Search
Search results
Split Screen Multitasking View for iPhone & iPad
Utilities and Productivity
App
Ranked #1 iPhone & iPad Utility App in 28 Countries, Split Screen Multitasking app DuMore also...
Hymnal SDA-PD
Music and Reference
App
Highlights: • Import your own music sheets from Dropbox, your photo album, or directly from the...
Fitness Chef Healthy Food - Calisthenics Meal Plan
Food & Drink and Health & Fitness
App
If you’re training to reach your fitness goals, you’ll know that 80% of your results come from...
Annie Chanse (15 KP) rated Shadows & Dreams in Books
Dec 19, 2017
Review** spoiler alert ** *Warning: contains spoilers, bad words, and quite a long rant*
To be honest, I was very disappointed in this book. It had a great premise, which meant it had the potential to be a really good story, but the writing style of the author just completely ruined this book for me.
The basic idea behind the story is that Kate Kane, a paranormal PI, sets off on a case to find the brother of a woman she slept with once, and during this investigation, she runs into ALL MANNER OF TROUBLE. There are vampires and werewolves and ex-girlfriends around every corner, just lurking and waiting to pounce on Miss Kane. It's a very busy and involved story, and if it had been better written, I would have easily given it four stars at least, but there was just TOO much about this book -- style-wise -- that drove me insane.
For instance:
1. The plot, itself, is actually fairly well thought out and developed and is nowhere NEAR as cheesy as it sounds when you hear, "Vampires fighting werewolves," -- which, let's be honest, these days is so trite and overdone that it is scoffed at on a regular basis. However, there IS a good story in this novel. But the way Hall writes the not-cheesy story is so cheesy that it makes you THINK the story is cheesy. A lot of cheese, huh? A little confusing? Well then, let me give you an example.
Page 7-8: "Truth be told it was a little bit awkward, but my social weirdness threshold has gone way up since my girlfriend tried to murder my ex-girlfriend because her ex-girlfriend tried to murder her."
Okay... a bit ridiculous, especially seven/eight pages in, but I can roll with it. However, at the bottom of page eight:
Kane asks, "Who saw him last?"
Her assistant -- who is actually a statue brought to life and gifted to Kate by a group of rats who are apparently all seeing and all knowing God-types -- says, "I don't know. [...] Probably somebody at the hospital."
Kane asks, "Which one?"
And the assistant replies with this fantastic line: "The Whittington. He broke his leg changing a light bulb. Because he was standing on a swivel chair because he's an idiot."
Okay, I concede that maybe this line is supposed to sound ridiculous and funny, so I can even let that one slide. But then, three pages later, Hall completely turns me off to the book with this:
"Well, fuck. I was about to be hired by a woman I'd very nearly slept with to find her missing brother who was working for the woman who'd left me for a tech startup at the tech startup she left me for."
Wh-wh-what?! Are you kidding me? Could that sentence BE anymore convoluted or that plot-point any more ridiculously stereotypical?
And what is truly awful is that the story itself REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD. I mean, the writing was awful, which, overall, meant that the novel was -- in my opinion, of course -- bad, but the way the story progressed WAS interesting. It was nowhere near as bad as these 'recaps' by the main character make it sound, but the problem is that Hall throws in these inner-monologues for Kane ALL throughout the book, and they are terrible! Which, in turn, decreases the value of the entire story.
Another example falls right on the heels of the page 11 jewel.
Page 14: "I really really hoped this wasn't going to be another zombie plague. There'd been an outbreak when I'd taken Eve up to Lake Windermere for our third anniversary, and we'd spent the whole weekend under siege in the hotel, making molotovs from the minibar and clubbing re-animated tourists to death with souvenir walking sticks."
Really? Zombies now? On top of the vampires, witches, and werewolves? Can we POSSIBLY fit anymore para into this normal?
Enough with that.
Now on to point number 2. The girl on girl sex scenes in this book between sexy, snarky PI and her vampire girlfriend, the Prince (yes, Prince) of Cups, should be hot, right? No. They are forced, fake, and ridiculous. Halfway through the first one, I thought, "Jesus. This isn't lesbian sex. This is lesbian sex if it was written by a man who WISHES he could see some lesbian sex." That was the point at which I decided to look up more info on Alexis Hall, and I found out that he is, in fact, a man, which at least explains the sex scenes.
#3. Speaking of sex scenes, Hall also has this really irritating -- and distracting -- habit of throwing in random, explicitly sexual thoughts at TOTALLY inappropriate times. Right in the middle of the most stressful situations -- being locked up, about to be killed, thrown in prison/on trial -- Kate Kane begins inner-monologuing with herself about how much she'd like to fuck whatever female happens to be standing in front of her. RIDICULOUS! And annoying. Hated it.
4. One of the MOST annoying things about this book, however, was that it was in DESPERATE need of a SERIOUS case of editing. All throughout the book there were glaring errors that any first year college student should have caught while reading. I'm willing to discount SOME of these "errors" as simply being lost in translation, as the book is written with a British tone, and I am very much American. However, SOME of these errors simply CANNOT be due to anything other than careless editing.
For instance, page 113: "It's main distinguishing feature, right, was that was it was blue."
WAS that WAS it WAS blue? What does that even mean? Oh, yes, it means that no one bothered editing this beast before printing.
Page 141: "Piercing the heart will paralyse, but it won't kill, and anything will do, it doesn't have to wood."
Okay, so maybe the "paralyse" is simply British, but surely the "doesn't have to wood" bit needs a "be" in there somewhere, right?
Page 157: "Have we have achieved case closed, Miss Kane?"
Yes, yes have we have.
There are several -- SEVERAL -- more examples of these type errors, but I'm not about to point them all out. If you read the book, I'm sure you'll easily catch them on your own.
5. Another thing that drove me NUTS was the repetition. The awful thing is I'm fairly certain that Hall used these repetitious lines PURPOSELY to create some kind of effect -- humor, maybe? Whatever the desired result, it failed to do anything other than annoy me.
For instance, page 163: "'Hi. So. Look.' I tried to find a way to express the fact I had some good news and some bad news that wasn't I've got some good news and some bad news. 'I've got some good news and some bad news.'"
...blink... ...falls over...
Page 177: "All the more reason to tell them. [...] If they know that we know that she has returned, then they will not be tempted to conspire against us out of the false belief that we do not know. Of course, they may already know, but at present, we have no way to know what they know. If we tell them, we will know what they know, and all we will not know is how long they have known it."
Oh. Jumping. Jesus. On. A. Pogo. Stick. Please tell me you aren't serious.
And there was this one thing that repeated over and over again throughout the book. The first time, it was actually pretty clever. The second time, even, was okay. But by the time I'd read it nine times -- yes, NINE TIMES, no exaggeration whatsoever -- I was ready to never EVER read anything like it ever again.
This particular phrase was something Kate Kane internalized or muttered aloud to herself each time she decided to do something stupid OR she felt her life was in danger. The basic format went something like this:
"Here lies Kate Kane, died peacefully in her sleep aged 94. Beloved daughter."
The "Here lies Kate Kane" part remained constant, as did the "Beloved daughter." It was only the middle part that changed, for instance, "Here lies Kate Kate. Should have minded her own business. Beloved daughter." Or perhaps, "Here lies Kate Kane. She made a difference to dozens. Beloved daughter."
This continued NINE TIMES. It is not cute, funny, or clever after about the second time, definitely after the third. BUT NINE TIMES?! Come on!
And finally, my last complaint.
6. Several of the items, scenes, quotes, etc. in this book seemed waaaaaaaaaay too close to things from other books for my taste. Perhaps it is simply a coincidence and the author did not intentionally siphon plot points and details from other authors -- except, of course, when he obviously did in his quotations, such as his use of "Not all those who wander are lost" and "As old as my tongue, a little bit older than my teeth" which are DIRECTLY taken from other books, but I'm hoping those were intentional and not attempted-to-get-away-with-it plagiarism.
But there are several things in this novel that could have been taken from Jim Butcher's "Dresden Files", Lewis' "Narnia" chronicles, and Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" series. I'm hoping, however, that they weren't, but they were very, very similar.
All in all, I'm disappointed to say that I was not a fan of this book at all, and I will most likely not be reading anymore Kate Kane books.
To be honest, I was very disappointed in this book. It had a great premise, which meant it had the potential to be a really good story, but the writing style of the author just completely ruined this book for me.
The basic idea behind the story is that Kate Kane, a paranormal PI, sets off on a case to find the brother of a woman she slept with once, and during this investigation, she runs into ALL MANNER OF TROUBLE. There are vampires and werewolves and ex-girlfriends around every corner, just lurking and waiting to pounce on Miss Kane. It's a very busy and involved story, and if it had been better written, I would have easily given it four stars at least, but there was just TOO much about this book -- style-wise -- that drove me insane.
For instance:
1. The plot, itself, is actually fairly well thought out and developed and is nowhere NEAR as cheesy as it sounds when you hear, "Vampires fighting werewolves," -- which, let's be honest, these days is so trite and overdone that it is scoffed at on a regular basis. However, there IS a good story in this novel. But the way Hall writes the not-cheesy story is so cheesy that it makes you THINK the story is cheesy. A lot of cheese, huh? A little confusing? Well then, let me give you an example.
Page 7-8: "Truth be told it was a little bit awkward, but my social weirdness threshold has gone way up since my girlfriend tried to murder my ex-girlfriend because her ex-girlfriend tried to murder her."
Okay... a bit ridiculous, especially seven/eight pages in, but I can roll with it. However, at the bottom of page eight:
Kane asks, "Who saw him last?"
Her assistant -- who is actually a statue brought to life and gifted to Kate by a group of rats who are apparently all seeing and all knowing God-types -- says, "I don't know. [...] Probably somebody at the hospital."
Kane asks, "Which one?"
And the assistant replies with this fantastic line: "The Whittington. He broke his leg changing a light bulb. Because he was standing on a swivel chair because he's an idiot."
Okay, I concede that maybe this line is supposed to sound ridiculous and funny, so I can even let that one slide. But then, three pages later, Hall completely turns me off to the book with this:
"Well, fuck. I was about to be hired by a woman I'd very nearly slept with to find her missing brother who was working for the woman who'd left me for a tech startup at the tech startup she left me for."
Wh-wh-what?! Are you kidding me? Could that sentence BE anymore convoluted or that plot-point any more ridiculously stereotypical?
And what is truly awful is that the story itself REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD. I mean, the writing was awful, which, overall, meant that the novel was -- in my opinion, of course -- bad, but the way the story progressed WAS interesting. It was nowhere near as bad as these 'recaps' by the main character make it sound, but the problem is that Hall throws in these inner-monologues for Kane ALL throughout the book, and they are terrible! Which, in turn, decreases the value of the entire story.
Another example falls right on the heels of the page 11 jewel.
Page 14: "I really really hoped this wasn't going to be another zombie plague. There'd been an outbreak when I'd taken Eve up to Lake Windermere for our third anniversary, and we'd spent the whole weekend under siege in the hotel, making molotovs from the minibar and clubbing re-animated tourists to death with souvenir walking sticks."
Really? Zombies now? On top of the vampires, witches, and werewolves? Can we POSSIBLY fit anymore para into this normal?
Enough with that.
Now on to point number 2. The girl on girl sex scenes in this book between sexy, snarky PI and her vampire girlfriend, the Prince (yes, Prince) of Cups, should be hot, right? No. They are forced, fake, and ridiculous. Halfway through the first one, I thought, "Jesus. This isn't lesbian sex. This is lesbian sex if it was written by a man who WISHES he could see some lesbian sex." That was the point at which I decided to look up more info on Alexis Hall, and I found out that he is, in fact, a man, which at least explains the sex scenes.
#3. Speaking of sex scenes, Hall also has this really irritating -- and distracting -- habit of throwing in random, explicitly sexual thoughts at TOTALLY inappropriate times. Right in the middle of the most stressful situations -- being locked up, about to be killed, thrown in prison/on trial -- Kate Kane begins inner-monologuing with herself about how much she'd like to fuck whatever female happens to be standing in front of her. RIDICULOUS! And annoying. Hated it.
4. One of the MOST annoying things about this book, however, was that it was in DESPERATE need of a SERIOUS case of editing. All throughout the book there were glaring errors that any first year college student should have caught while reading. I'm willing to discount SOME of these "errors" as simply being lost in translation, as the book is written with a British tone, and I am very much American. However, SOME of these errors simply CANNOT be due to anything other than careless editing.
For instance, page 113: "It's main distinguishing feature, right, was that was it was blue."
WAS that WAS it WAS blue? What does that even mean? Oh, yes, it means that no one bothered editing this beast before printing.
Page 141: "Piercing the heart will paralyse, but it won't kill, and anything will do, it doesn't have to wood."
Okay, so maybe the "paralyse" is simply British, but surely the "doesn't have to wood" bit needs a "be" in there somewhere, right?
Page 157: "Have we have achieved case closed, Miss Kane?"
Yes, yes have we have.
There are several -- SEVERAL -- more examples of these type errors, but I'm not about to point them all out. If you read the book, I'm sure you'll easily catch them on your own.
5. Another thing that drove me NUTS was the repetition. The awful thing is I'm fairly certain that Hall used these repetitious lines PURPOSELY to create some kind of effect -- humor, maybe? Whatever the desired result, it failed to do anything other than annoy me.
For instance, page 163: "'Hi. So. Look.' I tried to find a way to express the fact I had some good news and some bad news that wasn't I've got some good news and some bad news. 'I've got some good news and some bad news.'"
...blink... ...falls over...
Page 177: "All the more reason to tell them. [...] If they know that we know that she has returned, then they will not be tempted to conspire against us out of the false belief that we do not know. Of course, they may already know, but at present, we have no way to know what they know. If we tell them, we will know what they know, and all we will not know is how long they have known it."
Oh. Jumping. Jesus. On. A. Pogo. Stick. Please tell me you aren't serious.
And there was this one thing that repeated over and over again throughout the book. The first time, it was actually pretty clever. The second time, even, was okay. But by the time I'd read it nine times -- yes, NINE TIMES, no exaggeration whatsoever -- I was ready to never EVER read anything like it ever again.
This particular phrase was something Kate Kane internalized or muttered aloud to herself each time she decided to do something stupid OR she felt her life was in danger. The basic format went something like this:
"Here lies Kate Kane, died peacefully in her sleep aged 94. Beloved daughter."
The "Here lies Kate Kane" part remained constant, as did the "Beloved daughter." It was only the middle part that changed, for instance, "Here lies Kate Kate. Should have minded her own business. Beloved daughter." Or perhaps, "Here lies Kate Kane. She made a difference to dozens. Beloved daughter."
This continued NINE TIMES. It is not cute, funny, or clever after about the second time, definitely after the third. BUT NINE TIMES?! Come on!
And finally, my last complaint.
6. Several of the items, scenes, quotes, etc. in this book seemed waaaaaaaaaay too close to things from other books for my taste. Perhaps it is simply a coincidence and the author did not intentionally siphon plot points and details from other authors -- except, of course, when he obviously did in his quotations, such as his use of "Not all those who wander are lost" and "As old as my tongue, a little bit older than my teeth" which are DIRECTLY taken from other books, but I'm hoping those were intentional and not attempted-to-get-away-with-it plagiarism.
But there are several things in this novel that could have been taken from Jim Butcher's "Dresden Files", Lewis' "Narnia" chronicles, and Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" series. I'm hoping, however, that they weren't, but they were very, very similar.
All in all, I'm disappointed to say that I was not a fan of this book at all, and I will most likely not be reading anymore Kate Kane books.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 10, 2019)
The Marvel touch
The first thing I’m going to tell you about Spider-Man: Homecoming is that it has been gloriously undersold in its uninspiring trailers and promotional posters. In fact, most of the marketing materials shown made it look like this would be Iron Man 4 ft. Peter Parker. Thankfully that’s not the case.
The second thing I’ll tell you is that Tom Holland’s turn as Peter Parker is very good indeed. But is he better than Tobey Maguire or Andrew Garfield? Well, for that you’ll have to read on.
Still buzzing from his experiences with the Avengers in Captain America: Civil War, young Peter Parker (Tom Holland) returns home to live with his Aunt May (Marisa Tomei). Under the watchful eye of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr), Peter starts to embrace Spider-Man. He also tries to return to his normal life — distracted by thoughts of proving himself to be more than just a bargain basement superhero. However, when danger emerges in the shape of the Vulture (Michael Keaton), Peter must soon put his powers to the test.
Jon Watts directs not only the best Spider-Man film to date, but probably the best film to come out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe since Guardians of the Galaxy. That is by no means and easy thing to achieve, but by golly he’s done it.
The best Marvel films don’t shout about their superhero roots. By that I mean Captain America: the Winter Soldier was first and foremost a heist movie and Guardians of the Galaxy was an epic space opera. Here, Watts and his two writers turn Spider-Man: Homecoming into a cheesy, fun high-school romance and it succeeds at that beautifully.
But is it a good superhero flick? In a word, yes. The action is shot exceptionally well with very little nonsensical shaky cam, the pacing is spot on; in fact it may be one of the best films I have ever seen for pacing and the characters are all utterly believable.
Tom Holland is, without a doubt the best iteration of Peter Parker ever put to the big screen. He is the school geek that the character always should have been. Gone are Tobey Maguire’s ridiculous facial expressions and Andrew Garfield’s unrealistic ‘high school nerd’ persona.
Elsewhere, Michael Keaton avoids the Marvel villain trap and becomes the universe’s best antagonist since Loki. It would be easy for Vulture to come across ridiculous rather than menacing and Keaton gets the latter absolutely spot on. In particular, a pivotal turning point in the film’s third act is exquisitely written and truly intimidating.
It’s not all good news unfortunately. Like a broken record, I have to mention the obligatory CGI-heavy finale. Thankfully though, the story is nicely twisted to give the scenes emotional gravitas. I’m also not sold on Marisa Tomei as Aunt May, but this may come with time. And if I’m really nit-picking, there’s a little too much obvious product placement for Audi.
So, I’ve managed to get through a full review with only a small paragraph of negative points, that doesn’t happen very often. Something else that doesn’t happen very often is for me to award a film a full five stars. On this occasion however, the Marvel touch has well and truly created a corker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/06/spider-man-homecoming-review/
The second thing I’ll tell you is that Tom Holland’s turn as Peter Parker is very good indeed. But is he better than Tobey Maguire or Andrew Garfield? Well, for that you’ll have to read on.
Still buzzing from his experiences with the Avengers in Captain America: Civil War, young Peter Parker (Tom Holland) returns home to live with his Aunt May (Marisa Tomei). Under the watchful eye of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr), Peter starts to embrace Spider-Man. He also tries to return to his normal life — distracted by thoughts of proving himself to be more than just a bargain basement superhero. However, when danger emerges in the shape of the Vulture (Michael Keaton), Peter must soon put his powers to the test.
Jon Watts directs not only the best Spider-Man film to date, but probably the best film to come out of the Marvel Cinematic Universe since Guardians of the Galaxy. That is by no means and easy thing to achieve, but by golly he’s done it.
The best Marvel films don’t shout about their superhero roots. By that I mean Captain America: the Winter Soldier was first and foremost a heist movie and Guardians of the Galaxy was an epic space opera. Here, Watts and his two writers turn Spider-Man: Homecoming into a cheesy, fun high-school romance and it succeeds at that beautifully.
But is it a good superhero flick? In a word, yes. The action is shot exceptionally well with very little nonsensical shaky cam, the pacing is spot on; in fact it may be one of the best films I have ever seen for pacing and the characters are all utterly believable.
Tom Holland is, without a doubt the best iteration of Peter Parker ever put to the big screen. He is the school geek that the character always should have been. Gone are Tobey Maguire’s ridiculous facial expressions and Andrew Garfield’s unrealistic ‘high school nerd’ persona.
Elsewhere, Michael Keaton avoids the Marvel villain trap and becomes the universe’s best antagonist since Loki. It would be easy for Vulture to come across ridiculous rather than menacing and Keaton gets the latter absolutely spot on. In particular, a pivotal turning point in the film’s third act is exquisitely written and truly intimidating.
It’s not all good news unfortunately. Like a broken record, I have to mention the obligatory CGI-heavy finale. Thankfully though, the story is nicely twisted to give the scenes emotional gravitas. I’m also not sold on Marisa Tomei as Aunt May, but this may come with time. And if I’m really nit-picking, there’s a little too much obvious product placement for Audi.
So, I’ve managed to get through a full review with only a small paragraph of negative points, that doesn’t happen very often. Something else that doesn’t happen very often is for me to award a film a full five stars. On this occasion however, the Marvel touch has well and truly created a corker.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/07/06/spider-man-homecoming-review/
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Divergent in Books
Jan 23, 2020
<p class="separator" style="clear: both;">Imagine having to choose only 5 factions when you're sixteen with the knowledge that you might even have to leave your family. Then there's initiation which you have to pass or you're practically homeless (in this case, factionless). I know for one thing that I'll be having a LOT of trouble choosing a faction if our world as we know it were divided into factions.
<p class="separator" style="clear: both;">My 2 cents on that? I'm not exactly selfless. And I have to look in the mirror, at least once a day, otherwise how else would I know if there's a ladybug in my hair? Dx Not that there is one. So Abnegation is out for me. I don't tell the truth ALL the time, even if I tend to burst out my honest opinion, therefore, I'm not Candor either. I would most certainly not jump off a train. Breaking a leg is painful. Falling to my death for fun and knowing that is worse. With that thought, I'm not Dauntless. I'm friendly most of the time, but not all the time. And I'm uncomfortable when it comes to hugs. *hides* I guess I'm cut out for Amity as well. I'm probably in Erudite though, drowning (in a good way) books and seeking knowledge. Maybe I'm not. I'm not that nerdy, even if I like hiding in books. I'm probably factionless though.
<p class="separator" style="clear: both;">I'm talking too much when I should probably go straight to the point. Whoops. I'm just curious about how the factions were formatted and how it's gonna work because like Four/Tobias says, "I want to be brave, and selfless, and smart, and kind, and honest."
Since I've been babbling randomly about my curiosity on the 5 factions, I should head back to the right trail then. And that is, actually reviewing and not writing away freely (more like typing) about something else (though related). I think that Divergent is quite similar to Harry Potter and The Hunger Games, but different and amazing in it's very own way that makes it just as unique as any other great books out there (whether or not I read them. Sparkly Vampires and Jacob Chihuahua included). :)
I really enjoy the main character Tris, though on some actions I'll disagree on. Why kill Will? He's kinda awesome, you know... he did stick with Tris when she was bullied by the others. (though I see why she had to. If Tris was dead, there would be a different main character instead. And that bounces more curiosity) Dx Christina's gonna murder you later o_o (Hey, if that's even true later, don't tell me because I'm just predicting! I'm not exactly cool with spoilers... lol. o_o) Eric is just plain mean (he was a bit aggressive in training though... too aggressive) and as evil as Jeanine (sorry if I spelled her name wrong). Nuff said. And I have a feeling they'll be causing more trouble in the future, whatever it might be.
Curiosity included or not, I fully enjoyed the plot the author has placed into the series and can't wait to read the next book when I get the chance. :)
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-divergent-by-veronica-roth/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
<p class="separator" style="clear: both;">My 2 cents on that? I'm not exactly selfless. And I have to look in the mirror, at least once a day, otherwise how else would I know if there's a ladybug in my hair? Dx Not that there is one. So Abnegation is out for me. I don't tell the truth ALL the time, even if I tend to burst out my honest opinion, therefore, I'm not Candor either. I would most certainly not jump off a train. Breaking a leg is painful. Falling to my death for fun and knowing that is worse. With that thought, I'm not Dauntless. I'm friendly most of the time, but not all the time. And I'm uncomfortable when it comes to hugs. *hides* I guess I'm cut out for Amity as well. I'm probably in Erudite though, drowning (in a good way) books and seeking knowledge. Maybe I'm not. I'm not that nerdy, even if I like hiding in books. I'm probably factionless though.
<p class="separator" style="clear: both;">I'm talking too much when I should probably go straight to the point. Whoops. I'm just curious about how the factions were formatted and how it's gonna work because like Four/Tobias says, "I want to be brave, and selfless, and smart, and kind, and honest."
Since I've been babbling randomly about my curiosity on the 5 factions, I should head back to the right trail then. And that is, actually reviewing and not writing away freely (more like typing) about something else (though related). I think that Divergent is quite similar to Harry Potter and The Hunger Games, but different and amazing in it's very own way that makes it just as unique as any other great books out there (whether or not I read them. Sparkly Vampires and Jacob Chihuahua included). :)
I really enjoy the main character Tris, though on some actions I'll disagree on. Why kill Will? He's kinda awesome, you know... he did stick with Tris when she was bullied by the others. (though I see why she had to. If Tris was dead, there would be a different main character instead. And that bounces more curiosity) Dx Christina's gonna murder you later o_o (Hey, if that's even true later, don't tell me because I'm just predicting! I'm not exactly cool with spoilers... lol. o_o) Eric is just plain mean (he was a bit aggressive in training though... too aggressive) and as evil as Jeanine (sorry if I spelled her name wrong). Nuff said. And I have a feeling they'll be causing more trouble in the future, whatever it might be.
Curiosity included or not, I fully enjoyed the plot the author has placed into the series and can't wait to read the next book when I get the chance. :)
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-divergent-by-veronica-roth/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Little Things (2021) in Movies
Feb 1, 2021
3 Strong Actors Elevate This Above Mediocrity
Generally, when a movie is “dumped” in January, it is a sure sign of a bad film, filled with Liam Neeson kicking butt or CGI monsters attacking a small group of survivors in an isolated location, but these being times that they are, Warner Brothers release of THE LITTLE THINGS simultaneously in Movie Theaters and on HBO MAX gave me reason to change my thinking.
And…I’m glad I did for THE LITTLE THINGS is an intriguing mystery with 3 very strong actors going toe-to-toe with each other.
Written and Directed by John Lee Hancock (THE BLIND SIDE), THE LITTLE THINGS stars the great Denzel Washington as a former L.A. Detective (now a Sherriff in some small town) who returns to L.A. and teams up with his hot shot replacement (Rami Malek) to track down a serial killer (the main suspect being Jared Leto).
It is a moody, atmospheric piece with Hancock taking his time telling the story he wants to tell in the way he wants to tell it, letting this trio of Oscar winning actors take over the story while he creates interesting, moody pictures/scenarios/scenes.
And…this approach mostly works. 2 time Oscar winner Denzel Washington, as you can imagine, is terrific as Joe “Deke” Deacon a cracker-jack Detective that is living with some demons from his last case in L.A.. He is in 90% of the scenes in this film and he is more than capable of carrying this film through some pretty slow and sloggy scenes.
I would love to say that Oscar winner Rami Malek is equal to the task of playing against Washington and keeping the middle part of this film interesting - but he just isn’t. Not to say that Malek is bad - he is very good. He just isn’t as good as Washington and the chemistry between these two characters was just not all that strong.
That said…without spoiling anything…Malek has a scene at the end of this film where he is TERRIFIC and shows that he is a VERY, VERY good actor.
The wild card in this film is Oscar winner Jared Leto as the prime suspect in this case - and he is more than up to the task. As is often the case in these sorts of film (think David Fincher’s SEVEN), Leto does not show up in full force until about 2/3 of the way through the film and that is too bad for he creates sparks on the screen the moment he enters the proceedings and the 3 way interrogation scene between these 3 Oscar winners is, I’m sure, what drew all 3 of these performers to this project and is the best thing in the film.
The praise and the criticism of this film must fall on Writer/Director Hancock, for he was smart enough to cast these 3 actors and direct them well while also falling prey to falling in love too much with the script and atmosphere he created to the detriment of the film. He could have used someone telling him to speed things up.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And…I’m glad I did for THE LITTLE THINGS is an intriguing mystery with 3 very strong actors going toe-to-toe with each other.
Written and Directed by John Lee Hancock (THE BLIND SIDE), THE LITTLE THINGS stars the great Denzel Washington as a former L.A. Detective (now a Sherriff in some small town) who returns to L.A. and teams up with his hot shot replacement (Rami Malek) to track down a serial killer (the main suspect being Jared Leto).
It is a moody, atmospheric piece with Hancock taking his time telling the story he wants to tell in the way he wants to tell it, letting this trio of Oscar winning actors take over the story while he creates interesting, moody pictures/scenarios/scenes.
And…this approach mostly works. 2 time Oscar winner Denzel Washington, as you can imagine, is terrific as Joe “Deke” Deacon a cracker-jack Detective that is living with some demons from his last case in L.A.. He is in 90% of the scenes in this film and he is more than capable of carrying this film through some pretty slow and sloggy scenes.
I would love to say that Oscar winner Rami Malek is equal to the task of playing against Washington and keeping the middle part of this film interesting - but he just isn’t. Not to say that Malek is bad - he is very good. He just isn’t as good as Washington and the chemistry between these two characters was just not all that strong.
That said…without spoiling anything…Malek has a scene at the end of this film where he is TERRIFIC and shows that he is a VERY, VERY good actor.
The wild card in this film is Oscar winner Jared Leto as the prime suspect in this case - and he is more than up to the task. As is often the case in these sorts of film (think David Fincher’s SEVEN), Leto does not show up in full force until about 2/3 of the way through the film and that is too bad for he creates sparks on the screen the moment he enters the proceedings and the 3 way interrogation scene between these 3 Oscar winners is, I’m sure, what drew all 3 of these performers to this project and is the best thing in the film.
The praise and the criticism of this film must fall on Writer/Director Hancock, for he was smart enough to cast these 3 actors and direct them well while also falling prey to falling in love too much with the script and atmosphere he created to the detriment of the film. He could have used someone telling him to speed things up.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Lee (2222 KP) rated Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (2019) in Movies
Aug 21, 2019
Obviously I'm not familiar with the Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark books that this movie is based on - a series of three books containing short horror stories for children and drawing heavily on urban legend and folklore for it's subject matter, first published in 1981. Apparently, the series is listed by the American Library Association as being the most challenged series of books from the 1990s, with complaints relating to the violence and disturbing subject matter portrayed within them not being suitable for the children it was aimed at. The illustrations within the book also drew criticism, vividly portraying the nightmare creatures and scenes contained within the stories. Perfect material for a movie version!
That movie version comes from Troll Hunter director André Øvredal and producer/co-writer Guillermo del Toro and attempts a Goosebumps style movie, taking some of the better known stories from the 80+ contained within the books and weaving them into a larger narrative, set in Mill Valley Pennsylvania during the fall of 1968.
It's Halloween and a group of teens are preparing to go out for an evening of trick or treating - applying makeup, getting into their costumes, fishing in the toilet for turds in preparation for a Halloween trick. They head out on their bikes but it's not long before they run into some idiot jocks from their local school, and that turd trick suddenly comes in handy! We've already been introduced to the jocks earlier in the movie, out in a cornfield where they were hitting a creepy looking scarecrow about the head with a baseball bat. Yep, they're certainly going to regret that a little bit later on!
The teens manage to escape the jocks, working their way into a drive through movie that's showing "Night of the Living Dead" and into the car of another teen called Ramón. The group strike up a bond with Ramón after he helps them out and they all decide to go and break into an abandoned local house which is reportedly haunted. They find their way into the basement where legend has it that Sarah Bellows, the daughter of a prominent local family, was locked away in the late 1800s. Horror nerd Stella comes across a book containing short scary stories that were written in blood by Sarah, and she decides to take it with them. As Stella opens the book’s pages, she sees that Sarah’s stories are literally beginning to write themselves - stories that put her friends in some pretty unpleasant situations, stories which immediately become reality the moment they're written. As Stella later puts it, "You don't read the book, the book reads you".
The setup and the scenarios within each story are enjoyable enough and are certainly creepy, however the execution doesn't always work so well and the payoffs aren't quite as scary as I would have liked. The movie also suffers from some slightly dodgy CGI at times too, which doesn't help. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the final story, and the return to the house in order to try and stop Sarah Bellows worked really well for me. It all ends with a definite opportunity for a sequel and with plenty more scary stories to choose from within the source material, I'm sure we'll be seeing another one soon. Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark taps nicely into the "It" and "Stranger Thing" vibe, with it's group of teens rising up together against evil, and despite it's faults I did have a lot of fun with it. I'm definitely interested in seeing more.
That movie version comes from Troll Hunter director André Øvredal and producer/co-writer Guillermo del Toro and attempts a Goosebumps style movie, taking some of the better known stories from the 80+ contained within the books and weaving them into a larger narrative, set in Mill Valley Pennsylvania during the fall of 1968.
It's Halloween and a group of teens are preparing to go out for an evening of trick or treating - applying makeup, getting into their costumes, fishing in the toilet for turds in preparation for a Halloween trick. They head out on their bikes but it's not long before they run into some idiot jocks from their local school, and that turd trick suddenly comes in handy! We've already been introduced to the jocks earlier in the movie, out in a cornfield where they were hitting a creepy looking scarecrow about the head with a baseball bat. Yep, they're certainly going to regret that a little bit later on!
The teens manage to escape the jocks, working their way into a drive through movie that's showing "Night of the Living Dead" and into the car of another teen called Ramón. The group strike up a bond with Ramón after he helps them out and they all decide to go and break into an abandoned local house which is reportedly haunted. They find their way into the basement where legend has it that Sarah Bellows, the daughter of a prominent local family, was locked away in the late 1800s. Horror nerd Stella comes across a book containing short scary stories that were written in blood by Sarah, and she decides to take it with them. As Stella opens the book’s pages, she sees that Sarah’s stories are literally beginning to write themselves - stories that put her friends in some pretty unpleasant situations, stories which immediately become reality the moment they're written. As Stella later puts it, "You don't read the book, the book reads you".
The setup and the scenarios within each story are enjoyable enough and are certainly creepy, however the execution doesn't always work so well and the payoffs aren't quite as scary as I would have liked. The movie also suffers from some slightly dodgy CGI at times too, which doesn't help. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the final story, and the return to the house in order to try and stop Sarah Bellows worked really well for me. It all ends with a definite opportunity for a sequel and with plenty more scary stories to choose from within the source material, I'm sure we'll be seeing another one soon. Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark taps nicely into the "It" and "Stranger Thing" vibe, with it's group of teens rising up together against evil, and despite it's faults I did have a lot of fun with it. I'm definitely interested in seeing more.
Alison Pink (7 KP) rated Two Rings: A Story of Love and War in Books
Jan 15, 2018
I have been interested in the history of WWII for some time, particularly by the Holocaust. I don't know where the interest began. It has nothing to do with my family. My dad was an infant & my mother not even born. As far as I know no one in my family fought it the war. I think more than anything it is the horror of the situation & that people were able to survive despite the atrocities they faced. Ones I can not even begin to imagine.
This memoir tells the story of Millie Werber & her experiences as a Jew in Poland during the war. I found myself amazed that a young woman could go through what she went through & live to tell the tale. I felt like I was holding my breath as I read. It sounds silly being as it is a memoir & I knew she had written it, but I found myself begging for her to be okay, wanting to know what happened next.
It was a surreal read. This book is incredibly well written. It reads like a top notch thriller, one you long to see made into a box office smash. Yet at the same time you know that it is all real...that the person recounting these "stories" actually lived through them. That in itself makes the ending unbelieveable.
I would reccommend this book to anyone interested in that particular time in history. But also to anyone who enjoys an amazing story of survival where one is least expected to occur. This is one of my favorite books ever. READ IT!!!!!!
This memoir tells the story of Millie Werber & her experiences as a Jew in Poland during the war. I found myself amazed that a young woman could go through what she went through & live to tell the tale. I felt like I was holding my breath as I read. It sounds silly being as it is a memoir & I knew she had written it, but I found myself begging for her to be okay, wanting to know what happened next.
It was a surreal read. This book is incredibly well written. It reads like a top notch thriller, one you long to see made into a box office smash. Yet at the same time you know that it is all real...that the person recounting these "stories" actually lived through them. That in itself makes the ending unbelieveable.
I would reccommend this book to anyone interested in that particular time in history. But also to anyone who enjoys an amazing story of survival where one is least expected to occur. This is one of my favorite books ever. READ IT!!!!!!
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Missing in Books
May 10, 2018
Blake Stanley needs a new housekeeper. Terry Johnson isn't exactly what he expected when he picked her up from the airport. Terry, along with her son Dale have come to help Blake and his son, Brad with the day to day operations around their home in the outback of Australia. From the moment Blake first lays eyes on Terry, he can tell there is something different about her and her son Dale is unlike any other little boy he has ever met. When Blake gets a frantic call from Dale while out on a muster, he hurries back to the homestead to find Terry lying on the ground in a pool of blood with Dale no where to be found. What is this lady into and where is Dale? Sent on a wild chase all throughout Australia, and finding out things about the past he should never know, Blake is determined to find out who Terry is and where Dale is.
Missing is a good book based in Australia. With so many twists and turns, you are never sure where you are headed next. This book keeps you on the edge of your seat and wondering what is going to happen next. There are a few parts of the book that get confusing at times and I had to read over these a couple of times. There are a lot of components to keep track of which adds to the confusion. Overall, though, this is a book that is a good read.
**I was given this book by the author in exchange for my honest review.**
Missing is a good book based in Australia. With so many twists and turns, you are never sure where you are headed next. This book keeps you on the edge of your seat and wondering what is going to happen next. There are a few parts of the book that get confusing at times and I had to read over these a couple of times. There are a lot of components to keep track of which adds to the confusion. Overall, though, this is a book that is a good read.
**I was given this book by the author in exchange for my honest review.**