Search
MaryAnn (14 KP) rated Cross My Heart (A Legacy of Faith #2) in Books
Nov 4, 2019
Can two broken paths lead toward Gods redemption?
When Ashley Showalter and Ben Henning meet on Ashleys horse rescue farm, they quickly discover how much they have in common. Both were raised by single moms. Both want to help where they see a need. And both work with horses in the Boise valley. Ben needs Ashleys help and expertise after starting an equine therapy barn on his great-great-grandfathers farmand the more time they spend together, both Ashley and Ben have the feeling that there could be something more between them.
They also carry the burden of past experiences that may drive them apart if the truth is ever revealed. Ben is a recovering alcoholic with five years of sobriety behind him, while Ashleys brother is an opioid addict residing in court-ordered rehab. Holding fast to the belief that addicts can never be cured, Ashley has promised herself she will never walk knowingly into the chaos created by addiction. Ben knows that with God, all things are possiblebut will Ashley find it within herself to give love a chance? Or will her brothers mistakes and the pain of her past jeopardize her future with Ben?
Cross My Heart threads together a contemporary love story with the heartwarming tale of Bens great-great-grandfather, Andrew Henningreminding us that Gods Word is timeless and that His promises are new every morning.
My Thoughts: This is such a wonderful story. The readers will love the story of Ben's family history and the wonderful woman Sashley who is all about rescuing horses. This is a story of healing, it's also about rescuing or saving those who are in a bad situation whether they be human or equine. God loves us so much that He sent His son to die on the cross for us. We are to love as He loves us and I do believe that is shown in this story. The way Andrew Henning took in 3 children to love on them as his own. It's about Ben's recovery and the forgiveness of his friend.
This story will win the hearts of its readers, I truly enjoy horses and the equine therapy is a wonderful idea for those who are hurting in any sort of way.
I look forward to more from Robin Lee Hatcher.
When Ashley Showalter and Ben Henning meet on Ashleys horse rescue farm, they quickly discover how much they have in common. Both were raised by single moms. Both want to help where they see a need. And both work with horses in the Boise valley. Ben needs Ashleys help and expertise after starting an equine therapy barn on his great-great-grandfathers farmand the more time they spend together, both Ashley and Ben have the feeling that there could be something more between them.
They also carry the burden of past experiences that may drive them apart if the truth is ever revealed. Ben is a recovering alcoholic with five years of sobriety behind him, while Ashleys brother is an opioid addict residing in court-ordered rehab. Holding fast to the belief that addicts can never be cured, Ashley has promised herself she will never walk knowingly into the chaos created by addiction. Ben knows that with God, all things are possiblebut will Ashley find it within herself to give love a chance? Or will her brothers mistakes and the pain of her past jeopardize her future with Ben?
Cross My Heart threads together a contemporary love story with the heartwarming tale of Bens great-great-grandfather, Andrew Henningreminding us that Gods Word is timeless and that His promises are new every morning.
My Thoughts: This is such a wonderful story. The readers will love the story of Ben's family history and the wonderful woman Sashley who is all about rescuing horses. This is a story of healing, it's also about rescuing or saving those who are in a bad situation whether they be human or equine. God loves us so much that He sent His son to die on the cross for us. We are to love as He loves us and I do believe that is shown in this story. The way Andrew Henning took in 3 children to love on them as his own. It's about Ben's recovery and the forgiveness of his friend.
This story will win the hearts of its readers, I truly enjoy horses and the equine therapy is a wonderful idea for those who are hurting in any sort of way.
I look forward to more from Robin Lee Hatcher.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Knock at the cabin (2023) in Movies
Feb 28, 2023
When M. Night Shyamalan's name comes up on something, my brow furrows and I purse my lips... I'm never quite sure how to feel.
Eric, Andrew and Wen, take an idyllic trip to a peaceful cabin. But that peace is shattered when the knock-off Guardians of the Galaxy show up.
First thing I want to say, despite it being an M.NS film, it doesn't have the usual dubious tangent in it. I suspect we can put this down to the fact it's based on source material, namely The Cabin at the End of the World by Paul Trembley.
I wanted to see what I could talk about without spoiling the film at all. The synopsis is fairly vague, but intriguing. Then I rewatched the trailer, and from that, I could probably talk about the majority of this hour and forty minute film. The latter basically telling everything makes me wonder how it wasn't spoiled for me going in.
Knock at the Cabin boils down to a look at personal faith in the face of terror, for those on both sides of the incident.
While the majority of the story is set in the isolated cabin, we're shown flashbacks to Eric and Andrew's life. Heartbreak, trauma, joy, vengeance, it has been filled with so much, and that being peppered into the main story really helps to shape how we see their separate personalities and reactions.
The acting is an interesting one. The nature of the situation means that everyone is feeling a massive cycle of emotions... and somehow that works.
The group dynamic of Eric, Andrew and Wen was incredible, with Jonathan Groff and Kristen Cui being the standouts. I don't know that I would have been on board with Ben Aldridge as Andrew if it hadn't been for the pairing with Groff.
Opposite them, we get an interesting mix of characters who are led by Leonard... I am so proud of Dave Bautista right now, this was an amazing performance. I love him doing comedy (My Spy is still probably my favourite), but this was a great change of pace, he channels the character's profession into the situation so well... 5 stars for Bautista, no notes.
The other three bring up the rear with some chaotic energy. I just cannot unsee Ron Weasley though. I know he's been in other things since then, but I haven't happened across any of them, and as such, he was entirely distracting. It wasn't a bad turn, but it did overwhelm Nikki Amuka-Bird and Abby Quinn's roles for me.
M. Night Shymalan does his cameo and throws in his usual colour references for the regular viewers. I won't go into that, as it definitely constitutes spoilers, but it might not be something that's common knowledge, so absolutely worth a Google afterwards.
IMDb lists Knock at the Cabin as horror, mystery and thriller. Thriller, check. Mystery, a stretch. Horror, in my opinion, completely inaccurate. Having "horror" over everything about this film put people off watching it, and that's a great shame.
I was left with one big thought after seeing this, and that's that somewhere, in a remote cabin, a group of people have been playing this game for the last 3 years.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2023/02/knock-at-cabin-movie-review.html
Eric, Andrew and Wen, take an idyllic trip to a peaceful cabin. But that peace is shattered when the knock-off Guardians of the Galaxy show up.
First thing I want to say, despite it being an M.NS film, it doesn't have the usual dubious tangent in it. I suspect we can put this down to the fact it's based on source material, namely The Cabin at the End of the World by Paul Trembley.
I wanted to see what I could talk about without spoiling the film at all. The synopsis is fairly vague, but intriguing. Then I rewatched the trailer, and from that, I could probably talk about the majority of this hour and forty minute film. The latter basically telling everything makes me wonder how it wasn't spoiled for me going in.
Knock at the Cabin boils down to a look at personal faith in the face of terror, for those on both sides of the incident.
While the majority of the story is set in the isolated cabin, we're shown flashbacks to Eric and Andrew's life. Heartbreak, trauma, joy, vengeance, it has been filled with so much, and that being peppered into the main story really helps to shape how we see their separate personalities and reactions.
The acting is an interesting one. The nature of the situation means that everyone is feeling a massive cycle of emotions... and somehow that works.
The group dynamic of Eric, Andrew and Wen was incredible, with Jonathan Groff and Kristen Cui being the standouts. I don't know that I would have been on board with Ben Aldridge as Andrew if it hadn't been for the pairing with Groff.
Opposite them, we get an interesting mix of characters who are led by Leonard... I am so proud of Dave Bautista right now, this was an amazing performance. I love him doing comedy (My Spy is still probably my favourite), but this was a great change of pace, he channels the character's profession into the situation so well... 5 stars for Bautista, no notes.
The other three bring up the rear with some chaotic energy. I just cannot unsee Ron Weasley though. I know he's been in other things since then, but I haven't happened across any of them, and as such, he was entirely distracting. It wasn't a bad turn, but it did overwhelm Nikki Amuka-Bird and Abby Quinn's roles for me.
M. Night Shymalan does his cameo and throws in his usual colour references for the regular viewers. I won't go into that, as it definitely constitutes spoilers, but it might not be something that's common knowledge, so absolutely worth a Google afterwards.
IMDb lists Knock at the Cabin as horror, mystery and thriller. Thriller, check. Mystery, a stretch. Horror, in my opinion, completely inaccurate. Having "horror" over everything about this film put people off watching it, and that's a great shame.
I was left with one big thought after seeing this, and that's that somewhere, in a remote cabin, a group of people have been playing this game for the last 3 years.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2023/02/knock-at-cabin-movie-review.html
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Every Fifteen Minutes in Books
Feb 1, 2018
Dr. Eric Parrish is a busy psychiatrist juggling his work as Chief at a hospital unit, as well as his own private practice. He is also reeling from his recent separation from his wife and the subsequent time he must spend away from his daughter, Hannah, who is only seven-years-old. One day, Eric is called to treat an elderly woman who is dying from cancer, but it quickly becomes clear the real patient is her grandson Max, who, at 17, is having difficulty dealing with his grandmother's impending death. Eric quickly discovers that Max is depressed, struggling with OCD, and having violent thoughts about a girl he knows from his job. However, as Eric treats Max, he suddenly finds his own life breaking apart around him. There is a murder, a violent incident, problems with his wife and daughter, issues at work, and much more.
I never really got "into" this book. To me, Eric is not a likeable character. Throughout the course of the novel he seems to make a remarkable number of questionable decisions, even if his life is somewhat spiraling out of control. For instance, as he goes through the divorce with Caitlin, Eric is constantly lamenting about Hannah and the effects of the divorce on her. So much so that he comes by the house unasked, calls his wife and daughter at all hours, completely ignores the advice of his lawyer, etc. He seems to lack knowledge of any basic divorce or legal protocol - not to mention common sense.
The lack of common sense prevails throughout the book. So much of the plot is supposedly driven by what Eric knows about Max, this teenage kid he meets at the hospital, but really they have two sessions together before things go awry. It seems insane that he would have learned so much about his patient in this time. So much of the plot just seemed implausible and annoying. We hear constant talk about Eric's past anxiety and how he overcame it. OK - so what?
Overall, I just found myself irritated by Eric and annoyed by his decisions. Parts of the book seem completely improbable and the plot is so thinly constructed that once you figure out how everything comes together, it seems barely possible. Then Scottoline throws in another twist that seems completely unnecessary. Overall, rather disappointing read.
I never really got "into" this book. To me, Eric is not a likeable character. Throughout the course of the novel he seems to make a remarkable number of questionable decisions, even if his life is somewhat spiraling out of control. For instance, as he goes through the divorce with Caitlin, Eric is constantly lamenting about Hannah and the effects of the divorce on her. So much so that he comes by the house unasked, calls his wife and daughter at all hours, completely ignores the advice of his lawyer, etc. He seems to lack knowledge of any basic divorce or legal protocol - not to mention common sense.
The lack of common sense prevails throughout the book. So much of the plot is supposedly driven by what Eric knows about Max, this teenage kid he meets at the hospital, but really they have two sessions together before things go awry. It seems insane that he would have learned so much about his patient in this time. So much of the plot just seemed implausible and annoying. We hear constant talk about Eric's past anxiety and how he overcame it. OK - so what?
Overall, I just found myself irritated by Eric and annoyed by his decisions. Parts of the book seem completely improbable and the plot is so thinly constructed that once you figure out how everything comes together, it seems barely possible. Then Scottoline throws in another twist that seems completely unnecessary. Overall, rather disappointing read.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Allegiant (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The third film in the popular “Divergent” series is here and will follow the pattern of recent book based films of splitting the finale into two films. In “The Divergent Series: Allegiant Part 1”, we catch up with Tris (Shailene Woodley), and Four (Theo James), shortly after the events of the previous film.
The wall has been opened and residents seek to leave the city and see what lies beyond. This is cut short when a power grab arises as Four’s mother is putting people on trial for supporting the last regime and executions or a common place as mob mentality has arisen.
Risking it all, Tris, Four, and a few companions make a daring brake and discover a wasteland beyond the wall before being taken in by a seemingly ideal community under the leadership of David (Jeff Daniels). It is learned that via sophisticated technology, they have watched Tris and the others as well as their society for ages as they were conducting a social experiment to undo evils of the previous world which lead to war.
Tris is highly prized as she is seen as genetically pure and David hopes to find out why and how so it can be replicated for the betterment of humanity. Naturally things are not always as they appear and before long, Tris, Four, and the others are forced to pick sides especially with a civil war brewing back at home.
The movie has some decent visuals but relies on the characters to carry the film. In many ways this is the downfall of the film as Woodley simply does not emote and James is very one-dimensional. Only Miles Teller and Jeff Daniels show any real or sustained emotion throughout the film.
There is also the matter of plot holes such as a society which amazing surveillance technology but they could not see a fairly obvious and common effort used during the finale of the film.
The movie is setting up the finale which hopefully will bring some advancement and satisfying closure to the series and characters. For now the film is a flawed but at times entertaining entry which should keep fans happy until the final film arrives.
http://sknr.net/2016/03/18/divergent-series-allegiant-part-1/
The wall has been opened and residents seek to leave the city and see what lies beyond. This is cut short when a power grab arises as Four’s mother is putting people on trial for supporting the last regime and executions or a common place as mob mentality has arisen.
Risking it all, Tris, Four, and a few companions make a daring brake and discover a wasteland beyond the wall before being taken in by a seemingly ideal community under the leadership of David (Jeff Daniels). It is learned that via sophisticated technology, they have watched Tris and the others as well as their society for ages as they were conducting a social experiment to undo evils of the previous world which lead to war.
Tris is highly prized as she is seen as genetically pure and David hopes to find out why and how so it can be replicated for the betterment of humanity. Naturally things are not always as they appear and before long, Tris, Four, and the others are forced to pick sides especially with a civil war brewing back at home.
The movie has some decent visuals but relies on the characters to carry the film. In many ways this is the downfall of the film as Woodley simply does not emote and James is very one-dimensional. Only Miles Teller and Jeff Daniels show any real or sustained emotion throughout the film.
There is also the matter of plot holes such as a society which amazing surveillance technology but they could not see a fairly obvious and common effort used during the finale of the film.
The movie is setting up the finale which hopefully will bring some advancement and satisfying closure to the series and characters. For now the film is a flawed but at times entertaining entry which should keep fans happy until the final film arrives.
http://sknr.net/2016/03/18/divergent-series-allegiant-part-1/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated About a Girl (Metamorphoses, #3) in Books
Feb 13, 2018
This book tells the story of Tally, who at age 18, seems confident that her life will turn out just as she had planned - summer spent with her best friend, Shane; head to college; become an astronomer... But when Tally starts wondering about her past, she finds herself on a quest to learn more about mother and father, and her neatly ordered life is quickly turned upside down.
This is third book in the Metamorphoses trilogy - Tally, we learn, is the daughter of Aurora, whom Aurora left on her best friend's (now termed "Aunt Beast") doorstep to raise, along with Aunt Beast's best friend, Raoul and his husband, Henri. (All characters easily recognizable if you've read the first two books.)
Needless to say, this is an interesting book. I actually really liked Tally. She's different from Aurora and Maia and even Cass. Tally finds relief in the order of planets and stars. She is a good kid, overall, with a pretty common upbringing, despite the fact it was by her "Aunt" and her friends.
However, when Tally is shown a picture of Jack (and Aurora) and sent off to the West Coast by the shadowy Mr. M - whom she just knows as her friendly neighbor - everything changes. She finds herself sucked into the strangeness of the town where Jack lives, where she can't remember things and time just slips away. As always, the "weirdness" in McCarry's writing comes out, and I'm always not 100% sure I'm following things correctly. I won't spoil the book, but I can point out that Tally meets Maddy there, for whom she falls for deeply.
I probably liked this book the best of the three - I rooted for Tally, and I loved that this book featured a transgender character (Tally's friend Shane) and a lesbian relationship (between Tally and Maddy). Great to see that thrown into a YA book without it truly being the focus of anything. As always, the mystical side of McCarry's novel threw me a bit, but I found it less disconcerting in this one than the previous two, for some reason. While I would have loved more resolution to the story of everyone, this book did seem a fairly fitting bookend to the tales McCarry has woven for these characters.
(Note: I received an ARC of this book from Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.)
This is third book in the Metamorphoses trilogy - Tally, we learn, is the daughter of Aurora, whom Aurora left on her best friend's (now termed "Aunt Beast") doorstep to raise, along with Aunt Beast's best friend, Raoul and his husband, Henri. (All characters easily recognizable if you've read the first two books.)
Needless to say, this is an interesting book. I actually really liked Tally. She's different from Aurora and Maia and even Cass. Tally finds relief in the order of planets and stars. She is a good kid, overall, with a pretty common upbringing, despite the fact it was by her "Aunt" and her friends.
However, when Tally is shown a picture of Jack (and Aurora) and sent off to the West Coast by the shadowy Mr. M - whom she just knows as her friendly neighbor - everything changes. She finds herself sucked into the strangeness of the town where Jack lives, where she can't remember things and time just slips away. As always, the "weirdness" in McCarry's writing comes out, and I'm always not 100% sure I'm following things correctly. I won't spoil the book, but I can point out that Tally meets Maddy there, for whom she falls for deeply.
I probably liked this book the best of the three - I rooted for Tally, and I loved that this book featured a transgender character (Tally's friend Shane) and a lesbian relationship (between Tally and Maddy). Great to see that thrown into a YA book without it truly being the focus of anything. As always, the mystical side of McCarry's novel threw me a bit, but I found it less disconcerting in this one than the previous two, for some reason. While I would have loved more resolution to the story of everyone, this book did seem a fairly fitting bookend to the tales McCarry has woven for these characters.
(Note: I received an ARC of this book from Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Car Dogs (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
One of the things that universally connects us in this world is driving. Eventually, in life, the other factor involved is buying a vehicle. Depending on your experience, it can be nerve wracking, intensely crazy or enjoyable. Almost everyone has a story about the first car they purchased. For some it is the entire process, spotting THE car or coming up against the salespeople. This common thread allows us to identify with each other. With Car Dogs, you will find yourself immersed in the world of car sales.
Mark Chamberlain (Patrick J. Adams) is a sales manager at his father’s dealership. He is in line to get his own shop once he fulfills the quota assigned by his dad. We see Mark go through his day handling purchase issues, client issues and his salespeople in the bullpen. Christian (George Lopez, playing against type) is one of the top dogs at Chamberlain. He gets assigned a fresh rookie on the day that he is busting to make his numbers. Sharon (Nia Vardalos) Is the clever sales guru that is always in competition with Christian. She plays Sharon as a tough but smart sales rep with a warm likability. George Lopez and Nia Vardalos are both well known for comedic parts and they play against type with such care that their performances are refreshingly unexpected.
Patrick J. Adams evokes the stress and pressure that he slowly builds throughout the day, taking us with him as the clock counts down to the hour of reckoning that is the sales goal of 35 cars for the day. This number is enforced by Mark’s father Malcolm (Chris Mulkey) embodying the old school stereotype of a car dealer, pushing his son in a supremely passive-aggressive dance with his brown nosing sadist sidekick Mike (Josh Hopkins).
Filmed on location in Scottsdale, Arizona. Directed by Adam Collis, taking us on a road trip that has familiar sites and unexpected surprises. Mark Edward King’s script pulls the curtain back from a world we rarely see the inner workings and shows us that even car salesmen, although can be real jerks to get the sale, are also human.
Whether you have bought or sold a car. Shopped or searched for the right one, dealt with some B.S. artist or had a fantastic experience. This movie provides the viewer with moments at a dealership that are so familiar, yet gives us a look at how they function behind the sales desk.
Mark Chamberlain (Patrick J. Adams) is a sales manager at his father’s dealership. He is in line to get his own shop once he fulfills the quota assigned by his dad. We see Mark go through his day handling purchase issues, client issues and his salespeople in the bullpen. Christian (George Lopez, playing against type) is one of the top dogs at Chamberlain. He gets assigned a fresh rookie on the day that he is busting to make his numbers. Sharon (Nia Vardalos) Is the clever sales guru that is always in competition with Christian. She plays Sharon as a tough but smart sales rep with a warm likability. George Lopez and Nia Vardalos are both well known for comedic parts and they play against type with such care that their performances are refreshingly unexpected.
Patrick J. Adams evokes the stress and pressure that he slowly builds throughout the day, taking us with him as the clock counts down to the hour of reckoning that is the sales goal of 35 cars for the day. This number is enforced by Mark’s father Malcolm (Chris Mulkey) embodying the old school stereotype of a car dealer, pushing his son in a supremely passive-aggressive dance with his brown nosing sadist sidekick Mike (Josh Hopkins).
Filmed on location in Scottsdale, Arizona. Directed by Adam Collis, taking us on a road trip that has familiar sites and unexpected surprises. Mark Edward King’s script pulls the curtain back from a world we rarely see the inner workings and shows us that even car salesmen, although can be real jerks to get the sale, are also human.
Whether you have bought or sold a car. Shopped or searched for the right one, dealt with some B.S. artist or had a fantastic experience. This movie provides the viewer with moments at a dealership that are so familiar, yet gives us a look at how they function behind the sales desk.
Christ In Song
Music and Book
1.0
Rate It
App
We are pleased to present the Christ in Song hymn treasury. These hymns are hand-picked for their...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Queens Corgi (2019) in Movies
Jul 13, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Queens Corgi is an animated children's movie about Rex, the Queen's favourite who, after a disastrous visit from Donald Trump, is tricked into leaving the palace and winds up in the dog pound. This is a common formula in children’s movies both animated and live action and I'm sure most of us can guess what happens next, Rex tries to get back home and, on the way makes some friends and falls in love. So when my daughter wanted to see it I though I'd be in for a funny, possibly sad film. God I was wrong. There is so much wrong with this film and it all seems to go wrong from the scene where Donald Trump visits the Queen and I really wish I could say my problems were politically motivated but unfortunately the film was just that bad.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
The character of Trump was reduced to a stereotypical American tourist with Melania passing comments about the size of Donald’s (big) hands being one of the things that attracted her to him.
The problems really start when Melania and the Queen decided it will be a good idea to breed their respective corgis. Melania's Corgi, Mitzi, who is made up in heave eye shadow and lipstick is instantly judged and disliked by all the Queens corgis (both Male and female). Melania's Corgi then passes judgment on all the corgis until she comes to Rex who she decided she wants. The two dogs are then left in a room together after being told by Trump to grab him by the pups.
Now I just want to make the following clear:
1) I've seen plenty of movies where the (normally timid/nerdy) male character is hit on by the strong scary bully female and this normally for comedy value. Although these scenes could be seen as problematic they are normally played for laughs.
2) I understand that dog breeders do choose dogs and put them together to mate. However, as the animals in this film are given human personality's the situation is different.
So when the two dogs are left in the room we are treated to long scene where Mitzi tries to get Rex to mate with her, because Rex wants none of it Mitzi chases him around the room, grabs him, stops him from leaving and generally won’t take no for an answer. This is not done playfully.
Later in the film, Rex is in a dog pound, one of his cell mates starts listing the rules of the pound, rule one, there is no fight club. Now, this may have been ok if it was a one time throw away line, kids films often have little jokes for adults. However, it's not a throw away line, it's used more than once, including the first time the dogs are at a fight club. Yes, the top dog, called Butch, keeps order by making any dog he doesn't like fight. We see a dog carried off on stretcher, Rex is almost thrown into a fire and is only saved when Butch is knock out in one punch which also knocks out half his teeth.
Of course Rex and his new friends make it back to the palace and beat the main villain who is sent off with Trump and Mitzi. Remember non of the palace dogs liked Mitzi and she has all already said she doesn't understand the word no so this has implications for Charlie’s futures. It's ok though because he's the bad guy (not).
So we have a children's film with dog fights, attempted rape, implied rape, judging on appearance and a dull story, that seem find the line between children’s jokes and the adult ones the only reason I'm giving this one star is because it avoids getting political with Trump.
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Dangerous Boy in Books
Nov 6, 2017
Filled with cliches, but a quick read
I would call this a guilty pleasure book. Why? Because it’s not the most greatest read out there but you read it anyway because something about it just draws you to continue reading. Whether it be characters, or the cheesy plot albeit ridiculous as it may be.
This is supposed to be a modern day retelling of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. I see some similarities although the way it’s explained (the soul thing) is a bit of a stretch. At least with Jekyll/Hyde he had something concrete and explanatory (eg; the serum that gets him to change personalities).
The book itself is filled with oodles of cliches so it’s not for everyone. It may induce eye rolls and may have some readers frustrated and quit reading altogether. Why did I keep reading? It’s a very simple plot and there’s not much when it comes to twists and turns, there’s a bit of a creepy and chilly factor which was actually pretty well done and I stuck with it. Despite the plot being as it is, the writing was pretty good and I enjoyed it.
A couple of things however. I’m not sure what Madison really had to do with the story. She’s just your average mean girl but doesn’t really add to the plot (except for being a previous romance. Woopie) so to me, this was just unnecessary filler moments in the novel.
Harper isn’t really that likable and there were moments where she goes off the deep end into the realm of stupidity. I do admit though, she’s got good chemistry with Logan and the writing that conveys their feelings towards each other is well done. Logan seems to be a great boyfriend if it wasn’t for that fatal flaw. Harper does tend to have some annoying qualities to herself - being a forgiving doormat for one, and lacking common sense in particular stages of the story (seriously? You’re going to break into a house and you say: “hello?” can we say first one to die in a horror movie here?)
Although this book has quite a few flaws, I couldn’t help but enjoy reading it. It’s a very quick read and it’s like you’re watching a B movie but you enjoyed it despite the many cliches and things you normally wouldn’t watch. There’s just something about it that makes you want to continue reading it. I’m not going to recommend this one, but if you’re up for a quick read to get back into the reading groove, why not?
This is supposed to be a modern day retelling of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. I see some similarities although the way it’s explained (the soul thing) is a bit of a stretch. At least with Jekyll/Hyde he had something concrete and explanatory (eg; the serum that gets him to change personalities).
The book itself is filled with oodles of cliches so it’s not for everyone. It may induce eye rolls and may have some readers frustrated and quit reading altogether. Why did I keep reading? It’s a very simple plot and there’s not much when it comes to twists and turns, there’s a bit of a creepy and chilly factor which was actually pretty well done and I stuck with it. Despite the plot being as it is, the writing was pretty good and I enjoyed it.
A couple of things however. I’m not sure what Madison really had to do with the story. She’s just your average mean girl but doesn’t really add to the plot (except for being a previous romance. Woopie) so to me, this was just unnecessary filler moments in the novel.
Harper isn’t really that likable and there were moments where she goes off the deep end into the realm of stupidity. I do admit though, she’s got good chemistry with Logan and the writing that conveys their feelings towards each other is well done. Logan seems to be a great boyfriend if it wasn’t for that fatal flaw. Harper does tend to have some annoying qualities to herself - being a forgiving doormat for one, and lacking common sense in particular stages of the story (seriously? You’re going to break into a house and you say: “hello?” can we say first one to die in a horror movie here?)
Although this book has quite a few flaws, I couldn’t help but enjoy reading it. It’s a very quick read and it’s like you’re watching a B movie but you enjoyed it despite the many cliches and things you normally wouldn’t watch. There’s just something about it that makes you want to continue reading it. I’m not going to recommend this one, but if you’re up for a quick read to get back into the reading groove, why not?
A Bibliophagist (113 KP) rated Wuthering Heights in Books
Feb 12, 2020
Stands up (2 more)
Enthralling
Unique
Dislikable characters (1 more)
Difficult accents without translations
I will do my best to review this, however, I didn't heed the intro, this tour de force really does leave you as quickly as it comes, and reading another book before reviewing this one was a mistake.
In reading reviews prior to reading this book, I learned three major things; 1, people either love or hate this book, 2. I had no idea what I was actually in for, and 3. this may have not been the romantic pick for February I was expecting it to be.
So yes, PSA for anyone out there considering going into this thinking it's a romance. It is NOT. There are love stories in this, absolutely, powerful love stories that made me read quotes to my boyfriend with snarky statements like "if you don't say this at my funeral, did you ever really love me?". But it is NOT a romance. If anything this has more in common with "The Count of Monte Cristo" than it does "Pride and Prejudice". Honestly, the only thing it has in common with other, romantic books of this time, is the time period. But beware, no balls and high society and Mr. Darcy's await you in this novel. I feel a number of the reviews decrying the book, calling the characters "monstrous" both were the orchestrators of their own disappointment by assuming it to be like an Austin, and really need to look in the mirror and reflect on if they are really as perfect as they think they are. Especially if they were in the circumstances that surround this tale.
I find that Heathcliff himself addresses this mistake many readers had going into this book.
"picturing in me a hero of romance, and expecting unlimited indulgences from my chivalrous devotion. I can hardly regard her in the light of a rational creature, so obstinately has she persisted in forming a fabulous notion of my character and actin gon false impressions she cherished."
SO many readers went into this expecting Heathcliff to be some misunderstood brute or one harsh but salvaged by the purity of his love of Catherine. But this isn't the case.
Wuthering Heights tells the story of (I guess technically 3) but really 2 generations of families. Living in the Yorkshire Moors, isolated from high society. We have the Liptons, primmer and properer and more in touch with society, and the Earnshaws which become a little rough around the edges in their isolation and loss. Papa Earnshaw has two children, Catherine and Hindley, and adopts a small boy of unknown heritage but is implied to be Romani or of mixed race (sorry Tom Hardy and nearly every portrayal of Heathcliff), that he names, simply, Heathcliff. He loves Heathcliff, and dotes on him greatly, much to the chagrin of Hindly who grows to resent Heathcliff, treating him terribly until Hindly leaves for school. Catherine and Heathcliff become great playmates, their care is given primarily to a maid scarcely older than them, as Papa Earnshaw is a single daddy. They are wild things, as children I would assume would be, in such isolation as the Yorkshire Moors in a time before the creature comforts and entertainment we have. They grow very close, obsessively close. Upon Papa Earnshaw's death, Hindley returns (at around the age of 23) to run the household, and take over the care of these two youngsters, one of which, he hates. So, Cinderella-style, Heathcliff gets treated worse and worse and treated like a servant rather than the adoptive child that Papa Earnshaw loved so dearly. Suddenly Heathcliff is nothing, treated terribly, and has the most important thing in his life banned from him, Catherine. Meanwhile, the Liptons also have two children, not wild, but spoilt in their own ways, Edgar and Isabella, close in age to Heathcliff and Catherine. When H and C run off on a camping adventure and find themselves at the Lipton's house, Catherine is injured and stays with the Liptons, in their higher society for 5 weeks. Leaving Heathcliff to the abuse of her brother and further isolation. She returns much more a lady and with her connection to Heathcliff slightly burned. In an attempt to protect Heathcliff, and because Heathcliff is now no more than a servant and not an option to marry, Catherine intends to marry Edgar. Causing our resident bad boy to run off for a number of years. Only to return a proper, but still broody gentleman, and confuse Catherine's affection much to the displeasure of Edgar.
Now, this is where a number of shows and movies end things. With a focus on Catherine and Heathcliff's whirlwind romance, obsession. It has some of the most to the point and beautiful lines regarding love, not all flowery, not "I love you most ardently" but rather cries of "I am Heathcliff" by Catherine. Absolutely heart-rending, even though I didn't like Catherine. But this is not where the book ends. The book goes on to follow Heathcliff's obsession with revenge, with his treatment as a child, his rage against Hindley, and against losing Catherine to Edgar. He spends years slowly ruining everyone's lives. Not that you could really ruin Hindley's life, he was a mean drunk. But he even goes as far as to meddle with the next generation, Hindley's son Hareton is raised terribly and is a bit of a wild thing (those his redemption and love story is quite beautiful), Catherine's daughter Cathy and Heathcliff's son Lipton are whisked up into a big scheme by Heathcliff to take everything. Heathcliff even marry's out of pure spite.
Love does not redeem this man, he's barely an antihero without his youth story. He is angry and passionate and obsessed. Which for the first half of the book I didn't fault him for, but he does do some damnable things in the second half that you cannot argue away. No matter how romantic and beautiful and heartrending his lamentations can be. I was quite the character arc, quite the tale of revenge and loss. He was unredeemable because of his big sprawling schemes and harsh intentions. Catherine for me was unredeemable because she was an obnoxious, selfish thing, that honestly if Heathcliff had stopped thinking about two minutes would have found a better woman in every town. She whined and treated Edgar (who was honestly super sweet) so terribly, she had an anger problem and would work herself up until she was sick. But it is in this imperfection that I fell in love more with the book. Here is something unique and real, this is no Elizabeth Bennett. The isolation and hermetic lifestyle created very different characters than what we see in Jane Austin or even in Emily's sister's novel.
It's no wonder this book was harshly critiqued upon release, here is a woman, writing a revenge story, with love stories in it. That based on the biographical intro had some parallels to her own life. She lived an isolated existence, surrounded by the death of the majority of her family young. She was in her late 20s when she wrote this and died a year after publication. She made humans of monsters and monsters of humans and wrote something unexpected and truly unique.
It's hard for me to explain, amongst the harshness and bleakness of this novel, why I loved it so much. But I did, I loved every bit. The anger, the passion, the love, the scheming, I loved it all.
I also feel it's important to note that this whole story is told by a maid to a new tenant. So the narrator is unreliable. Were these people truly this way? Or is it clouded by this maid's opinions of them? How much is omitted due to the maid not being privy to an event?
Truly a fantastic read, that punched me in my chest and gut, grabbed and twisted my insides and refuses to let go. I would argue it's a cult classic rather than a classic. So please, shed all preconceived notions of what this book is, shake that Austin out of your mind and read this tale of obsession and revenge. It's well worth it.
In reading reviews prior to reading this book, I learned three major things; 1, people either love or hate this book, 2. I had no idea what I was actually in for, and 3. this may have not been the romantic pick for February I was expecting it to be.
So yes, PSA for anyone out there considering going into this thinking it's a romance. It is NOT. There are love stories in this, absolutely, powerful love stories that made me read quotes to my boyfriend with snarky statements like "if you don't say this at my funeral, did you ever really love me?". But it is NOT a romance. If anything this has more in common with "The Count of Monte Cristo" than it does "Pride and Prejudice". Honestly, the only thing it has in common with other, romantic books of this time, is the time period. But beware, no balls and high society and Mr. Darcy's await you in this novel. I feel a number of the reviews decrying the book, calling the characters "monstrous" both were the orchestrators of their own disappointment by assuming it to be like an Austin, and really need to look in the mirror and reflect on if they are really as perfect as they think they are. Especially if they were in the circumstances that surround this tale.
I find that Heathcliff himself addresses this mistake many readers had going into this book.
"picturing in me a hero of romance, and expecting unlimited indulgences from my chivalrous devotion. I can hardly regard her in the light of a rational creature, so obstinately has she persisted in forming a fabulous notion of my character and actin gon false impressions she cherished."
SO many readers went into this expecting Heathcliff to be some misunderstood brute or one harsh but salvaged by the purity of his love of Catherine. But this isn't the case.
Wuthering Heights tells the story of (I guess technically 3) but really 2 generations of families. Living in the Yorkshire Moors, isolated from high society. We have the Liptons, primmer and properer and more in touch with society, and the Earnshaws which become a little rough around the edges in their isolation and loss. Papa Earnshaw has two children, Catherine and Hindley, and adopts a small boy of unknown heritage but is implied to be Romani or of mixed race (sorry Tom Hardy and nearly every portrayal of Heathcliff), that he names, simply, Heathcliff. He loves Heathcliff, and dotes on him greatly, much to the chagrin of Hindly who grows to resent Heathcliff, treating him terribly until Hindly leaves for school. Catherine and Heathcliff become great playmates, their care is given primarily to a maid scarcely older than them, as Papa Earnshaw is a single daddy. They are wild things, as children I would assume would be, in such isolation as the Yorkshire Moors in a time before the creature comforts and entertainment we have. They grow very close, obsessively close. Upon Papa Earnshaw's death, Hindley returns (at around the age of 23) to run the household, and take over the care of these two youngsters, one of which, he hates. So, Cinderella-style, Heathcliff gets treated worse and worse and treated like a servant rather than the adoptive child that Papa Earnshaw loved so dearly. Suddenly Heathcliff is nothing, treated terribly, and has the most important thing in his life banned from him, Catherine. Meanwhile, the Liptons also have two children, not wild, but spoilt in their own ways, Edgar and Isabella, close in age to Heathcliff and Catherine. When H and C run off on a camping adventure and find themselves at the Lipton's house, Catherine is injured and stays with the Liptons, in their higher society for 5 weeks. Leaving Heathcliff to the abuse of her brother and further isolation. She returns much more a lady and with her connection to Heathcliff slightly burned. In an attempt to protect Heathcliff, and because Heathcliff is now no more than a servant and not an option to marry, Catherine intends to marry Edgar. Causing our resident bad boy to run off for a number of years. Only to return a proper, but still broody gentleman, and confuse Catherine's affection much to the displeasure of Edgar.
Now, this is where a number of shows and movies end things. With a focus on Catherine and Heathcliff's whirlwind romance, obsession. It has some of the most to the point and beautiful lines regarding love, not all flowery, not "I love you most ardently" but rather cries of "I am Heathcliff" by Catherine. Absolutely heart-rending, even though I didn't like Catherine. But this is not where the book ends. The book goes on to follow Heathcliff's obsession with revenge, with his treatment as a child, his rage against Hindley, and against losing Catherine to Edgar. He spends years slowly ruining everyone's lives. Not that you could really ruin Hindley's life, he was a mean drunk. But he even goes as far as to meddle with the next generation, Hindley's son Hareton is raised terribly and is a bit of a wild thing (those his redemption and love story is quite beautiful), Catherine's daughter Cathy and Heathcliff's son Lipton are whisked up into a big scheme by Heathcliff to take everything. Heathcliff even marry's out of pure spite.
Love does not redeem this man, he's barely an antihero without his youth story. He is angry and passionate and obsessed. Which for the first half of the book I didn't fault him for, but he does do some damnable things in the second half that you cannot argue away. No matter how romantic and beautiful and heartrending his lamentations can be. I was quite the character arc, quite the tale of revenge and loss. He was unredeemable because of his big sprawling schemes and harsh intentions. Catherine for me was unredeemable because she was an obnoxious, selfish thing, that honestly if Heathcliff had stopped thinking about two minutes would have found a better woman in every town. She whined and treated Edgar (who was honestly super sweet) so terribly, she had an anger problem and would work herself up until she was sick. But it is in this imperfection that I fell in love more with the book. Here is something unique and real, this is no Elizabeth Bennett. The isolation and hermetic lifestyle created very different characters than what we see in Jane Austin or even in Emily's sister's novel.
It's no wonder this book was harshly critiqued upon release, here is a woman, writing a revenge story, with love stories in it. That based on the biographical intro had some parallels to her own life. She lived an isolated existence, surrounded by the death of the majority of her family young. She was in her late 20s when she wrote this and died a year after publication. She made humans of monsters and monsters of humans and wrote something unexpected and truly unique.
It's hard for me to explain, amongst the harshness and bleakness of this novel, why I loved it so much. But I did, I loved every bit. The anger, the passion, the love, the scheming, I loved it all.
I also feel it's important to note that this whole story is told by a maid to a new tenant. So the narrator is unreliable. Were these people truly this way? Or is it clouded by this maid's opinions of them? How much is omitted due to the maid not being privy to an event?
Truly a fantastic read, that punched me in my chest and gut, grabbed and twisted my insides and refuses to let go. I would argue it's a cult classic rather than a classic. So please, shed all preconceived notions of what this book is, shake that Austin out of your mind and read this tale of obsession and revenge. It's well worth it.