book ended suddenly, and with no sequel in sight. I can't recommend this book to anyone.