Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Wolf (2019) in Movies
Sep 26, 2019
A lot of the acting in Wolf feels like it was from TV, and several of the parts wouldn't have been far off comedic roles in things made for network shows. The acting isn't the only thing that smacked of TV. The music is also not something you'd expect in this sort of thing, it would be much more suited to a crime drama. Occasionally I felt like it might have been perfect for this sort of historic piece but then it would quickly slip back to crime drama and I was almost completely distracted from the film.
As an idea it's an intriguing one. The outline of the story would make a good movie, it's simple and has lots of opportunities to be really effective on screen, unfortunately I don't think this delivered on that potential.
There's quite a spread of characters but some do get overlooked. Ima has a backstory that you can glean through context and Liviana has an implied story but both are only hinted at and nothing is used. Sometimes this is forgivable but with what happens with them both at the end of the film I think it's appalling that we don't get more from them.
This was yet another film that suffers from a black hole of time. There are a couple of points where they play fast and loose ad in one particular place it looks like they filmed at different times of day not accounting for the scenes timeline.
The location itself is stunning and you can see that repeatedly in the panning shots of forest... lots of forest, oh, and a mountain range. The first time it was nice, the second time it was a little cliche, and after that I started writing abuse in my notes.
The other thing that seems to be popular in Wolf is the blurry camera work. For the most part it looks intentional as it's part of the reveal but it's not isolated to that. Some of the fight scenes look like they might have been put together quite well but in one of the biggest of those you can't tell because the action is accompanied by camerawork that looks like it was done by someone hiccuping on a pogo stick.
My other major quibble is the ending. It seems very late in the game to be adding information to the story. There was even an opportunity to introduce the point earlier in the film but that was where we ignored Ima's backstory, looks like a lot of things could have been solved by changing that scene, it seems like a huge misstep.
It's not the worst film, but it's also not the best. There were some big opportunities for improvements but none of them were taken and ultimately this feels like a waste of a good story.
Check out my full review here: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/09/wolf-movie-review.html
As an idea it's an intriguing one. The outline of the story would make a good movie, it's simple and has lots of opportunities to be really effective on screen, unfortunately I don't think this delivered on that potential.
There's quite a spread of characters but some do get overlooked. Ima has a backstory that you can glean through context and Liviana has an implied story but both are only hinted at and nothing is used. Sometimes this is forgivable but with what happens with them both at the end of the film I think it's appalling that we don't get more from them.
This was yet another film that suffers from a black hole of time. There are a couple of points where they play fast and loose ad in one particular place it looks like they filmed at different times of day not accounting for the scenes timeline.
The location itself is stunning and you can see that repeatedly in the panning shots of forest... lots of forest, oh, and a mountain range. The first time it was nice, the second time it was a little cliche, and after that I started writing abuse in my notes.
The other thing that seems to be popular in Wolf is the blurry camera work. For the most part it looks intentional as it's part of the reveal but it's not isolated to that. Some of the fight scenes look like they might have been put together quite well but in one of the biggest of those you can't tell because the action is accompanied by camerawork that looks like it was done by someone hiccuping on a pogo stick.
My other major quibble is the ending. It seems very late in the game to be adding information to the story. There was even an opportunity to introduce the point earlier in the film but that was where we ignored Ima's backstory, looks like a lot of things could have been solved by changing that scene, it seems like a huge misstep.
It's not the worst film, but it's also not the best. There were some big opportunities for improvements but none of them were taken and ultimately this feels like a waste of a good story.
Check out my full review here: http://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2019/09/wolf-movie-review.html
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Hell or High Water (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“Sometimes a blind pig finds a truffle”.
One of the joys (and stresses) of the run up to the Oscar weekend is to try to catch all the major award films before the big event. As I bitched about in my BAFTA write-up, UK release dates do NOT make this an easy task, with some films like Paul Verhoeven’s “Elle”, featuring Best Actress nominee Isabelle Huppert, not released until mid March.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
This week I have had the chance to catch up on two of the films with award potential that I missed at the cinema, and this is the write up of the first of those: “Hell or High Water”, was first released in September 2016, and what an excellent film it is.
Bank robberies have been featured in many hundreds of films since the early days of cinema: The Great Train Robbery for example dates back to 1903! More recent heist classics such as “Oceans 11”, “Die Hard”, “Run Lola Run” and “The Dark Knight Rises” tend towards the stylised end of the act. Where this film delivers interest is in aligning the protagonists’ drivers with the banking and mortgage ‘crimes’ featured in last year’s “The Big Short”. Add in to the movie Nutribullet a soupçon of the West Texan setting from Arthur Penn’s 1967 “Bonnie and Clyde”, turn it on and you have “Hell or High Water”.
Chris Pine (“Star Trek”) and Ben Foster (“Inferno“, “The Program“) play brothers Toby and Tanner Howard trying to rescue their deceased mother’s ranch from being foreclosed on by Texas Midlands bank. Rather than taking one of the “get out of debt” offers advertised on billboards – cleverly and insistently introduced in long panning highway shots – the brothers have their own financial plan: a scheme that involves early morning raids of the cash drawers of small-town Texas Midlands branches. But the meticulous planning of Toby, as the calm and intelligent one, are constantly at risk of upset by the unpredictable and violent actions of the loose-cannon Tanner.
Since the amounts of cash stolen are in the thousands rather than the millions, the FBI aren’t interested and the case is handed instead by aged and grumpy Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”) and his partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham). The pair have a respectful relationship but one built around racial banter, with Hamilton constantly referring to Alberto’s Mexican/Comanche heritage. A cat and mouse game ensues with the lawmen staking out the most likely next hits. The sonorous cello strings of the soundtrack portend a dramatic finale, and we as viewers are not disappointed.
The performances of the main leads are all excellent, with Chris Pine given the chance to show more acting chops than he has had chance to with his previous Kirk/Jack Ryan characters. His chemistry with Ben Foster is just sublime. Similarly, Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham make for a formidable double act. It is Jeff Bridges though who has the standout performance and one that is Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (In fact with Michael Shannon also getting nominated in the same category for “Nocturnal Animals”, we can add ‘West Texan lawman’ to ‘Holocaust movies’ (a Winslet “Extras” reference there!) as the prime bait for Oscar nomination glory!)
The real winner here though is the whip-smart screenplay by Taylor Sheridan (“Sicario“) which sizzles with great lines: lines that make you grin inanely at the screen regularly through the running time.”In your last days in the nursing home, you’ll think of me and giggle” schmoozes Tanner to the pretty hotel check-in girl: a come-on clearly worth remembering as it delivers the goods, as it were.
The trick here is in building up a degree of empathy and sympathy for the characters on both sides. The ‘bad guys’ here are successfully portrayed as the banks. At the moment you can get 25/1 odds on this winning the Best Original Screenplay Oscar – but I would personally rate it right up there with “Manchester by the Sea“.
Deftly directed by Scot David Mackenzie (“Starred Up”) this is a film (the first of two!) that might well have elbowed it’s way into my Top 10 of 2016 if I’d seen it during its cinema release. Well worth catching on the small screen.
Chelsea (449 KP) rated The Bachman Books in Books
Sep 6, 2017
Intro, Why I was Bachman:
WARNING read this LAST! It has spoilers in it, but definitely read it after the books. Very interesting. Why would such a famous author decide to write as someone else and keep it a secret?
Rage:
The infamous story that has been pulled from shelves due to its supposed influence in the Columbine shootings... well, this was a pretty good story. Yes, there's shooting, but it's more about the lives of teenagers. This definitely did not make me want to go shoot up a school.
The Long Walk:
Can you walk at 4mph? Nonstop? For days on end? With no sleep because you are not allowed to go below 4mph? The Long Walk is about a yearly contest where 100 teenage boys VOLUNTEER to walk until there is only one left. Nonstop. If your speed drops below 4mph, you get a warning. If you can keep up the pace for 1 hour then the warning disappears. If you do not speed up after 30 secs, you get another warning. If you collect 3 warnings and slow again you are shot dead. If you are the last walker, you win whatever your heart desires. You are fed and allowed to carry what you think you will need, but you cannot stop. No one is allowed to interfere with a walker's progress, not even spectators. Of course the whole country is watching you, many from along the side of the road just waiting a chance to grab some discarded souvenir. If you have to poop? Yup that could be a souvenir too. Make it quick though so you don't rack up warnings! The guards have no mercy and will shoot you with zero emotion on their face.
This book is brutal. You ARE in the boy's shoes. Why is he there? How do they get SO MANY volunteers EVERY YEAR? So many that they turn away most? This isn't like the hunger games. The boys are not out to kill each other. The situation is just completely bizarre.
The only thing I didn't like about the book was the very end. The end wasn't an "ending" it just kind of lingers.. This wasn't enough of a problem for me to drop the rating though.
Roadwork:
I couldn't get into this one. It is about a man who is upset about needing to leave his home because of a new roadway.
The Running Man:
A slightly creepy and action-packed dystopian future story. A man signs up for a game show whose premise is all too real! Basically, he has to run for his life. Great story.
WARNING read this LAST! It has spoilers in it, but definitely read it after the books. Very interesting. Why would such a famous author decide to write as someone else and keep it a secret?
Rage:
The infamous story that has been pulled from shelves due to its supposed influence in the Columbine shootings... well, this was a pretty good story. Yes, there's shooting, but it's more about the lives of teenagers. This definitely did not make me want to go shoot up a school.
The Long Walk:
Can you walk at 4mph? Nonstop? For days on end? With no sleep because you are not allowed to go below 4mph? The Long Walk is about a yearly contest where 100 teenage boys VOLUNTEER to walk until there is only one left. Nonstop. If your speed drops below 4mph, you get a warning. If you can keep up the pace for 1 hour then the warning disappears. If you do not speed up after 30 secs, you get another warning. If you collect 3 warnings and slow again you are shot dead. If you are the last walker, you win whatever your heart desires. You are fed and allowed to carry what you think you will need, but you cannot stop. No one is allowed to interfere with a walker's progress, not even spectators. Of course the whole country is watching you, many from along the side of the road just waiting a chance to grab some discarded souvenir. If you have to poop? Yup that could be a souvenir too. Make it quick though so you don't rack up warnings! The guards have no mercy and will shoot you with zero emotion on their face.
This book is brutal. You ARE in the boy's shoes. Why is he there? How do they get SO MANY volunteers EVERY YEAR? So many that they turn away most? This isn't like the hunger games. The boys are not out to kill each other. The situation is just completely bizarre.
The only thing I didn't like about the book was the very end. The end wasn't an "ending" it just kind of lingers.. This wasn't enough of a problem for me to drop the rating though.
Roadwork:
I couldn't get into this one. It is about a man who is upset about needing to leave his home because of a new roadway.
The Running Man:
A slightly creepy and action-packed dystopian future story. A man signs up for a game show whose premise is all too real! Basically, he has to run for his life. Great story.
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Swamp Thing, Vol. 4: A Murder of Crows in Books
Nov 30, 2020
Earlier this year I had finished Vol. 3 and was ready to start on Vol. 4, but I just wasn't feeling it. The timing just wasn't right. So, I put off my re-visitation of Alan Moore's <b>EFFING BRILLIANT</b> SWAMP THING run...until the other night, when the "timing" returned and I devoured it two nights! Now, with that out of the way, onto my review...
In my reviews for the first three volumes, I mentioned that this was a re-visitation of sorts. It was always something I had intended, returning to a series I had not read since it first came out in the 80s, but it wasn't until going the digital route that I felt the time was due.
This is the volume that introduces that ol' bastard John Constantine, and for that alone, this volume is worth the price of admission! However, it was the path that Constantine sets Swampy on, and the tense and unforgettable finale that culminates in Issue 50, the last part of this volume! For that turns it all the way up to Eleven! Yeah, no Spoilers, despite it's age, but it is intense as a comic could be and then some!
Moore has become, in my eyes, some of a pain in the ass over the last few years. However, with SWAMP THING, as well as WATCHMEN and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, he was totally on his game! There was not one issue in this volume that had me thinking, <i>"Yeah, this was good, but that one story was just absolute rubbish!"</i>. It was pure gold!
Now let it be said that I think the artwork of Jock is about as good as it gets as far as stirring horror images that stay with you long after the story is finished! However, after seeing the art of Stephen R. Bissette and John Tottleben, I was reminded of being scared reading this the first time out, and even now, on the re-read! Man, what I wouldn't give to seem them do another Swampy run, maybe even a guest spot on JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK! Oh, I am excited just imagining how frikkin' <b>AWESOME</b> that would be!
Look, there are a ton of great reviews out there, wherein the writer takes and analyzes everything of importance in this volume. And a number of those great reviews are right here on Goodreads! But, I can't add much to what has already been said! All I can add is this: You soooooo need to read this series! That's all I'm gonna say!
In my reviews for the first three volumes, I mentioned that this was a re-visitation of sorts. It was always something I had intended, returning to a series I had not read since it first came out in the 80s, but it wasn't until going the digital route that I felt the time was due.
This is the volume that introduces that ol' bastard John Constantine, and for that alone, this volume is worth the price of admission! However, it was the path that Constantine sets Swampy on, and the tense and unforgettable finale that culminates in Issue 50, the last part of this volume! For that turns it all the way up to Eleven! Yeah, no Spoilers, despite it's age, but it is intense as a comic could be and then some!
Moore has become, in my eyes, some of a pain in the ass over the last few years. However, with SWAMP THING, as well as WATCHMEN and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, he was totally on his game! There was not one issue in this volume that had me thinking, <i>"Yeah, this was good, but that one story was just absolute rubbish!"</i>. It was pure gold!
Now let it be said that I think the artwork of Jock is about as good as it gets as far as stirring horror images that stay with you long after the story is finished! However, after seeing the art of Stephen R. Bissette and John Tottleben, I was reminded of being scared reading this the first time out, and even now, on the re-read! Man, what I wouldn't give to seem them do another Swampy run, maybe even a guest spot on JUSTICE LEAGUE DARK! Oh, I am excited just imagining how frikkin' <b>AWESOME</b> that would be!
Look, there are a ton of great reviews out there, wherein the writer takes and analyzes everything of importance in this volume. And a number of those great reviews are right here on Goodreads! But, I can't add much to what has already been said! All I can add is this: You soooooo need to read this series! That's all I'm gonna say!
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Oct 13, 2017 (Updated Oct 13, 2017)
Top Notch Performances. (1 more)
Effective Scares.
Hard To Watch, Yet Impossible To Turn Away
Contains spoilers, click to show
After being underwhelmed by the major blockbuster release of IT, I didn’t have much hope for this small Netflix movie with a limited cast, a low budget and being an adaption of what is regarded as one of Stephen King’s lesser works. I am happy to report that I was pleasantly surprised when I sat down to watch this one, in fact I’d go as far as to say it blew me away.
This is a movie that lives and dies on the performances of the actors involved. For those of you not familiar with the story’s premise, it involves a married couple driving out to a holiday cottage in the woods for a dirty weekend. The couple is played by Carla Gugino, (Jessie,) and Bruce Greenwood, (Gerald,) who both totally nail their respective roles in the movie. Once they get to the cottage and the door is conveniently left ajar, Gerald handcuffs Jessie to the bed and goes to the bathroom to pop a Viagra. Once he comes back and explains how he has made sure the gardeners and the cleaners won’t disturb them for a few days, he takes a heart attack and collapses onto the floor and dies.
From this point on, Carla Gugino spends the vast majority of the movie handcuffed to the bed and she gives an absolutely stellar performance, possibly the best of her career. She goes though a vast array of emotions in convincing, believable form and shows everything, from despair, to sadness, to anger, to fear, to resilience. I don’t think anyone has ever been Oscar nominated for a straight-to-Netflix movie, but if there is one performance that deserves to be, it is this one.
If you haven’t seen the movie yet, please don’t read on past this point as I am going to have to delve into spoilers in order to discuss the other aspects of the movie that I enjoyed. I thought the way that Gerald appeared to Jessie as a sort of devil on her shoulder was really effective and Greenwood delivered the required level of intense cruelty perfectly. Then the fact that Jessie appeared to herself as a sort of angel on the shoulder to oppose Gerald’s negative thoughts, meant that Gugino was required to deliver a dual character performance, on top of the already challenging role of being chained to the bed.
Flashback sequences in movies can go either way for me. They usually either tend to detract from the story at hand and become an unnecessary tangent, or they compliment what is going on and add to the movie overall. Thankfully in this movie, it is the latter. The flashback scenes are uncomfortable and hard to watch, but they do add context to what is going on in the character’s mind and make for a more interesting dissection of the effect that child abuse can have on a person in later life and how psychologically, even as adults people are still affected by the dreadful things that occurred in their past.
I also thought that this film was extremely effective in terms of its fear factor. As opposed to IT, which was scary at the start, but became repetitive and managed to desensitise its audience for what to expect by the halfway mark, Gerald’s game retains an unpredictable level of uneasiness throughout.
As far as the viewer knows during the first half of the movie, the main conflict facing the protagonist is starvation and the dog that is gnawing on Gerald’s dead body, but then things take a much more sinister turn. In what is possibly the creepiest scene I have seen in a movie this year, Jessie wakes up during the night after passing out for a few hours and she looks into the corner of the room, squinting her eyes. The camera follows where she is looking and the general shape of something can be made out. Then the shape begins to move forwards into the moonlight and is revealed to be a huge, deformed man holding a trinket box. This was so unexpected and freaky, and I loved it. I thought it was so effective in the context of the movie and was executed perfectly to be as disturbing as possible. It is also a relatable scare, as we have all experienced that moment; glancing at the corner of the room, something catches our eye and looks off in the darkness, but you just brush it off and fall back asleep. Jessie’s worst fears are confirmed here though, as she really did see something in the corner of the room and she is helpless to get away from it.
It also throws a twist into a story that has so far been based in what could be a real situation. You start to wonder, is Jessie experiencing something supernatural, or is she just hallucinating due to lack of food and water? Then the Gerald hallucination asks her if ‘The Moonlight Man,’ that she saw isn’t real, then why did the dog run away when he was in the room? Just like Jessie, the audience starts to wonder if he could be real, perhaps he is death and he has come to take Jessie to hell. All of these questions add to the already intense and disturbing tone of the movie and I thought it worked perfectly.
Eventually the movie wraps up with Jessie having an epiphany that if she smashes the glass of water and cuts her wrist, the blood can help her slip her hand out of the cuffs. What follows is a gory, brutal, difficult to watch de-gloving scene that will have you wincing and watching through your fingers. Then in true Stephen King fashion, the movie goes on to reveal another twist. It is revealed that ‘The Moonlight Man,’ really was in the room with Jessie. He was a serial killer that collected various body parts form dead people and he was taking parts from Gerald’s body while Jessie was chained to the bed. I can see why this ending could be polarizing for some, but I loved it and I thought it added an extra layer of craziness to the already insane sequence of events that we just witnessed.
Overall, Gerald’s Game is fantastic. A truly unsettling, chilling Stephen King adaption that showcases fantastic performances from its cast, makes the most of its minimal setting and managed to creep me out way more than any other horror movie I have seen this year.
This is a movie that lives and dies on the performances of the actors involved. For those of you not familiar with the story’s premise, it involves a married couple driving out to a holiday cottage in the woods for a dirty weekend. The couple is played by Carla Gugino, (Jessie,) and Bruce Greenwood, (Gerald,) who both totally nail their respective roles in the movie. Once they get to the cottage and the door is conveniently left ajar, Gerald handcuffs Jessie to the bed and goes to the bathroom to pop a Viagra. Once he comes back and explains how he has made sure the gardeners and the cleaners won’t disturb them for a few days, he takes a heart attack and collapses onto the floor and dies.
From this point on, Carla Gugino spends the vast majority of the movie handcuffed to the bed and she gives an absolutely stellar performance, possibly the best of her career. She goes though a vast array of emotions in convincing, believable form and shows everything, from despair, to sadness, to anger, to fear, to resilience. I don’t think anyone has ever been Oscar nominated for a straight-to-Netflix movie, but if there is one performance that deserves to be, it is this one.
If you haven’t seen the movie yet, please don’t read on past this point as I am going to have to delve into spoilers in order to discuss the other aspects of the movie that I enjoyed. I thought the way that Gerald appeared to Jessie as a sort of devil on her shoulder was really effective and Greenwood delivered the required level of intense cruelty perfectly. Then the fact that Jessie appeared to herself as a sort of angel on the shoulder to oppose Gerald’s negative thoughts, meant that Gugino was required to deliver a dual character performance, on top of the already challenging role of being chained to the bed.
Flashback sequences in movies can go either way for me. They usually either tend to detract from the story at hand and become an unnecessary tangent, or they compliment what is going on and add to the movie overall. Thankfully in this movie, it is the latter. The flashback scenes are uncomfortable and hard to watch, but they do add context to what is going on in the character’s mind and make for a more interesting dissection of the effect that child abuse can have on a person in later life and how psychologically, even as adults people are still affected by the dreadful things that occurred in their past.
I also thought that this film was extremely effective in terms of its fear factor. As opposed to IT, which was scary at the start, but became repetitive and managed to desensitise its audience for what to expect by the halfway mark, Gerald’s game retains an unpredictable level of uneasiness throughout.
As far as the viewer knows during the first half of the movie, the main conflict facing the protagonist is starvation and the dog that is gnawing on Gerald’s dead body, but then things take a much more sinister turn. In what is possibly the creepiest scene I have seen in a movie this year, Jessie wakes up during the night after passing out for a few hours and she looks into the corner of the room, squinting her eyes. The camera follows where she is looking and the general shape of something can be made out. Then the shape begins to move forwards into the moonlight and is revealed to be a huge, deformed man holding a trinket box. This was so unexpected and freaky, and I loved it. I thought it was so effective in the context of the movie and was executed perfectly to be as disturbing as possible. It is also a relatable scare, as we have all experienced that moment; glancing at the corner of the room, something catches our eye and looks off in the darkness, but you just brush it off and fall back asleep. Jessie’s worst fears are confirmed here though, as she really did see something in the corner of the room and she is helpless to get away from it.
It also throws a twist into a story that has so far been based in what could be a real situation. You start to wonder, is Jessie experiencing something supernatural, or is she just hallucinating due to lack of food and water? Then the Gerald hallucination asks her if ‘The Moonlight Man,’ that she saw isn’t real, then why did the dog run away when he was in the room? Just like Jessie, the audience starts to wonder if he could be real, perhaps he is death and he has come to take Jessie to hell. All of these questions add to the already intense and disturbing tone of the movie and I thought it worked perfectly.
Eventually the movie wraps up with Jessie having an epiphany that if she smashes the glass of water and cuts her wrist, the blood can help her slip her hand out of the cuffs. What follows is a gory, brutal, difficult to watch de-gloving scene that will have you wincing and watching through your fingers. Then in true Stephen King fashion, the movie goes on to reveal another twist. It is revealed that ‘The Moonlight Man,’ really was in the room with Jessie. He was a serial killer that collected various body parts form dead people and he was taking parts from Gerald’s body while Jessie was chained to the bed. I can see why this ending could be polarizing for some, but I loved it and I thought it added an extra layer of craziness to the already insane sequence of events that we just witnessed.
Overall, Gerald’s Game is fantastic. A truly unsettling, chilling Stephen King adaption that showcases fantastic performances from its cast, makes the most of its minimal setting and managed to creep me out way more than any other horror movie I have seen this year.
Sophia (Bookwyrming Thoughts) (530 KP) rated 27 hours: Nightside Saga Series, Book One in Books
Jan 23, 2020
DNF at a place I don't remember because I read this book ages ago and apparently I didn't upload a review. (Also will not be supporting further on after this due to reasons.)
<b><i>I received this book for free from the publisher via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</b></i>
I wish I could’ve enjoyed 27 Hours as much as most people I know seem to have enjoyed the book, but alas, that is not the case.
Also I’ve been keeping a wonderful streak of finishing every book this year, and I wanted to keep that streak. But...
27 Hours was an absolute pain for me to read, and this was the situation I found myself in constantly:
Me: *picks up book, starts reading*
Me (ten minutes later): Ugh, this is painful. I’m bored.
Me (while trying to read): I’m going to do some blogging and maybe quest on my balance wizard. Maybe this will motivate me.
Me (two hours later): *finishes a dungeon in game, finds myself reading maybe two sentences in between battles* Please note that I'm actually good at reading while waiting for my turn, especially when I'm in a team.
Me (two days later): Ooo shiny book! *starts new book*
Me (another two days later): Oh, yeah. I was supposed to read you, right? *eyes book warily* Let's try this again.
This cycle repeated itself for days and weeks. Eventually, I just called it quits because when I’ve been repeating the same thing over and over again and have progressed more in a game than a book, we’ve got issues and it’s time for me to move on to other books.
27 Hours has a lot of representation among the characters, I won’t deny that. But that’s honestly the only thing I can think of that’s good about this book. Anything I might have missed has been clouded over by the cons.
<b>Why 27 Hours Is Not My Cup of Tea</b>
Rumor - I’m being very nitpicky, but the name Rumor instantly reminded me of Adele’s song. Every time “Rumor” came up in the book (which is a lot, considering the fact he’s a main character), the song blasted in my brain.
The name Rumor, however, is the least of my worries.
The world building is a mass of confusion - I have no clue what things are and honestly the world is a jumbled mess of a confusion. Is a dragon the same as a gargoyle, is a chimera the same as a gargoyle, are they simply the same creatures with different names depending on which group the person belongs to… or what? Is it a group of rebellious humans? Also what is this about hellhounds and gargoyles? The world building feels like a melting pot gone very wrong on the moon hundreds of years in the future.
Not only is the world building is a mass of confusion, but it feels way too modern for a book that is supposedly set 200 years from now.
I’m mainly concerned about the world building to focus on the logistics of book year and present year, though.
Too many characters - There are too many to keep track of in 27 Hours, and the fun part? They’re introduced early. I don’t… I don’t even know who this random dude is and boom! We’ve got another one. I knew for sure there were going to be at least four POVs, which is a lot, but it’s not too much. BUT… not only do we have Jude, Rumor, Nyx, Braedon, etc. etc. we have some person named Colt, Wren, Eric, Sara… that’s just some of the characters.
This is by chapter three. Chapter freaking THREE. My brain was already hurting from the world building and then there are all of these characters being introduced and OMG I just wanted to scream.
I just… I just can’t handle all of these characters because I don’t even remember who does what by the time character #2244 pops up.
I really wished I could’ve finished 27 Hours and continued my streak for this year, but the huge cast of characters being introduced so early into the story and massively confusing world is a no go for me.
<a href="https://thenovelistics.blogspot.com/2017/11/27-hours-by-tristina-wright-arc-review.html">This review is originally posted on The Novelistics</a>
<b><i>I received this book for free from the publisher via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review. This does not affect my opinion of the book or the content of my review.</b></i>
I wish I could’ve enjoyed 27 Hours as much as most people I know seem to have enjoyed the book, but alas, that is not the case.
Also I’ve been keeping a wonderful streak of finishing every book this year, and I wanted to keep that streak. But...
27 Hours was an absolute pain for me to read, and this was the situation I found myself in constantly:
Me: *picks up book, starts reading*
Me (ten minutes later): Ugh, this is painful. I’m bored.
Me (while trying to read): I’m going to do some blogging and maybe quest on my balance wizard. Maybe this will motivate me.
Me (two hours later): *finishes a dungeon in game, finds myself reading maybe two sentences in between battles* Please note that I'm actually good at reading while waiting for my turn, especially when I'm in a team.
Me (two days later): Ooo shiny book! *starts new book*
Me (another two days later): Oh, yeah. I was supposed to read you, right? *eyes book warily* Let's try this again.
This cycle repeated itself for days and weeks. Eventually, I just called it quits because when I’ve been repeating the same thing over and over again and have progressed more in a game than a book, we’ve got issues and it’s time for me to move on to other books.
27 Hours has a lot of representation among the characters, I won’t deny that. But that’s honestly the only thing I can think of that’s good about this book. Anything I might have missed has been clouded over by the cons.
<b>Why 27 Hours Is Not My Cup of Tea</b>
Rumor - I’m being very nitpicky, but the name Rumor instantly reminded me of Adele’s song. Every time “Rumor” came up in the book (which is a lot, considering the fact he’s a main character), the song blasted in my brain.
The name Rumor, however, is the least of my worries.
The world building is a mass of confusion - I have no clue what things are and honestly the world is a jumbled mess of a confusion. Is a dragon the same as a gargoyle, is a chimera the same as a gargoyle, are they simply the same creatures with different names depending on which group the person belongs to… or what? Is it a group of rebellious humans? Also what is this about hellhounds and gargoyles? The world building feels like a melting pot gone very wrong on the moon hundreds of years in the future.
Not only is the world building is a mass of confusion, but it feels way too modern for a book that is supposedly set 200 years from now.
I’m mainly concerned about the world building to focus on the logistics of book year and present year, though.
Too many characters - There are too many to keep track of in 27 Hours, and the fun part? They’re introduced early. I don’t… I don’t even know who this random dude is and boom! We’ve got another one. I knew for sure there were going to be at least four POVs, which is a lot, but it’s not too much. BUT… not only do we have Jude, Rumor, Nyx, Braedon, etc. etc. we have some person named Colt, Wren, Eric, Sara… that’s just some of the characters.
This is by chapter three. Chapter freaking THREE. My brain was already hurting from the world building and then there are all of these characters being introduced and OMG I just wanted to scream.
I just… I just can’t handle all of these characters because I don’t even remember who does what by the time character #2244 pops up.
I really wished I could’ve finished 27 Hours and continued my streak for this year, but the huge cast of characters being introduced so early into the story and massively confusing world is a no go for me.
<a href="https://thenovelistics.blogspot.com/2017/11/27-hours-by-tristina-wright-arc-review.html">This review is originally posted on The Novelistics</a>
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Your Highness (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
For all you minotaur lovers out there, the movie Your Highness is the film for you. Not that the movie is about them but it has the most unique minotaur I have ever seen in a movie. Your Highness takes place long ago in a land far away in a kingdom that has two princes. The oldest and heir-to-the-throne is Prince Fabious (the fabulous James Franco). He is a prince’s prince, a knight’s knight, he enjoys protecting the innocent, he slays evil cyclops and other evil things that should be slayed.
The youngest is Prince Thadeous (film co-writer Danny McBride), he is a slacker’s slacker, a player’s player, he enjoys booze and other mind-altering stuff, he lays with easy maidens and…well, you get the point. Even though the two brothers are so very different they still love each other, even if Thadeous won’t admit it. So when Prince Fabious was to be married to the beautiful yet naive Belladonna (the enchanting Zooey Deschanel) he wanted none other than his younger brother to be his best man.
But fate had other plans and what should have been the happiest of wedding days was ruined when the evil wizard Leezar (Justin Theroux) kidnaps Belladonna so he can produce an evil dragon offspring that he would use to rule the world. The two brothers vow to save her and kill Leezar. Ok, technically Thadeous is told by their father the King (Charles Dance) that either he goes with his older brother or he will be kicked out of the kingdom and it is Fabious who does the vowing. So they ride out with their most trusted knights and along the way they meet the Great Wize (not a typo) Wizard (voiced by Mario Torres. Jr.), the highly skilled fighter Isabel (played by a pretty intimidating Natalie Portman), the Minotaur (Brian Steele, a surprisingly fitting name), forest people (I loved the forest people!). Epic adventure and treachery ensue – dun dun dunn! Will they save Belladonna and the world? Will Thadeous become a respectable prince? Will the minotaur live happily ever after?
The movie is funny but the humor is on par with middle-school-aged male humor so approximately 80% of all adult males will probably find the movie funny and a lot of wives will be wondering why they married them. It also had some decent fight scenes sprinkled throughout the movie. I’ll be honest, there were a couple of scenes in the film that I wish I could un-see… the kind of stuff that never happened in any dice role-playing game that I have ever played.
Now I am sure we have all seen movies where one person’s performance was so well done that it made the other people’s performances seem lacking (whether they truly were or not). To me this movie fell victim to that problem. After all with people like Charles Dance, Natalie Portman, James Franco, Zooey Deschanel and Damian Lewis, who plays Boremont, one of the trusted Knights, it was bound to happen. Overall, a very entertaining and funny movie.
The youngest is Prince Thadeous (film co-writer Danny McBride), he is a slacker’s slacker, a player’s player, he enjoys booze and other mind-altering stuff, he lays with easy maidens and…well, you get the point. Even though the two brothers are so very different they still love each other, even if Thadeous won’t admit it. So when Prince Fabious was to be married to the beautiful yet naive Belladonna (the enchanting Zooey Deschanel) he wanted none other than his younger brother to be his best man.
But fate had other plans and what should have been the happiest of wedding days was ruined when the evil wizard Leezar (Justin Theroux) kidnaps Belladonna so he can produce an evil dragon offspring that he would use to rule the world. The two brothers vow to save her and kill Leezar. Ok, technically Thadeous is told by their father the King (Charles Dance) that either he goes with his older brother or he will be kicked out of the kingdom and it is Fabious who does the vowing. So they ride out with their most trusted knights and along the way they meet the Great Wize (not a typo) Wizard (voiced by Mario Torres. Jr.), the highly skilled fighter Isabel (played by a pretty intimidating Natalie Portman), the Minotaur (Brian Steele, a surprisingly fitting name), forest people (I loved the forest people!). Epic adventure and treachery ensue – dun dun dunn! Will they save Belladonna and the world? Will Thadeous become a respectable prince? Will the minotaur live happily ever after?
The movie is funny but the humor is on par with middle-school-aged male humor so approximately 80% of all adult males will probably find the movie funny and a lot of wives will be wondering why they married them. It also had some decent fight scenes sprinkled throughout the movie. I’ll be honest, there were a couple of scenes in the film that I wish I could un-see… the kind of stuff that never happened in any dice role-playing game that I have ever played.
Now I am sure we have all seen movies where one person’s performance was so well done that it made the other people’s performances seem lacking (whether they truly were or not). To me this movie fell victim to that problem. After all with people like Charles Dance, Natalie Portman, James Franco, Zooey Deschanel and Damian Lewis, who plays Boremont, one of the trusted Knights, it was bound to happen. Overall, a very entertaining and funny movie.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Greyhound (2020) in Movies
Mar 11, 2021
Hanks Does It Again
Tom Hanks interest in the men who fought in WWII is well known. From his starring role as Capt. Miller is what is (arguably) the definitive film about D-Day, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, to his Executive Producing role in, arguably, the best mini-series ever produced about WWII, BAND OF BROTHERS, Hanks has brought a face to the nameless heroes who fought in the middle of the last century.
Add his latest film GREYHOUND, to the list of films that brings a face to a heretofore unknown (at least to me) group of heroes.
Based on the book THE GOOD SHEPHERD by C.S. Forester and adapted for the screen by Hanks himself, GREYHOUND tells the story of a Commander of a U.S. Navy escort ship, helping cargo ships cross the Atlantic Ocean - an Ocean filled with enemy submarines.
Hanks, of course, plays Commander Ernest Krause, Captain of the USS Keeling, code named “Greyhound”, who is on his first mission. As one might imagine, Hanks imbues Krause with a common decency and you inherently trust Krause’s instincts as he makes split second decision after split second decision. What surprised me about Hanks in this role is his “steely resolve” in dealing with the problems. You can see his brain working as he makes pragmatic decision after pragmatic decision - sometimes not the most “human” decisions - but the right decisions after all.
This is both the strength and the problem with this film - Hanks’ character is NEVER wrong, so after awhile, the tension on the Bridge with Capt. Krause being questioned on his decisions, is never really there.
But, that is a “nit” in this film for Director Aaron Schneider has constructed a taunt and tight thriller that is non-stop action from start to finish. He wisely decided to keep the film at a tight 90 minutes and keep the action flying (versus putting in a couple of “character building scenes” that could have stretched the runtime). He does shoehorn in a flashback scene between Krause and his lady love (played by Elisabeth Shue), a scene that is not really needed, but besides this he focuses his attention on the Greyhound and it’s mission and this is a smart move that the film benefits from.
Director Schneider relies, heavily, on the Special F/X recreating the Atlantic sea battles and, for the most part, it succeeds. BUT…from time-to-time I felt like I was watching a video game - and not a film. The F/X (at times) was just not feature film quality that drew me away from the emotion and the action on the screen.
With the Global Pandemic, this film’s theatrical release was cancelled and it was put on Apple TV+(where you can find it today), so I can forgive the lower F/X results…but just a little.
All-in-all a fun thrill ride, with a terrific central performance, in a film that shows an aspect of WWII I had not previously scene portrayed on film before.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Add his latest film GREYHOUND, to the list of films that brings a face to a heretofore unknown (at least to me) group of heroes.
Based on the book THE GOOD SHEPHERD by C.S. Forester and adapted for the screen by Hanks himself, GREYHOUND tells the story of a Commander of a U.S. Navy escort ship, helping cargo ships cross the Atlantic Ocean - an Ocean filled with enemy submarines.
Hanks, of course, plays Commander Ernest Krause, Captain of the USS Keeling, code named “Greyhound”, who is on his first mission. As one might imagine, Hanks imbues Krause with a common decency and you inherently trust Krause’s instincts as he makes split second decision after split second decision. What surprised me about Hanks in this role is his “steely resolve” in dealing with the problems. You can see his brain working as he makes pragmatic decision after pragmatic decision - sometimes not the most “human” decisions - but the right decisions after all.
This is both the strength and the problem with this film - Hanks’ character is NEVER wrong, so after awhile, the tension on the Bridge with Capt. Krause being questioned on his decisions, is never really there.
But, that is a “nit” in this film for Director Aaron Schneider has constructed a taunt and tight thriller that is non-stop action from start to finish. He wisely decided to keep the film at a tight 90 minutes and keep the action flying (versus putting in a couple of “character building scenes” that could have stretched the runtime). He does shoehorn in a flashback scene between Krause and his lady love (played by Elisabeth Shue), a scene that is not really needed, but besides this he focuses his attention on the Greyhound and it’s mission and this is a smart move that the film benefits from.
Director Schneider relies, heavily, on the Special F/X recreating the Atlantic sea battles and, for the most part, it succeeds. BUT…from time-to-time I felt like I was watching a video game - and not a film. The F/X (at times) was just not feature film quality that drew me away from the emotion and the action on the screen.
With the Global Pandemic, this film’s theatrical release was cancelled and it was put on Apple TV+(where you can find it today), so I can forgive the lower F/X results…but just a little.
All-in-all a fun thrill ride, with a terrific central performance, in a film that shows an aspect of WWII I had not previously scene portrayed on film before.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Prey (2022) in Movies
Aug 12, 2022
Less Is More - And It Works!
In 1987, at the height of the ‘80’s action movie craze with the likes of Stallone, Van Damme, Segal, Norris and Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger came out with what on the surface looked like a throw away macho, sci-fi action flick, PREDATOR. What it turned out to be was one of the all-time classic action films.
It has taken 35 years for a sequel (in this case, a prequel) to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the first.
While the other 5 sequels (if you count the Alien vs. Predator cross-over films) delve deeper and harder into the science fiction and macho-action of the first film, the straight-to-streaming prequel PREY (on Hulu and now on Disney+) decided to go in the other direction, it simplified the Predator/Prey dynamic, eschewing deep sci-fi mythology and settled on the “less is more” dictum of storytelling to great affect.
Set in the Midwestern Plains in the 1710’s, PREY follows a group of Comanches as they live their unassuming lifestyle - living off and giving back to the land. A lifestyle that is slowly being encroached upon by foreign entities. At first these “aliens” are terrestrial in nature (the approach of the White Man, in this case, they are in the guise of French Voyageurs), but later, in it takes the form of the extraterrestrial Predator. It’s an interesting juxtaposition of the duo forces outside of what this tribe of Native Americans know - and how they deal with it.
Leading us into the conflict are the main protagonists - the brother/sister combo of Naru (Amber Midthunder, HELL OR HIGHWATER) and her older brother, Taabe (Dakota Beavers, in what is his feature film debut). These 2 - along with their Comanche brethren track and then begin to understand what they are encountering and since they know they are out-gunned, they need to outsmart the Predator.
This could have devolved, quickly, into a gorey, CGI-fest of carnage, but in the careful hands of Director Dan Trachtenberg (10 CLOVERFIELD LANE) and with an interesting screenplay by Trachtenberg and Patrick Aison, this film becomes a thoughtful, intelligence game of wits that is satisfying on both sides.
Midthunder and Beavers are very strong in their roles of the brother and sister Comanches and they are 2 characters that you quickly start rooting for in their battle. These characters are drawn in an interesting, 3-dimensional, way and are a pair that you want to spend these 2 hours of struggle with.
Trachtenberg helps these 2 - and the story - by setting a deliberate pace, as if you the audience are thinking and encountering things along with these 2. There are long bits of thought and talk highlighted by spikes of action that are well choreographed and interesting, but really add to the depths of the characters.
I am as surprised as you are that I encountered an interesting character study in disguise in an action-packed Predator film - but that is just what this is…and very well done to boot.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
It has taken 35 years for a sequel (in this case, a prequel) to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the first.
While the other 5 sequels (if you count the Alien vs. Predator cross-over films) delve deeper and harder into the science fiction and macho-action of the first film, the straight-to-streaming prequel PREY (on Hulu and now on Disney+) decided to go in the other direction, it simplified the Predator/Prey dynamic, eschewing deep sci-fi mythology and settled on the “less is more” dictum of storytelling to great affect.
Set in the Midwestern Plains in the 1710’s, PREY follows a group of Comanches as they live their unassuming lifestyle - living off and giving back to the land. A lifestyle that is slowly being encroached upon by foreign entities. At first these “aliens” are terrestrial in nature (the approach of the White Man, in this case, they are in the guise of French Voyageurs), but later, in it takes the form of the extraterrestrial Predator. It’s an interesting juxtaposition of the duo forces outside of what this tribe of Native Americans know - and how they deal with it.
Leading us into the conflict are the main protagonists - the brother/sister combo of Naru (Amber Midthunder, HELL OR HIGHWATER) and her older brother, Taabe (Dakota Beavers, in what is his feature film debut). These 2 - along with their Comanche brethren track and then begin to understand what they are encountering and since they know they are out-gunned, they need to outsmart the Predator.
This could have devolved, quickly, into a gorey, CGI-fest of carnage, but in the careful hands of Director Dan Trachtenberg (10 CLOVERFIELD LANE) and with an interesting screenplay by Trachtenberg and Patrick Aison, this film becomes a thoughtful, intelligence game of wits that is satisfying on both sides.
Midthunder and Beavers are very strong in their roles of the brother and sister Comanches and they are 2 characters that you quickly start rooting for in their battle. These characters are drawn in an interesting, 3-dimensional, way and are a pair that you want to spend these 2 hours of struggle with.
Trachtenberg helps these 2 - and the story - by setting a deliberate pace, as if you the audience are thinking and encountering things along with these 2. There are long bits of thought and talk highlighted by spikes of action that are well choreographed and interesting, but really add to the depths of the characters.
I am as surprised as you are that I encountered an interesting character study in disguise in an action-packed Predator film - but that is just what this is…and very well done to boot.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
I must be starting to enjoy fantasy and YA because in my past few reviews I’ve put my normal “I don’t usually read…” in front of my review because they’re not my genres. But… something must have changed because I’m finally starting to like them.
Caraval is the fantasy I never knew I needed in my life. It’s fast-paced, magical and gripping, and nothing like I expected. I got my copy for Christmas in a Book Matchmaker package. I don’t think if I’d have seen this on a shelf that I would have gone for it because as I’ve said, it’s not my usual type. But I was nicely surprised.
The novel opens with letters from Scarlett to Legend about Caraval as she’s always wanted to see it because of the stories her grandmother told her when she was younger. After years of trying to get an invite, Legend replies and the story begins.
Scarlett is thrown into an adventure with her sister Tella and a sailor, Julien. They all take part in Caraval – a magical game where nothing is ever as it seems – and compete against other players to win a wish from Legend.
I was a bit unsure where the book was going to go in the beginning because it took off quite slowly, but once the action started I couldn’t put it down. It was truly gripping and I was completely obsessed to the point I was reading it in whatever spare time I could find just to finish it.
It finishes with a bit of a cliffhanger but that just means that I absolutely cannot wait for the second book!
Caraval is the fantasy I never knew I needed in my life. It’s fast-paced, magical and gripping, and nothing like I expected. I got my copy for Christmas in a Book Matchmaker package. I don’t think if I’d have seen this on a shelf that I would have gone for it because as I’ve said, it’s not my usual type. But I was nicely surprised.
The novel opens with letters from Scarlett to Legend about Caraval as she’s always wanted to see it because of the stories her grandmother told her when she was younger. After years of trying to get an invite, Legend replies and the story begins.
Scarlett is thrown into an adventure with her sister Tella and a sailor, Julien. They all take part in Caraval – a magical game where nothing is ever as it seems – and compete against other players to win a wish from Legend.
I was a bit unsure where the book was going to go in the beginning because it took off quite slowly, but once the action started I couldn’t put it down. It was truly gripping and I was completely obsessed to the point I was reading it in whatever spare time I could find just to finish it.
It finishes with a bit of a cliffhanger but that just means that I absolutely cannot wait for the second book!