Search
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Grotto Under the Tree in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
To be honest, I really didn't know what to make of this book when I first received the tour invite in my inbox. It sounded interesting, so I thought I'd take a chance on it. Luckily, the book turned out to be likable.
Sara and Sebastian are both in 5th grade and are best friends. While in school, the learn the legend of the big, old oak tree that sits outside their classroom window. During a storm, the oak is damaged. When Sara and Sebastian are walking by the now damaged oak tree, the notice a hole that leads them into a grotto filled with beautiful and magical beings. However, there are also dangerous beings in this grotto. Little do Sara and Sebastian know that they've just got themselves into a dangerous war between these creatures underground. Will Sara and Sebastian make it back home in one piece?
I think the cover is absolutely gorgeous! I love the magical feel of this picture! The grotto under the tree on the cover is breathtaking! The cover definitely suits the book.
The title is very straight forward. The whole setting is the grotto under the tree, so I think this is a fantastic title for this book.
I thought the world building, for a middle grade novel, was done fantastically! It's so easy to get lost in this magical world thanks to the author's great descriptions! In fact, I wanted to visit this grotto under the oak tree!
The pacing was a bit slow to begin with, and I was thinking that I had made a mistake in agreeing to review this book. Luckily, without even realizing it, the pacing picked up, and I was enthralled with this story.
The book definitely has an interesting plot. I love, love, love the idea of a grotto under a tree. There's not many subplots, but I think this is because it's a middle grade novel. I was quite happy there wasn't many subplots though. The use of mystical creatures as well as a traditional figure was interesting. I even like the way the author made up his own type of mythical creatures. The best thing about the plot was the life lessons found throughout the novel.
I liked the characters. I thought they sounded like they were really sweet. I would've liked to know more about them such as what they were like when they were in their normal existence. I did like the way they looked out for each other no matter what happened. It was touching to see how they were willing to sacrifice their own life for the other's many times. It was obvious how close these two were.
The dialogue was mostly written well for a middle grade novel. However, there were some words in there that I think tweens and younger teens might struggle with. Also, there were times when the children spoke that made them seem more like high school kids rather than elementary kids. Oh, and I found it annoying how the book had to mention every time they held hands or rested their head on each other. It got a bit repetitive. Other than that, the dialogue flows really well and suits a middle grade novel! There's no swearing although there is mild violence.
Overall, The Grotto Under the Tree is a very amusing read which will transport you into a magical realm. With only a few minor issues, this is a novel that children will thoroughly enjoy.
I'd recommend this to children aged 10 - 13 who would love to be transported into a magical and mystical universe!
(I received a free ebook of this title from the tour host in exchange for a fair and honest review).
To be honest, I really didn't know what to make of this book when I first received the tour invite in my inbox. It sounded interesting, so I thought I'd take a chance on it. Luckily, the book turned out to be likable.
Sara and Sebastian are both in 5th grade and are best friends. While in school, the learn the legend of the big, old oak tree that sits outside their classroom window. During a storm, the oak is damaged. When Sara and Sebastian are walking by the now damaged oak tree, the notice a hole that leads them into a grotto filled with beautiful and magical beings. However, there are also dangerous beings in this grotto. Little do Sara and Sebastian know that they've just got themselves into a dangerous war between these creatures underground. Will Sara and Sebastian make it back home in one piece?
I think the cover is absolutely gorgeous! I love the magical feel of this picture! The grotto under the tree on the cover is breathtaking! The cover definitely suits the book.
The title is very straight forward. The whole setting is the grotto under the tree, so I think this is a fantastic title for this book.
I thought the world building, for a middle grade novel, was done fantastically! It's so easy to get lost in this magical world thanks to the author's great descriptions! In fact, I wanted to visit this grotto under the oak tree!
The pacing was a bit slow to begin with, and I was thinking that I had made a mistake in agreeing to review this book. Luckily, without even realizing it, the pacing picked up, and I was enthralled with this story.
The book definitely has an interesting plot. I love, love, love the idea of a grotto under a tree. There's not many subplots, but I think this is because it's a middle grade novel. I was quite happy there wasn't many subplots though. The use of mystical creatures as well as a traditional figure was interesting. I even like the way the author made up his own type of mythical creatures. The best thing about the plot was the life lessons found throughout the novel.
I liked the characters. I thought they sounded like they were really sweet. I would've liked to know more about them such as what they were like when they were in their normal existence. I did like the way they looked out for each other no matter what happened. It was touching to see how they were willing to sacrifice their own life for the other's many times. It was obvious how close these two were.
The dialogue was mostly written well for a middle grade novel. However, there were some words in there that I think tweens and younger teens might struggle with. Also, there were times when the children spoke that made them seem more like high school kids rather than elementary kids. Oh, and I found it annoying how the book had to mention every time they held hands or rested their head on each other. It got a bit repetitive. Other than that, the dialogue flows really well and suits a middle grade novel! There's no swearing although there is mild violence.
Overall, The Grotto Under the Tree is a very amusing read which will transport you into a magical realm. With only a few minor issues, this is a novel that children will thoroughly enjoy.
I'd recommend this to children aged 10 - 13 who would love to be transported into a magical and mystical universe!
(I received a free ebook of this title from the tour host in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb in Books
Apr 13, 2019
"The crime itself was indefensible. The brilliant, spoiled and bored sons of two of Chicago's wealthiest families planned to commit the perfect crime both for the thrill of and to prove their perverse misunderstanding of Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy of the 'superman,' who was above all law so long as he made no mistake. Their plan, worked out over several months, was to kidnap and immediately kill one of their younger neighbors and hide his body. They would then demand and collect a ransom. The body would never be discovered, the crime would never be solved and only they would know that they had prevailed over ordinary human beings and their simple-minded legal system. But far from being the 'perfect crime,' the murder of 14-year-old Bobby Franks turned out to be amateurishly botched. Before any ransom could be paid, the boy's body was discovered in a culvert near where Nathan Leopold often went bird-watching. A pair of telltale glasses were found adjacent to the body. They were easily traced to Leopold who first came up with a paper-thin alibi and soon thereafter confessed to the crime. His fellow murderer likewise confessed. Each of the 'superboys' placed blame for the actual killing on the other." - Alan M. Dershowitz
If you mentioned the names Leopold and Loeb today, many people wouldn't know who you were talking about, but if you had mentioned them just thirty years ago, many people would recall the 'murder of the century.'
If you are a fan of the True Crime genre, you'll come across the case of two wealthy Chicago boys who thought they could get away with murder. (The trial is probably the most talked about trial to-date because this is the first time that psychology was brought before a court room.)
For a good part of the late 1920's, Leopold and Loeb were household names for good reason: they came from millionaire families, they were college graduates before they were 18-years-old, and their trial was the first time in history that the world saw psychology put in front of a judge. The trial was even more unforgettable due to a closing speech given by famous defense attorney, Clarence Darrow, which is reprinted in its entirety,spanning a hefty 93 pages.
Nathan Leopold, Jr. and Richard Loeb were two people who should have never met, according to the courtroom. The two met at about the age of fifteen, soon after they began to embark on criminal acts together, ranging from theft to arson. It's stated in 'the Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb' that Loeb had created a fantasy world where he was a crime ringleader that was too smart for the police to catch. Readers get to judge for themselves whether or not they believe Loeb was the cause of their crimes, or if Leopold was the one really in charge.
After robbing Loeb's fraternity house together, Leopold and Loeb came up with a plan to kidnap a wealthy child that they could then ransom. "They began to devise elaborate plans for this kidnapping, and soon the planning became the all-important thing. They gave up the idea of kidnapping this particular person [a young man named William], and settled on the idea of kidnapping anyone who would fit in their kidnapping plans." Throughout the book, we find out that the boys were pretty desperate for a kidnapping victim, that they even thought about kidnapping one of their close friends:
"The plan of kidnaping Dick Rubel was given up because Dick Rubel's father was so tight we might not get any money from him."
Leopold and Loeb discussed everything from how they would receive the ransom, what weapons they would use, how they would get the victim inside a rented vehicle, and what they would do with the body afterwards. "In March, 1924, the patient [Loeb] conceived the idea of securing the money by having it thrown off a moving train. This idea was discussed in great detail, and gradually developed into a carefully systematized plan. As time wore on the plan became greatly modified from the original one. They discussed at considerable length the choice of a suitable subject for kidnapping. The patient's companion [Leopold] suggested that they kidnap a young girl instead of a boy, but the patient [Loeb] objected to this. His companion [Leopold] also suggested that they kidnap the patient's [Loeb] younger brother, but the patient apparently did not seriously consider doing this. They then considered half a dozen boys, any one of whom would do, for the following reasons: that they were physically small enough to be easily handled and their parents were extremely wealthy and would have no difficulty or disinclination to pay ransom money."
During the trial, Leopold and Loeb's psychological evaluations became the forefront of their guilty plea, stating that they were not responsible for their actions due to their upbringing and environment. "I submit the facts do not rest on the evidence of these boys alone. It is proven by the writings; it is proven by every act. It is proven by their companions, and there can by no question about it." Clarence Darrow explains in his famous closing statement. "We brought into this courtroom a number of their boy friends, whom they had known day by day, who had associated with them in the club house, were their constant companions, and they tell the same stories. They tell the story that neither of these two boys was responsible for his conduct."
'The Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb' contains the portions of the psychiatric evaluations that were submitted in court,but the testimony of character witnesses is omitted. For a factual telling of a real life trial, this book is okay. If the reader pays attention, they may notice that some of the book contradicts itself, such as one page states that the car robe used to wrap up Franks' body was found buried near Lake Michigan,but then pages later, the book states it had been burned at Loeb's home.
The psychiatric reports are very repetitive,just using different words to describe the same things. Yet, these reports are the backbone of the trial and well worth a read. The evaluations and Darrow's extensive speech were what saved Leopold and Loeb from a death sentence.
There are very few books written about the 'murder of the century,' and even less about the 'lawyer of the century.' Leopold and Loeb, as well as Darrow, have faded into the obscurity of the True Crime genre, but because the boys' mental state was brought into question, we now accept forensic science/psychology in the court room today. I feel that only people who are truly interested in True Crime, or even have a fascination for the court room are the only ones who will enjoy 'The Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb.'
If you mentioned the names Leopold and Loeb today, many people wouldn't know who you were talking about, but if you had mentioned them just thirty years ago, many people would recall the 'murder of the century.'
If you are a fan of the True Crime genre, you'll come across the case of two wealthy Chicago boys who thought they could get away with murder. (The trial is probably the most talked about trial to-date because this is the first time that psychology was brought before a court room.)
For a good part of the late 1920's, Leopold and Loeb were household names for good reason: they came from millionaire families, they were college graduates before they were 18-years-old, and their trial was the first time in history that the world saw psychology put in front of a judge. The trial was even more unforgettable due to a closing speech given by famous defense attorney, Clarence Darrow, which is reprinted in its entirety,spanning a hefty 93 pages.
Nathan Leopold, Jr. and Richard Loeb were two people who should have never met, according to the courtroom. The two met at about the age of fifteen, soon after they began to embark on criminal acts together, ranging from theft to arson. It's stated in 'the Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb' that Loeb had created a fantasy world where he was a crime ringleader that was too smart for the police to catch. Readers get to judge for themselves whether or not they believe Loeb was the cause of their crimes, or if Leopold was the one really in charge.
After robbing Loeb's fraternity house together, Leopold and Loeb came up with a plan to kidnap a wealthy child that they could then ransom. "They began to devise elaborate plans for this kidnapping, and soon the planning became the all-important thing. They gave up the idea of kidnapping this particular person [a young man named William], and settled on the idea of kidnapping anyone who would fit in their kidnapping plans." Throughout the book, we find out that the boys were pretty desperate for a kidnapping victim, that they even thought about kidnapping one of their close friends:
"The plan of kidnaping Dick Rubel was given up because Dick Rubel's father was so tight we might not get any money from him."
Leopold and Loeb discussed everything from how they would receive the ransom, what weapons they would use, how they would get the victim inside a rented vehicle, and what they would do with the body afterwards. "In March, 1924, the patient [Loeb] conceived the idea of securing the money by having it thrown off a moving train. This idea was discussed in great detail, and gradually developed into a carefully systematized plan. As time wore on the plan became greatly modified from the original one. They discussed at considerable length the choice of a suitable subject for kidnapping. The patient's companion [Leopold] suggested that they kidnap a young girl instead of a boy, but the patient [Loeb] objected to this. His companion [Leopold] also suggested that they kidnap the patient's [Loeb] younger brother, but the patient apparently did not seriously consider doing this. They then considered half a dozen boys, any one of whom would do, for the following reasons: that they were physically small enough to be easily handled and their parents were extremely wealthy and would have no difficulty or disinclination to pay ransom money."
During the trial, Leopold and Loeb's psychological evaluations became the forefront of their guilty plea, stating that they were not responsible for their actions due to their upbringing and environment. "I submit the facts do not rest on the evidence of these boys alone. It is proven by the writings; it is proven by every act. It is proven by their companions, and there can by no question about it." Clarence Darrow explains in his famous closing statement. "We brought into this courtroom a number of their boy friends, whom they had known day by day, who had associated with them in the club house, were their constant companions, and they tell the same stories. They tell the story that neither of these two boys was responsible for his conduct."
'The Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb' contains the portions of the psychiatric evaluations that were submitted in court,but the testimony of character witnesses is omitted. For a factual telling of a real life trial, this book is okay. If the reader pays attention, they may notice that some of the book contradicts itself, such as one page states that the car robe used to wrap up Franks' body was found buried near Lake Michigan,but then pages later, the book states it had been burned at Loeb's home.
The psychiatric reports are very repetitive,just using different words to describe the same things. Yet, these reports are the backbone of the trial and well worth a read. The evaluations and Darrow's extensive speech were what saved Leopold and Loeb from a death sentence.
There are very few books written about the 'murder of the century,' and even less about the 'lawyer of the century.' Leopold and Loeb, as well as Darrow, have faded into the obscurity of the True Crime genre, but because the boys' mental state was brought into question, we now accept forensic science/psychology in the court room today. I feel that only people who are truly interested in True Crime, or even have a fascination for the court room are the only ones who will enjoy 'The Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb.'
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated The Collector (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Arkin wants to smooth over the rough patch his family is currently going through. He seems like a hard working man that's trying to make a living by doing some housework for a family who lives out in the country. It turns out that Arkin has more problems than he lets on though. His wife, Lisa, has quite a pile of debt resting on her shoulders and the loan sharks want their share that very night. Knowing his paycheck isn't enough to pay for their debt, Arkin assures Lisa that he'll have the money by midnight. Arkin is actually a thief who has been scoping out his employer's property the entire time he's been working for him. With the family away on vacation, the safe behind the mirror in the couple's bedroom is ripe for the taking. Unbeknownst to Arkin, however, is that the family never left and somebody else beat him to the punch. A man who's known as The Collector has already broken into the house Arkin had his eye on. After a quick investigation, Arkin notices the traps The Collector has set up in nearly every room and by every exit. As Arkin weighs his options, he realizes he must try to help the family he originally intended to steal from in a race against time.
The Collector is a film that is somewhat hurt by its own hype. It's written by Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan (who also directs), the writing team who penned the last three Saw films (including part VI). News broke right before its release that the film was almost a prequel to Saw. In the horror community, being a part of the Saw franchise is a rather large achievement. Even if you're not a fan of the franchise, it's hard to deny how well the Saw films do at the box office as their gross revenue is sometimes up to ten times what the film's budget was. The down side is that The Collector seems to make this point blatantly obvious. The film gives off a sense of deja vu throughout its entire duration. The Collector's traps are very reminiscent of Jigsaw's traps, at least in the way they're set up (reverse bear trap in Saw compared to the bear trap scene in The Collector). The Collector also looks and feels like a Saw film. The quick edits that a lot of people expressed their dislike for in Saw are used more often than not in The Collector. Grainy and high contrast filters along with those quick edits make it a bit hard to distinguish what events are actually occurring on screen at times. The first ten minutes or so of the film feel like an extended music video. These qualities don't necessarily make the film bad, but a film that's advertised as being original shouldn't have so much in common with a well distinguished franchise in the same genre; let alone when some of the same people are involved. Something that may have been easily averted if the marketing campaign didn't throw that fact in the public's face.
With all that being said, the film still has enough originality going for it to bring in horror fans. While the film does have its flaws (the main one being, how'd The Collector have time to set up all these traps?), they actually don't take away from the overall enjoyment for the film. What The Collector collects is rather interesting and even with its similarities to Saw, it's an original horror film that isn't a remake. Something we don't see a lot of anymore. What also might make or break the deal for horror fans seeing this film is that it doesn't shy away from blood and guts. The bear trap sequence alone is rather gruesome, but you do get to see some intestines make a cameo. So this definitely isn't for the squeamish. The film did leave a few open-ended questions, but they don't seem to be negative. The most memorable one is more of a sense of wondering why a certain character did a certain act rather than it being a glaring mistake. If this gets turned into a franchise (which depending on its reception, it just might), we'll probably get answers in the sequel(s). The Collector also seemed to establish a bit of tension at times, while the closing moments of the film were similar to a seesaw. The events that unfold seem to be going in one direction, but then quickly shift and go in another direction.
TV spots are saying things like, "Horror has a new icon," and that The Collector is the best horror film to come out in years. While the latter could be debated, the first part of that statement could very well be true. I, personally, wouldn't mind seeing more of The Collector as I like the idea and the character. The film as a whole, however, may have let its influences shine brighter than its original aspects. In retrospect, The Collector is an entertaining horror film composed of a decent antagonist, standard acting, an original storyline, and a few buckets of gore.
The Collector is a film that is somewhat hurt by its own hype. It's written by Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan (who also directs), the writing team who penned the last three Saw films (including part VI). News broke right before its release that the film was almost a prequel to Saw. In the horror community, being a part of the Saw franchise is a rather large achievement. Even if you're not a fan of the franchise, it's hard to deny how well the Saw films do at the box office as their gross revenue is sometimes up to ten times what the film's budget was. The down side is that The Collector seems to make this point blatantly obvious. The film gives off a sense of deja vu throughout its entire duration. The Collector's traps are very reminiscent of Jigsaw's traps, at least in the way they're set up (reverse bear trap in Saw compared to the bear trap scene in The Collector). The Collector also looks and feels like a Saw film. The quick edits that a lot of people expressed their dislike for in Saw are used more often than not in The Collector. Grainy and high contrast filters along with those quick edits make it a bit hard to distinguish what events are actually occurring on screen at times. The first ten minutes or so of the film feel like an extended music video. These qualities don't necessarily make the film bad, but a film that's advertised as being original shouldn't have so much in common with a well distinguished franchise in the same genre; let alone when some of the same people are involved. Something that may have been easily averted if the marketing campaign didn't throw that fact in the public's face.
With all that being said, the film still has enough originality going for it to bring in horror fans. While the film does have its flaws (the main one being, how'd The Collector have time to set up all these traps?), they actually don't take away from the overall enjoyment for the film. What The Collector collects is rather interesting and even with its similarities to Saw, it's an original horror film that isn't a remake. Something we don't see a lot of anymore. What also might make or break the deal for horror fans seeing this film is that it doesn't shy away from blood and guts. The bear trap sequence alone is rather gruesome, but you do get to see some intestines make a cameo. So this definitely isn't for the squeamish. The film did leave a few open-ended questions, but they don't seem to be negative. The most memorable one is more of a sense of wondering why a certain character did a certain act rather than it being a glaring mistake. If this gets turned into a franchise (which depending on its reception, it just might), we'll probably get answers in the sequel(s). The Collector also seemed to establish a bit of tension at times, while the closing moments of the film were similar to a seesaw. The events that unfold seem to be going in one direction, but then quickly shift and go in another direction.
TV spots are saying things like, "Horror has a new icon," and that The Collector is the best horror film to come out in years. While the latter could be debated, the first part of that statement could very well be true. I, personally, wouldn't mind seeing more of The Collector as I like the idea and the character. The film as a whole, however, may have let its influences shine brighter than its original aspects. In retrospect, The Collector is an entertaining horror film composed of a decent antagonist, standard acting, an original storyline, and a few buckets of gore.
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Eleanor & Park in Books
Jun 11, 2019
Eleanor and Park: First Love At Its Finest
Contains spoilers, click to show
I did this book for a reading vlog without knowing anything about it and that turned out to be a mistake. This book was a lot heavier than I anticipated. Trigger warnings for domestic violence and child abuse for those who want to read it.
Together, Eleanor and Park are excellent. They have witty dialogue full of 80’s references and general high school silliness. The two of them together made me nostalgic for high school with their cuteness.
That was definitely needed because the rest of the book was really dark.
From the start, Eleanor isn’t doing well. As the new kid in school, she is an easy target for bullies and has no friends to turn to (at least until Park). But her home life is even worse. After living off a neighbor’s couch for a year, Eleanor was finally allowed to move back into her mom’s house, where her mom and siblings live under the tyrannical rule of Ritchie, a violent and abusive alcoholic.
In Eleanor’s house, the feeling of danger and unease is always there, heightened by nightly fights between Ritchie and the mother and having no bathroom door. Eleanor only really feels safe in the house when Ritchie isn’t there.
Her escape becomes Park, the quiet boy on the bus who let her sit next to him and lets her read comic books over his shoulder. Slowly they develop a reluctant friendship which turns into love.
I really like Eleanor. I think she’s really smart and witty and very relatable. She’s insecure about her body and the abuse definitely took a toll on her emotional state. But in general, she’s just a normal teenager.
Park is a typical teenager as well. He’s frustratingly insecure and angsty, which makes him act like a jerk to Eleanor sometimes, especially in the beginning. But despite that, he’s usually a really nice guy who cares deeply for Eleanor. He’s pretty understanding about her home life and is patient with her, which I really like. He does a lot of things that he thinks are small, like lending Eleanor comics and making her mixtapes, but they mean the world to Eleanor, and it’s really sweet.
The only time I didn’t like him was when he found out someone was writing dirty messages on Eleanor’s textbook and he accused her of writing the messages herself. That was really out-of-character for him and was pretty horrible. Aside from that, though, he was nice. He was, in general, a normal, realistic teenage boy.
My biggest problem with the book was the ending. It wasn’t satisfying for me because it ends abruptly and I didn’t get enough closure about Eleanor’s family. It’s hinted at that they move out of the toxic house but it’s never confirmed. So because of that, it’s only 4 out of 5 stars, but still definitely worth reading.
Together, Eleanor and Park are excellent. They have witty dialogue full of 80’s references and general high school silliness. The two of them together made me nostalgic for high school with their cuteness.
That was definitely needed because the rest of the book was really dark.
From the start, Eleanor isn’t doing well. As the new kid in school, she is an easy target for bullies and has no friends to turn to (at least until Park). But her home life is even worse. After living off a neighbor’s couch for a year, Eleanor was finally allowed to move back into her mom’s house, where her mom and siblings live under the tyrannical rule of Ritchie, a violent and abusive alcoholic.
In Eleanor’s house, the feeling of danger and unease is always there, heightened by nightly fights between Ritchie and the mother and having no bathroom door. Eleanor only really feels safe in the house when Ritchie isn’t there.
Her escape becomes Park, the quiet boy on the bus who let her sit next to him and lets her read comic books over his shoulder. Slowly they develop a reluctant friendship which turns into love.
I really like Eleanor. I think she’s really smart and witty and very relatable. She’s insecure about her body and the abuse definitely took a toll on her emotional state. But in general, she’s just a normal teenager.
Park is a typical teenager as well. He’s frustratingly insecure and angsty, which makes him act like a jerk to Eleanor sometimes, especially in the beginning. But despite that, he’s usually a really nice guy who cares deeply for Eleanor. He’s pretty understanding about her home life and is patient with her, which I really like. He does a lot of things that he thinks are small, like lending Eleanor comics and making her mixtapes, but they mean the world to Eleanor, and it’s really sweet.
The only time I didn’t like him was when he found out someone was writing dirty messages on Eleanor’s textbook and he accused her of writing the messages herself. That was really out-of-character for him and was pretty horrible. Aside from that, though, he was nice. He was, in general, a normal, realistic teenage boy.
My biggest problem with the book was the ending. It wasn’t satisfying for me because it ends abruptly and I didn’t get enough closure about Eleanor’s family. It’s hinted at that they move out of the toxic house but it’s never confirmed. So because of that, it’s only 4 out of 5 stars, but still definitely worth reading.
Debbiereadsbook (1727 KP) rated Honey From the Lion (Love Across Time #2) in Books
May 7, 2019
beautifully written love story
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is the second book in the Love Across Time series, but you don't need to have read book one, Heroes For Ghosts, for this one to make sense. They are only related in that they both are time travel stories.
Laurie books himself a week on a dude ranch and on the first night there is caught in a snow storm along with a meteor shower. Waking up freezing, he manages to find himself in John's cabin, in 1891. John just wants to be left alone, to get on with his solitary life after the horrors of the war. Finding a freezing young man on his doorstep kind of throws him for a loop but the pair grow close. When Laurie gets caught in a storm again, and comes back to his time, he knows where he wants to be: with John. But how to get there?
I liked this, I liked this A LOT. Just one teeny weeny thing stopped it getting 5 stars, but I will come back to that.
Laurie is burnt out from work, and decides a dude ranch week is just the thing. First night there, he hears the legend of Old Joe and his little fox he found. Waking up in 1891, finding John and subsequently meeting the people in this legend, don't bother Laurie so much, as when he returns to his time. He KNOWS he needs to be with John, and when the lady on the ranch explains the legend PROPERLY, and what The Iron Mountain, the snow storms AND the meteor showers are said to do, Laurie knows, he KNOWS where he needs to be, and how to get there.
I loved that Laurie was almost totally UNphased by everything! He's like: Okay then! I went to sleep in 2018 and I woke up in 1891! Let's get on and live here! There wasn't really any panicking on his part, except when they went to town and Laurie was attacked, and I liked that he was all calm about everything.
I must admit, I thought he might have put the clues together about the legend before he did, but Laurie was enjoying his time with John. Teaching John all the pleasures he has missed up to now, even if it might get them killed. Coming back to his time, though, he sees it then.
It's not overly explicit, but it carries passion and love a plenty. Full of words and phrases of the time though. It takes time for Laurie and John to properly come together, and I liked being made to wait for it. It isn't a quick thing, them falling in love, it creeps up on them both and I loved that it did.
The only niggle I have is this: only Laurie has a say. I desperately wanted to hear from John, I really did. There were some important points that I needed to hear what he was thinking about, feeling, experiencing with Laurie, and he doesn't tell me. And if John had had a say, this would have been a 5 star read, I'm sure.
It's a beautifully written love story, this, don't mistake what I'm saying! It's just, I needed John, and I don't get him.
But even though only Laurie has a say, his voice is strong and clear and he grabbed me and did not let go. One sitting, 300 pages, two and a half hours, not a muscle moved off the sofa! Job done.
4 meteor stars, shooting across the sky.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is the second book in the Love Across Time series, but you don't need to have read book one, Heroes For Ghosts, for this one to make sense. They are only related in that they both are time travel stories.
Laurie books himself a week on a dude ranch and on the first night there is caught in a snow storm along with a meteor shower. Waking up freezing, he manages to find himself in John's cabin, in 1891. John just wants to be left alone, to get on with his solitary life after the horrors of the war. Finding a freezing young man on his doorstep kind of throws him for a loop but the pair grow close. When Laurie gets caught in a storm again, and comes back to his time, he knows where he wants to be: with John. But how to get there?
I liked this, I liked this A LOT. Just one teeny weeny thing stopped it getting 5 stars, but I will come back to that.
Laurie is burnt out from work, and decides a dude ranch week is just the thing. First night there, he hears the legend of Old Joe and his little fox he found. Waking up in 1891, finding John and subsequently meeting the people in this legend, don't bother Laurie so much, as when he returns to his time. He KNOWS he needs to be with John, and when the lady on the ranch explains the legend PROPERLY, and what The Iron Mountain, the snow storms AND the meteor showers are said to do, Laurie knows, he KNOWS where he needs to be, and how to get there.
I loved that Laurie was almost totally UNphased by everything! He's like: Okay then! I went to sleep in 2018 and I woke up in 1891! Let's get on and live here! There wasn't really any panicking on his part, except when they went to town and Laurie was attacked, and I liked that he was all calm about everything.
I must admit, I thought he might have put the clues together about the legend before he did, but Laurie was enjoying his time with John. Teaching John all the pleasures he has missed up to now, even if it might get them killed. Coming back to his time, though, he sees it then.
It's not overly explicit, but it carries passion and love a plenty. Full of words and phrases of the time though. It takes time for Laurie and John to properly come together, and I liked being made to wait for it. It isn't a quick thing, them falling in love, it creeps up on them both and I loved that it did.
The only niggle I have is this: only Laurie has a say. I desperately wanted to hear from John, I really did. There were some important points that I needed to hear what he was thinking about, feeling, experiencing with Laurie, and he doesn't tell me. And if John had had a say, this would have been a 5 star read, I'm sure.
It's a beautifully written love story, this, don't mistake what I'm saying! It's just, I needed John, and I don't get him.
But even though only Laurie has a say, his voice is strong and clear and he grabbed me and did not let go. One sitting, 300 pages, two and a half hours, not a muscle moved off the sofa! Job done.
4 meteor stars, shooting across the sky.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Quran Memorization Program: Learning, Memorizing and Mastering the Holy Qura'an in arabic handwritten script
Education
App
برنامج حفظ القرآن الكريم Quran Memorization Program (QMP) بين يديكم...
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Halloween (2007) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019 (Updated Jun 21, 2019)
You probably already know the story of Michael Myers and the horror that took place in Haddonfield, Illinois on Halloween night. How Michael Myers became one of the biggest slasher icons in horror movie history. Now we get to hear the story told by Rob Zombie, the man who brought us House of 1,000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects. He gives us some insight as to why Michael Myers is the way he is by showing us some of his childhood, the environment he grew up in, and how his family was. After he's institutionalized, we see how his progress continues to deteriorate as Dr. Samuel Loomis tries to do everything he can to save this young boy. Fifteen years go by when Loomis finally throws in the towel and Myers escapes Smith's Grove. Now on his way back to Haddonfield, Myers seeks his sister, Laurie, to finish what he started almost two decades ago.
There seems to be a huge debate amongst horror fans about whether this film was good or not. The results seemed to be pretty one-sided in favor of the original horror film from 1978, but now it seems the remake has almost just as many fans. I wouldn't say it was a 50/50 ratio, but 60/40 (60% of horror fans either hate the remake or prefer the original, 40% like the remake or prefer it over the original) seems about right these days. I managed to see the work print a few years ago and I wasn't impressed. With the release of Halloween 2 at the end of this month though, I promised myself I would give this film another shot. So that time has finally come and I can honestly say that the film isn't as bad as I remembered.
A few aspects of the film are actually quite good. Tyler Mane is a great Michael Myers. He's almost seven feet tall and is built like a giant. He's a total monster and the destruction and mayhem he causes is believable given his size. The adult version of Michael Myers is spot-on for a re-imagining of the film. Malcolm McDowell also does a good job as Dr. Loomis. He's no Donald Pleasance, but McDowell's take on the character isn't bad. Scout Taylor-Compton is also a worthy mention. She slips into the shoes of a modern day Laurie Strode rather flawlessly. Moving on from the acting though, the film is pretty solid from the time Michael gets his iconic mask through the finale. The way Michael made so many masks while he was in Smith's Grove was an interesting idea and the scene where you see his room fifteen years later with nothing but masks on every wall is one of the best in the film. The cinematography is also something that is often overlooked, which is a shame since it's actually pretty exceptional. It seemed to stand out most during the scenes where Michael was stalking Laurie, especially in the abandoned Myers house at the end. There's a scene right after Michael gets out of Smith's Grove where he goes to a truck stop and winds up getting the jumpsuit we're all familiar with. While there, he runs into Big Joe Grizzly in the bathroom stall and is banging Grizzly's hand, which is holding a knife, against the bathroom stall wall. As he's doing this though, the bathroom stall is just getting demolished but with every smashing blow, the camera violently shakes. The camera just always seemed to have a knack for giving a good perspective of what the character was going through, whether it was Michael or Laurie.
The disappointing part of this is pretty much everything leading up to Michael getting his mask back after his escape is pretty terrible. The dialogue, especially in the first ten to fifteen minutes of the film, is horrendous. Everything that's said between Deborah Myers and Ronnie White is just awful. The white trash upbringing just doesn't seem worthy for a horror icon like Michael Myers. It's just hard to believe that Michael Myers is the way he is because his mom was a stripper and his older sister was a whore. Logic seems to just be thrown by the way side as the film progresses. After Michael escapes from Smith's Grove, he returns to his old house where his mask and knife that he used to kill his family happen to just be lying under the floorboards. So did the police just pick up the bodies without searching the house or what? So he got his jumpsuit by stealing it from a guy taking a dump at a truck stop? Really? Hearing some of the original music return from John Carpenter's version of the film was a bit bittersweet. On one hand, it was great hearing it again. On the other, however, it just didn't seem to fit. Made me miss the original film more than anything. Giving Michael Myers a specific origin was probably Zombie's biggest mistake. The most terrifying thing about Michael Myers was that he was The Shape and had a bit of mystery to him. You knew he was going after Laurie, but other than that you had Loomis' word to fall back on. Michael was the human incarnation of pure evil. That's it. That's all you need. Humanizing the character and introducing us to his childhood only watered down the Michael Myers character.
There's a scene with Michael Myers and Dr. Loomis in Smith's Grove Sanitarium where Michael has made a mask that he's colored completely black. When Loomis asks him why it's black, Michael says that it's his favorite color. Loomis goes into an explanation about the color spectrum. Black is on one end and is the absence of color while white is at the opposite end and is every color. That's actually a great explanation of the differences between the original film and the remake. The original film would be the black segment of the spectrum. Carpenter's version leaves more to the viewer's imagination as the only explanation for Michael Myers is that he is "pure evil." While the remake would be the white segment of the spectrum as it goes into full detail why Michael Myers is the way he is and it shows every little violent and vulgar detail. Some people would say that having a little bit of mystery would be a good thing when it comes to a film like this while others like having everything laid out for them. It all depends on the viewer and which end of the spectrum they prefer. In my opinion though, that's the biggest mistake Rob Zombie made. There's no mystery left with the Michael Myers character. He's no longer The Shape, but is a psychopathic killer because he was raised by a white trash family, liked to torture animals, and whose sister didn't take him trick or treating.
The best thing Zombie can do is distance himself from the original film(s) as much as possible. To do something original with these characters. He looks like he'll do just that when Halloween 2 hits theaters on August 28th. One thing re-watching the remake accomplished was that it made me look forward to the sequel. The trailer looks really good (but to be fair, so did the trailer for the original film) and I was on the fence about it until I saw this again. The only problem I have is that Zombie seems to be telling the same story with the same initial cast with all of his films. House of 1,000 Corpses, The Devil's Rejects, and Halloween (first half of the film) are all way too similar. Zombie needs something new to add to his resume. Will Halloween 2 deliver that? Probably not, but a guy can hope.
There seems to be a huge debate amongst horror fans about whether this film was good or not. The results seemed to be pretty one-sided in favor of the original horror film from 1978, but now it seems the remake has almost just as many fans. I wouldn't say it was a 50/50 ratio, but 60/40 (60% of horror fans either hate the remake or prefer the original, 40% like the remake or prefer it over the original) seems about right these days. I managed to see the work print a few years ago and I wasn't impressed. With the release of Halloween 2 at the end of this month though, I promised myself I would give this film another shot. So that time has finally come and I can honestly say that the film isn't as bad as I remembered.
A few aspects of the film are actually quite good. Tyler Mane is a great Michael Myers. He's almost seven feet tall and is built like a giant. He's a total monster and the destruction and mayhem he causes is believable given his size. The adult version of Michael Myers is spot-on for a re-imagining of the film. Malcolm McDowell also does a good job as Dr. Loomis. He's no Donald Pleasance, but McDowell's take on the character isn't bad. Scout Taylor-Compton is also a worthy mention. She slips into the shoes of a modern day Laurie Strode rather flawlessly. Moving on from the acting though, the film is pretty solid from the time Michael gets his iconic mask through the finale. The way Michael made so many masks while he was in Smith's Grove was an interesting idea and the scene where you see his room fifteen years later with nothing but masks on every wall is one of the best in the film. The cinematography is also something that is often overlooked, which is a shame since it's actually pretty exceptional. It seemed to stand out most during the scenes where Michael was stalking Laurie, especially in the abandoned Myers house at the end. There's a scene right after Michael gets out of Smith's Grove where he goes to a truck stop and winds up getting the jumpsuit we're all familiar with. While there, he runs into Big Joe Grizzly in the bathroom stall and is banging Grizzly's hand, which is holding a knife, against the bathroom stall wall. As he's doing this though, the bathroom stall is just getting demolished but with every smashing blow, the camera violently shakes. The camera just always seemed to have a knack for giving a good perspective of what the character was going through, whether it was Michael or Laurie.
The disappointing part of this is pretty much everything leading up to Michael getting his mask back after his escape is pretty terrible. The dialogue, especially in the first ten to fifteen minutes of the film, is horrendous. Everything that's said between Deborah Myers and Ronnie White is just awful. The white trash upbringing just doesn't seem worthy for a horror icon like Michael Myers. It's just hard to believe that Michael Myers is the way he is because his mom was a stripper and his older sister was a whore. Logic seems to just be thrown by the way side as the film progresses. After Michael escapes from Smith's Grove, he returns to his old house where his mask and knife that he used to kill his family happen to just be lying under the floorboards. So did the police just pick up the bodies without searching the house or what? So he got his jumpsuit by stealing it from a guy taking a dump at a truck stop? Really? Hearing some of the original music return from John Carpenter's version of the film was a bit bittersweet. On one hand, it was great hearing it again. On the other, however, it just didn't seem to fit. Made me miss the original film more than anything. Giving Michael Myers a specific origin was probably Zombie's biggest mistake. The most terrifying thing about Michael Myers was that he was The Shape and had a bit of mystery to him. You knew he was going after Laurie, but other than that you had Loomis' word to fall back on. Michael was the human incarnation of pure evil. That's it. That's all you need. Humanizing the character and introducing us to his childhood only watered down the Michael Myers character.
There's a scene with Michael Myers and Dr. Loomis in Smith's Grove Sanitarium where Michael has made a mask that he's colored completely black. When Loomis asks him why it's black, Michael says that it's his favorite color. Loomis goes into an explanation about the color spectrum. Black is on one end and is the absence of color while white is at the opposite end and is every color. That's actually a great explanation of the differences between the original film and the remake. The original film would be the black segment of the spectrum. Carpenter's version leaves more to the viewer's imagination as the only explanation for Michael Myers is that he is "pure evil." While the remake would be the white segment of the spectrum as it goes into full detail why Michael Myers is the way he is and it shows every little violent and vulgar detail. Some people would say that having a little bit of mystery would be a good thing when it comes to a film like this while others like having everything laid out for them. It all depends on the viewer and which end of the spectrum they prefer. In my opinion though, that's the biggest mistake Rob Zombie made. There's no mystery left with the Michael Myers character. He's no longer The Shape, but is a psychopathic killer because he was raised by a white trash family, liked to torture animals, and whose sister didn't take him trick or treating.
The best thing Zombie can do is distance himself from the original film(s) as much as possible. To do something original with these characters. He looks like he'll do just that when Halloween 2 hits theaters on August 28th. One thing re-watching the remake accomplished was that it made me look forward to the sequel. The trailer looks really good (but to be fair, so did the trailer for the original film) and I was on the fence about it until I saw this again. The only problem I have is that Zombie seems to be telling the same story with the same initial cast with all of his films. House of 1,000 Corpses, The Devil's Rejects, and Halloween (first half of the film) are all way too similar. Zombie needs something new to add to his resume. Will Halloween 2 deliver that? Probably not, but a guy can hope.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Nemesis in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<b>The Tom Wilde Series</b>
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2780335366">Corpus</a>; - Not Read Yet
#2 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2780335377">Nucleus</a>; - Not Read Yet
#3 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2664038091">Nemesis</a>; - ★★★★★
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/New-blog-banner-13.png"/>;
<b><i>Nemesis is the third book from the Tom Wilde series by Rory Clements. I haven't read the previous two books, and I also haven't read any books from Rory Clements before. I received this book through ReadersFirst, and I will be honest, I was quite reluctant to read it. You already know my opinion on reading sequels before reading the previous books - but I went in blind in this book.</i></b>
The blue cover is simply gorgeous and I knew it was a thriller and a mystery, so I decided this was enough to get me going. If this book review ever captures your attention, I advise you to also go in blind. I think going blind made me enjoy this book even more.The fact that this is a third book in a series doesn't mean anything. The only similarity with the other books is the main character. Almost the same basis as Dan Brown's series and his professor Robert Langdon. The books are entirely standalones.
It is very hard to reveal what the plot is about without spoiling the fun. Tom Wilde is a university professor and one of his very talented students, Marcus, has left to join the International Brigades in Spain. Now, two years after, he is in trouble, and Tom helps him come home.
Meanwhile, numerous things happen, involving World War 2 Politics and propaganda, and in these times, no one knows who to trust. And when Tom Wilde finds himself in great danger, who will help him? And who does he needs to be afraid from? Has maybe helping Marcus been his greatest mistake?
Nemesis is full of suspense from the very first chapter, and the thing I loved the most about it was that the chapters are quite short, and always leave you hanging, hungry to find out more. Every word that Rory Clements types had a meaning and a purpose in this book, and that was the bit I admired the most.
The time setting revolves around the Second World War - a subject I don't often read about. I can't judge about the historical fiction element. However I do know that while I am a person that doesn't enjoy war books, this one struck me in a nice way. The war setting was very well written, and you could even feel the atmosphere around it. The ending was pleasantly surprising and it involved a mystery I could simply not resist.
<b>I will definitely read more books by Rory Clements, as I really enjoy the writing. If you enjoy thrillers and if you are a fan of Dan Brown, you will probably enjoy Nemesis a lot!</b>
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<b>The Tom Wilde Series</b>
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2780335366">Corpus</a>; - Not Read Yet
#2 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2780335377">Nucleus</a>; - Not Read Yet
#3 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2664038091">Nemesis</a>; - ★★★★★
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/New-blog-banner-13.png"/>;
<b><i>Nemesis is the third book from the Tom Wilde series by Rory Clements. I haven't read the previous two books, and I also haven't read any books from Rory Clements before. I received this book through ReadersFirst, and I will be honest, I was quite reluctant to read it. You already know my opinion on reading sequels before reading the previous books - but I went in blind in this book.</i></b>
The blue cover is simply gorgeous and I knew it was a thriller and a mystery, so I decided this was enough to get me going. If this book review ever captures your attention, I advise you to also go in blind. I think going blind made me enjoy this book even more.The fact that this is a third book in a series doesn't mean anything. The only similarity with the other books is the main character. Almost the same basis as Dan Brown's series and his professor Robert Langdon. The books are entirely standalones.
It is very hard to reveal what the plot is about without spoiling the fun. Tom Wilde is a university professor and one of his very talented students, Marcus, has left to join the International Brigades in Spain. Now, two years after, he is in trouble, and Tom helps him come home.
Meanwhile, numerous things happen, involving World War 2 Politics and propaganda, and in these times, no one knows who to trust. And when Tom Wilde finds himself in great danger, who will help him? And who does he needs to be afraid from? Has maybe helping Marcus been his greatest mistake?
Nemesis is full of suspense from the very first chapter, and the thing I loved the most about it was that the chapters are quite short, and always leave you hanging, hungry to find out more. Every word that Rory Clements types had a meaning and a purpose in this book, and that was the bit I admired the most.
The time setting revolves around the Second World War - a subject I don't often read about. I can't judge about the historical fiction element. However I do know that while I am a person that doesn't enjoy war books, this one struck me in a nice way. The war setting was very well written, and you could even feel the atmosphere around it. The ending was pleasantly surprising and it involved a mystery I could simply not resist.
<b>I will definitely read more books by Rory Clements, as I really enjoy the writing. If you enjoy thrillers and if you are a fan of Dan Brown, you will probably enjoy Nemesis a lot!</b>
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated Unbreakable (The Legion, #1) in Books
Jan 23, 2020
Obviously choosing to dissect Kami Garcia's solo series as my next audiobook victim was a bad idea... a very bad idea...
Basically, I'm saying I give up on Kami Garcia. No offense, but after my horrid experience with the first couple of books of her <i>Beautiful Creatures</i> series she wrote with Margaret Stohl and then <i>Unbreakable</i>, I'm not sure I want to read another of her books (aside from maybe reading <i>Dangerous Creatures</i>).
<i>Unbreakable</i> sort of has a good idea – emphasis on sort of. Garcia's first debut solo novel follows Kennedy Waters, a girl who doesn't actually believe in ghosts until she finds her mother dead. Shortly after, a ghost makes an attempt to kill her as well, and is stopped by Lukas and Jared Lockhart, two brothers who are part of a centuries-old secret society made up of five members trying to stop a demon released by their ancestors hundreds of years ago. However, Kennedy isn't entirely too sure about whether or not she really belongs with this secret society called the Legion of the Black Dove.
For a person who doesn't watch <i>Supernatural</i> much, it's really weird when I get though, oh... 33 pages, that I realize a book is almost an exact carbon copy of the few episodes I watched.
For instance, there are two brothers in <i>Supernatural</i> and there are two brothers in <i>Unbreakable</i>. Are Sam and his brother identical? No.... not that I'm aware, which is only a small difference between the two books. Brother Pair 1 (<i>Supernatural</i>) and Brother Pair 2 (Unbreakable) apparently hunt demons for a living. At least, that's what I think Pair 1 did – correct me if I'm wrong, avid fans who are bound to be more accurate than me.
Oh, and there's a demon hunting around for a certain person... or a certain group of people. I'm pretty sure there was a demon hunting Brother Pair 1 for quite awhile in the episodes I actually watched (give me a break. I was bored. <i>Supernatural</i> just seemed interesting). Fun fact: possession involved in both TV show and book.
The mere fact that <i>Unbreakable</i> matched the few episodes (I believe they were reruns) I watched didn't bother me too much – it was a potential love triangle between Kennedy, Jared, and Lukas that eventually drove me up the wall. If Garcia isn't careful enough, the tension between Jared and Lukas could eventually set the book on fire – Lukas spends a good part of his time between fighting vengeful spirits and other things rubbing something that Jared did wrong in his face. It gets bad enough that both brothers reach the point of throttling each other's throats and Kennedy going between them and stopping them.
I felt like I was watching a scene from a <i>Twilight</i> (I'm starting to appreciate this series). <i>Lux</i> (because I totally snuck a few peeks in the third one), and pretty much any other book that has a love triangle in which 66% of them nearly start a brawl while the rest of the 33% pretty much yells, "STOP!"
By then, I was definitely not sticking around for five to go down to four just because of a mistake.
I did, however, like the world of Legion. It's certainly not a life I would want, but I definitely enjoyed the basic idea behind the series, Candice Accola's narration of <i>Unbreakable</i>, and the sound effects used in the audiobook.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-audiobook-review-unbreakable-by-kami-garcia/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
Basically, I'm saying I give up on Kami Garcia. No offense, but after my horrid experience with the first couple of books of her <i>Beautiful Creatures</i> series she wrote with Margaret Stohl and then <i>Unbreakable</i>, I'm not sure I want to read another of her books (aside from maybe reading <i>Dangerous Creatures</i>).
<i>Unbreakable</i> sort of has a good idea – emphasis on sort of. Garcia's first debut solo novel follows Kennedy Waters, a girl who doesn't actually believe in ghosts until she finds her mother dead. Shortly after, a ghost makes an attempt to kill her as well, and is stopped by Lukas and Jared Lockhart, two brothers who are part of a centuries-old secret society made up of five members trying to stop a demon released by their ancestors hundreds of years ago. However, Kennedy isn't entirely too sure about whether or not she really belongs with this secret society called the Legion of the Black Dove.
For a person who doesn't watch <i>Supernatural</i> much, it's really weird when I get though, oh... 33 pages, that I realize a book is almost an exact carbon copy of the few episodes I watched.
For instance, there are two brothers in <i>Supernatural</i> and there are two brothers in <i>Unbreakable</i>. Are Sam and his brother identical? No.... not that I'm aware, which is only a small difference between the two books. Brother Pair 1 (<i>Supernatural</i>) and Brother Pair 2 (Unbreakable) apparently hunt demons for a living. At least, that's what I think Pair 1 did – correct me if I'm wrong, avid fans who are bound to be more accurate than me.
Oh, and there's a demon hunting around for a certain person... or a certain group of people. I'm pretty sure there was a demon hunting Brother Pair 1 for quite awhile in the episodes I actually watched (give me a break. I was bored. <i>Supernatural</i> just seemed interesting). Fun fact: possession involved in both TV show and book.
The mere fact that <i>Unbreakable</i> matched the few episodes (I believe they were reruns) I watched didn't bother me too much – it was a potential love triangle between Kennedy, Jared, and Lukas that eventually drove me up the wall. If Garcia isn't careful enough, the tension between Jared and Lukas could eventually set the book on fire – Lukas spends a good part of his time between fighting vengeful spirits and other things rubbing something that Jared did wrong in his face. It gets bad enough that both brothers reach the point of throttling each other's throats and Kennedy going between them and stopping them.
I felt like I was watching a scene from a <i>Twilight</i> (I'm starting to appreciate this series). <i>Lux</i> (because I totally snuck a few peeks in the third one), and pretty much any other book that has a love triangle in which 66% of them nearly start a brawl while the rest of the 33% pretty much yells, "STOP!"
By then, I was definitely not sticking around for five to go down to four just because of a mistake.
I did, however, like the world of Legion. It's certainly not a life I would want, but I definitely enjoyed the basic idea behind the series, Candice Accola's narration of <i>Unbreakable</i>, and the sound effects used in the audiobook.
<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/dnf-audiobook-review-unbreakable-by-kami-garcia/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Tenet (2020) in Movies
Jan 2, 2021
Nolan's PhD Thesis on time
And…on the first day of 2021…the BankofMarquis viewed the best film of 2020.
Christopher Nolan’s TENET is dense, beautifully shot, confusing, wonderfully acted, well staged, mind bending…and brilliant.
Starring John David Washington (Denzel’s kid - more on him later), TENET is Christopher Nolan’s “Spy Movie”. Much like what he did with the Murder Mystery genre (MEMENTO), the Heist Genre (INCEPTION), the Sci-Fi flick (INTERSTELLAR) and the war picture (DUNKIRK), Nolan takes the Spy film and turns it upside by playing with the one thing we all take for granted - time.
While all of these previous films were Nolan’s “warm up” to this film, TENET is Nolan’s PhD Thesis on playing with time - and the audience’s expectations of how time works. Not only does Nolan play with moving people and action forward and backwards through time, he also plays scenes where you don’t realize that the two folks talking are actually speaking at 2 different places in time.
It is a mind-bender to be sure - and I cannot imagine what the filmmakers, stunt personnel and actors went through in making it - but there is one thing I can guarantee you - you will be confused for (at least) the first part of the film while you retrain your mind to forget all preconceived notions on how time works.
But, if you are able to get your mind around this, Director Nolan has crafted a strong, well-acted, beautiful, exciting and action packed film that, in the end, is very satisfying.
Let’s start with the acting - top to bottom the performances are stellar. John David Washington (BLACK KkKLANSMAN) is “The Protagonist” (that is how he is billed, we never learn his name) and he is a charming and charismatic screen presence to experience this film with. Washington is a former professional football player and he uses this physicality throughout the film. But he is not a “lumbering brute”. He is intelligent and thoughtful as he learns things and adapts his plans as the audience learns them and helps lead us through the often complex plot and concepts throughout.
Elizabeth Debicki builds on her strong work in 2019’s WIDOWS (if you haven’t seen this film, check it out). Her character is much, much more than a “Femme Fatale” and goes mano-a-mano with the men in this film and more than holds her own. Nolan favorite Michael Caine (ALFIE) shows up as does Himesh Patel (INCEPTION), Dimple Kapadia (a major Bollywood star) and Aaron Taylor-Johnson (KICKASS) - all 3 of them bring their “A” game to this film and supports the story very very well.
Kenneth Branagh (TV’s WALLANDER) shows that he still has his fastball - when he is interested - as the film’s main villain. He has some very intense scenes where he just acts the pants off the others in the room (this is a compliment). Sir Kenneth has had a long, storied career (including many, many Shakespearean roles) and he plays the villain as a Shakespeare villain - and is very successful doing so. I’m glad he didn’t waste his “villain turn” on a Marvel or James Bond flick - he saved it for the right film.
Special notice should be made to the work of Robert Pattinson (TWILIGHT) - he has spent his “post-Twilight” years reinventing himself as a performer, mostly working in small, actor-led independent films, and this performance bears the fruits of those efforts. He is charming and mysterious as The Protagonist’s partner and proves that he can, indeed, act.
Like most Nolan films, the Cinematography is mesmerizing and beautiful to behld. Hats off to frequent Nolan Cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema who was able to create a mood and feeling of evil riding just under the surface of beauty - as well as to be able to distinguish those that are going forward in time versus those that are going backwards all while framing shots that are pictures of artistic beauty.
Nolan did not work with frequent musical collaborator Hans Zimmer on this film. He stated he felt that this film needed a “new, more modern” sound and turned to Ludwig Goransson (the Disney+ series THE MANDALORIAN) and he was smart to do so. The music/sound of this film is another character and helps drive the story forward in so many ways.
But make no mistake about it, this film is Nolan’s baby - and it is very “Nolan-y”. The action scenes are smartly put together, the plot and concepts are strong - but very dense - and the performances are strong. All trademarks of my favorite Director working today.
This film is not for everyone. The complexities of the plot are going to be too much for some folks, but if you just “roll with the flow” when your mind can’t quite catch up to the concepts, you will be rewarded with a very rich - very original - film experience. One that, I am sure, will become deeper and richer on the many, many re watches this film deserves.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Christopher Nolan’s TENET is dense, beautifully shot, confusing, wonderfully acted, well staged, mind bending…and brilliant.
Starring John David Washington (Denzel’s kid - more on him later), TENET is Christopher Nolan’s “Spy Movie”. Much like what he did with the Murder Mystery genre (MEMENTO), the Heist Genre (INCEPTION), the Sci-Fi flick (INTERSTELLAR) and the war picture (DUNKIRK), Nolan takes the Spy film and turns it upside by playing with the one thing we all take for granted - time.
While all of these previous films were Nolan’s “warm up” to this film, TENET is Nolan’s PhD Thesis on playing with time - and the audience’s expectations of how time works. Not only does Nolan play with moving people and action forward and backwards through time, he also plays scenes where you don’t realize that the two folks talking are actually speaking at 2 different places in time.
It is a mind-bender to be sure - and I cannot imagine what the filmmakers, stunt personnel and actors went through in making it - but there is one thing I can guarantee you - you will be confused for (at least) the first part of the film while you retrain your mind to forget all preconceived notions on how time works.
But, if you are able to get your mind around this, Director Nolan has crafted a strong, well-acted, beautiful, exciting and action packed film that, in the end, is very satisfying.
Let’s start with the acting - top to bottom the performances are stellar. John David Washington (BLACK KkKLANSMAN) is “The Protagonist” (that is how he is billed, we never learn his name) and he is a charming and charismatic screen presence to experience this film with. Washington is a former professional football player and he uses this physicality throughout the film. But he is not a “lumbering brute”. He is intelligent and thoughtful as he learns things and adapts his plans as the audience learns them and helps lead us through the often complex plot and concepts throughout.
Elizabeth Debicki builds on her strong work in 2019’s WIDOWS (if you haven’t seen this film, check it out). Her character is much, much more than a “Femme Fatale” and goes mano-a-mano with the men in this film and more than holds her own. Nolan favorite Michael Caine (ALFIE) shows up as does Himesh Patel (INCEPTION), Dimple Kapadia (a major Bollywood star) and Aaron Taylor-Johnson (KICKASS) - all 3 of them bring their “A” game to this film and supports the story very very well.
Kenneth Branagh (TV’s WALLANDER) shows that he still has his fastball - when he is interested - as the film’s main villain. He has some very intense scenes where he just acts the pants off the others in the room (this is a compliment). Sir Kenneth has had a long, storied career (including many, many Shakespearean roles) and he plays the villain as a Shakespeare villain - and is very successful doing so. I’m glad he didn’t waste his “villain turn” on a Marvel or James Bond flick - he saved it for the right film.
Special notice should be made to the work of Robert Pattinson (TWILIGHT) - he has spent his “post-Twilight” years reinventing himself as a performer, mostly working in small, actor-led independent films, and this performance bears the fruits of those efforts. He is charming and mysterious as The Protagonist’s partner and proves that he can, indeed, act.
Like most Nolan films, the Cinematography is mesmerizing and beautiful to behld. Hats off to frequent Nolan Cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema who was able to create a mood and feeling of evil riding just under the surface of beauty - as well as to be able to distinguish those that are going forward in time versus those that are going backwards all while framing shots that are pictures of artistic beauty.
Nolan did not work with frequent musical collaborator Hans Zimmer on this film. He stated he felt that this film needed a “new, more modern” sound and turned to Ludwig Goransson (the Disney+ series THE MANDALORIAN) and he was smart to do so. The music/sound of this film is another character and helps drive the story forward in so many ways.
But make no mistake about it, this film is Nolan’s baby - and it is very “Nolan-y”. The action scenes are smartly put together, the plot and concepts are strong - but very dense - and the performances are strong. All trademarks of my favorite Director working today.
This film is not for everyone. The complexities of the plot are going to be too much for some folks, but if you just “roll with the flow” when your mind can’t quite catch up to the concepts, you will be rewarded with a very rich - very original - film experience. One that, I am sure, will become deeper and richer on the many, many re watches this film deserves.
Letter Grade: A
9 stars (out of 10) - and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)