Search
Merissa (11805 KP) rated Hope's Deceit (The Fated #2) in Books
Apr 25, 2023
The dude is back! Morpheus reigns supreme with his sarcasm and cocky attitude, although you do also see a softer side to him occasionally. As for the rest of the characters, they continue to change and grow with each situation, divulging their secrets and showing strength where none was expected.
Trinity still has her hands full as she tries to learn about her powers and prepares for her eighteenth birthday which is rapidly approaching. Things are not all sunshine and roses with her and Blain - some of which is caused by miscommunication, some by age (she is only 17 after all) and some by circumstances. Every time they were together, my heart was in my mouth! I really want them to be together, but can also understand how the others say that Blain makes her weak. I really hope that she will start to show her true strength now, she has reason enough - and that is all I will say so that I don't give out any spoilers.
The one character I didn't get on with as much in this book is Trinity's dad. He seemed to have whiplash with his emotions and I just couldn't keep up. Still, this is a small thing and also understandable as a father realises he has to let his daughter grow up, even if these circumstances are slightly unusual! 😉
Well-written, fast-paced and chock full of emotion, you will be held prisoner by this book, turning the pages as you immerse yourself within the storyline. With no spelling or grammatical errors that I found, this was an amazing second book and I am now on tenterhooks whilst I wait for the third. If you like Urban Fantasy with a bit of Greek Mythology thrown in, then I can highly recommend this book and the first one in the series. Absolutely fantastic.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Nov 13, 2015
Trinity still has her hands full as she tries to learn about her powers and prepares for her eighteenth birthday which is rapidly approaching. Things are not all sunshine and roses with her and Blain - some of which is caused by miscommunication, some by age (she is only 17 after all) and some by circumstances. Every time they were together, my heart was in my mouth! I really want them to be together, but can also understand how the others say that Blain makes her weak. I really hope that she will start to show her true strength now, she has reason enough - and that is all I will say so that I don't give out any spoilers.
The one character I didn't get on with as much in this book is Trinity's dad. He seemed to have whiplash with his emotions and I just couldn't keep up. Still, this is a small thing and also understandable as a father realises he has to let his daughter grow up, even if these circumstances are slightly unusual! 😉
Well-written, fast-paced and chock full of emotion, you will be held prisoner by this book, turning the pages as you immerse yourself within the storyline. With no spelling or grammatical errors that I found, this was an amazing second book and I am now on tenterhooks whilst I wait for the third. If you like Urban Fantasy with a bit of Greek Mythology thrown in, then I can highly recommend this book and the first one in the series. Absolutely fantastic.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and my comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Nov 13, 2015
Chloë McTaggart (48 KP) rated The Circle in Books
Oct 19, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Circle is Eggers 10th fictional work and through dystopian world building, goes to highlight some of the key modern day issues - specifically those surrounding technology and social media. Unlike other dystopian novels Eggers sets about showing the ‘positive’ side of what could be, ficionally speaking, as opposed to novels such as The Handmaids Tale and Divergence and such books that set themselves in a destroyed-dystopia.
Despite being set in a dystopian world full of technology we currently only see on the Syfy channel, it somehow clings to our ideas of reality and what is possible. By doing this, it soon offers a dangerous look at what technology may become as it highlights the impact it already has on our lives. The protagonist, Mae, lands a job at a technology company named “The Circle” which is comparable to brands and companies such as Apple, Google and Samsung. Eggers takes the ideas of the main technological companies of the twenty first century and rolls them into one; producing an unstoppable powerhouse of sharing, transparency and sociability overseen by a trinity of male bosses that we never really connect to. While Eggers sets the scene, and development of society, through his use of The Circle as an interdimensional power house, he fails to develop a relatable character in his protagonist.
From the start of the book the protagonist, Mae, comes across as weak and unmotivated with some parts of the novel serving almost as a pity party for her. If she’s not complaining, she’s raving about ex-boyfriends or how hard a life she has as though she’s the only one in the world that matters - though I suppose to Eggers she is the most important. Through this self pity, the reader struggles to find a point of contact with Mae; she offers no escape from the real world and instead becomes a motivation to stop reading the novel.
However, despite the lack of character development, the novel does raise relevant questions concerning technology and social media. In the film adaptation, it serves to show us just how much of an impact we can have on others without realising it; and how even when we do realise it the popularity or reward is too enticing to stop.
Despite being set in a dystopian world full of technology we currently only see on the Syfy channel, it somehow clings to our ideas of reality and what is possible. By doing this, it soon offers a dangerous look at what technology may become as it highlights the impact it already has on our lives. The protagonist, Mae, lands a job at a technology company named “The Circle” which is comparable to brands and companies such as Apple, Google and Samsung. Eggers takes the ideas of the main technological companies of the twenty first century and rolls them into one; producing an unstoppable powerhouse of sharing, transparency and sociability overseen by a trinity of male bosses that we never really connect to. While Eggers sets the scene, and development of society, through his use of The Circle as an interdimensional power house, he fails to develop a relatable character in his protagonist.
From the start of the book the protagonist, Mae, comes across as weak and unmotivated with some parts of the novel serving almost as a pity party for her. If she’s not complaining, she’s raving about ex-boyfriends or how hard a life she has as though she’s the only one in the world that matters - though I suppose to Eggers she is the most important. Through this self pity, the reader struggles to find a point of contact with Mae; she offers no escape from the real world and instead becomes a motivation to stop reading the novel.
However, despite the lack of character development, the novel does raise relevant questions concerning technology and social media. In the film adaptation, it serves to show us just how much of an impact we can have on others without realising it; and how even when we do realise it the popularity or reward is too enticing to stop.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated The Matrix Resurrections (2021) in Movies
Dec 25, 2021 (Updated Dec 30, 2021)
Before watching The Matrix Resurrections, I was pretty much in the mindset that it didn't need to exist. The finished product did nothing to change my mind, however, it was entertaining enough that I genuinely enjoyed being back in this universe for another spin.
The whole narrative kind of felt inconsequential. Whereas in the original trilogy, Neo was woken up to save humanity. This time round, he's woken up for reasons that aren't made clear whatsoever, or at least, if they were then I completely missed them. By the time the story concludes, I found myself thinking "that was cool, but did anything actually happen?"
Like so many franchises these days, Resurrections leans heavily into nostalgia territory. I'm indifferent to this in all honesty. I see why some take issue with it, but I don't hate it. It doesn't feel too over the top, but the movie tries to get away with it by including a lot of meta dialogue about sequels and reboots. Some if it lands, some of it is horrifically on the nose. All of this combined really gives the impression that Resurrections purely exists to make money. The original sequels are riddled with issues, but at least it felt like a story was being told.
All of this being said, I still had a damn good time. It's a pleasure to see Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss back together, and it successfully hammers home that The Matrix was always centered around the love between Neo and Trinity. The supporting cast ain't too shabby either. Jessica Henwick is great, as is Yahya Abdul-Mateen and Neil Patrick Harris. The action scenes don't quite reach iconic status, but are still a blast to watch unfold, and the whole thing is visually pleasing, as is expected.
Resurrections is ultimately a mixed bag. There's plenty of material to enjoy, but there's equally a whole bunch of ideas that aren't executed particularly well. Unfortunately for any films that followed, the original movie is pretty much untouchable, but to its credit, Resurrections doesn't flinch in its commitment to remain part of a layered sci-fi saga, despite its blockbuster status, and for that, I can respect what Lana Wachowski has cooked up, even if it feels a little shallow at times.
The whole narrative kind of felt inconsequential. Whereas in the original trilogy, Neo was woken up to save humanity. This time round, he's woken up for reasons that aren't made clear whatsoever, or at least, if they were then I completely missed them. By the time the story concludes, I found myself thinking "that was cool, but did anything actually happen?"
Like so many franchises these days, Resurrections leans heavily into nostalgia territory. I'm indifferent to this in all honesty. I see why some take issue with it, but I don't hate it. It doesn't feel too over the top, but the movie tries to get away with it by including a lot of meta dialogue about sequels and reboots. Some if it lands, some of it is horrifically on the nose. All of this combined really gives the impression that Resurrections purely exists to make money. The original sequels are riddled with issues, but at least it felt like a story was being told.
All of this being said, I still had a damn good time. It's a pleasure to see Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss back together, and it successfully hammers home that The Matrix was always centered around the love between Neo and Trinity. The supporting cast ain't too shabby either. Jessica Henwick is great, as is Yahya Abdul-Mateen and Neil Patrick Harris. The action scenes don't quite reach iconic status, but are still a blast to watch unfold, and the whole thing is visually pleasing, as is expected.
Resurrections is ultimately a mixed bag. There's plenty of material to enjoy, but there's equally a whole bunch of ideas that aren't executed particularly well. Unfortunately for any films that followed, the original movie is pretty much untouchable, but to its credit, Resurrections doesn't flinch in its commitment to remain part of a layered sci-fi saga, despite its blockbuster status, and for that, I can respect what Lana Wachowski has cooked up, even if it feels a little shallow at times.
David McK (3248 KP) rated The Batman (2022) in Movies
Apr 3, 2022 (Updated Oct 23, 2022)
"I am vengeance!"
Batman.
First debuting in DC Comics, 1939, and now one of the most popular superheroes of all, amongst the 'holy trinity' of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman
It's often forgotten and/or overlooked in his numerous movies to date that those initials (DC) actually stand for Detective Comics, with Batman - on the pages - sometimes also known as The Worlds Greatest Detective.
This is the first of his movies that I can think of where that aspect of his character is portrayed - sure, there hints of it in 1989s Batman, but only hints. Here it's full force, front and centre, with Batman - only his second year as a Vigilante - working alongside Jim Gordon and a proto-Catwoman to track down and apprehend the serial killer known only as The Riddler, who is leaving clues behind at all his kills.
A very different portrayal of that character than Jim Carrey's version in 'Batman Forever'.
This is also a very long film - nearly 3 hours - that, I felt, is in danger of outstaying it's welcome, with very little in the way of superheroics. More of a police whodunnit with costumed characters, maybe. There's also a perfect 'cutting-off' point at just after the third act, with - I guess? - a studio mandate for the fourth act tacked on, which is probably more along the lines of what to expect from a Batman movie.
As for Robert Pattinson as The Caped Crusader? I kept expecting him to sparkle. Unfair, I know (to type cast him as the vampire from Twilight), but I do think he may have swung too far in the other direction when portraying Bruce Wayne; here very much an emo goth kid rather than the swaggering heir to the fortune he is oft shown as. In fact, there's very little of Bruce on display: he spends most of his time, in costume, as Batman. This was a conscious decision, or so I have heard, to show how Bruce is in danger of losing himself to that persona. I'm also struggling to think of a single key 'stand-out' moment in line with 'Batman Begins' rescuing Rachel or 'The Dark Knight' "he's the Hero we need ..." bit: the Penguin car chase, perhaps?
So, yeah, a very different cinematic take on The Dark Knight, indeed.
First debuting in DC Comics, 1939, and now one of the most popular superheroes of all, amongst the 'holy trinity' of Superman, Wonder Woman and Batman
It's often forgotten and/or overlooked in his numerous movies to date that those initials (DC) actually stand for Detective Comics, with Batman - on the pages - sometimes also known as The Worlds Greatest Detective.
This is the first of his movies that I can think of where that aspect of his character is portrayed - sure, there hints of it in 1989s Batman, but only hints. Here it's full force, front and centre, with Batman - only his second year as a Vigilante - working alongside Jim Gordon and a proto-Catwoman to track down and apprehend the serial killer known only as The Riddler, who is leaving clues behind at all his kills.
A very different portrayal of that character than Jim Carrey's version in 'Batman Forever'.
This is also a very long film - nearly 3 hours - that, I felt, is in danger of outstaying it's welcome, with very little in the way of superheroics. More of a police whodunnit with costumed characters, maybe. There's also a perfect 'cutting-off' point at just after the third act, with - I guess? - a studio mandate for the fourth act tacked on, which is probably more along the lines of what to expect from a Batman movie.
As for Robert Pattinson as The Caped Crusader? I kept expecting him to sparkle. Unfair, I know (to type cast him as the vampire from Twilight), but I do think he may have swung too far in the other direction when portraying Bruce Wayne; here very much an emo goth kid rather than the swaggering heir to the fortune he is oft shown as. In fact, there's very little of Bruce on display: he spends most of his time, in costume, as Batman. This was a conscious decision, or so I have heard, to show how Bruce is in danger of losing himself to that persona. I'm also struggling to think of a single key 'stand-out' moment in line with 'Batman Begins' rescuing Rachel or 'The Dark Knight' "he's the Hero we need ..." bit: the Penguin car chase, perhaps?
So, yeah, a very different cinematic take on The Dark Knight, indeed.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Normal People in Books
Mar 19, 2020
Marianne and Connell form a relationship in school, starting to talk to one another when Connell comes to pick up his mother at her job cleaning for Marianne's family. But at school itself, they pretend not to know each other, fiercely aware of where they stand in the social structure: Connell is a popular soccer star, while Marianne is smart but a social outcast. Things change a year later, when they are both studying at Trinity College. Marianne has found her social circle and is popular among her group of friends. Connell is known as smart, but feels awkward. The two's relationship ebbs and flows--at times, they are deeply in love; at other moments, they date other people and rarely speak.
I'm not exactly sure what to say about this one. I listened to this book over a couple of months as I traveled off and on for work. It felt very slow, and while I know part of it was the stops and starts when I was traveling, but some of it was the book itself. I can definitely recognize the brilliance others found in this novel. Rooney is a wonderful writer, and there were passages that I wish I could capture and save to savor later. At other moments, I wanted to hurry things along quite badly... she turned the water on in the shower, the water came out, the water fell to the floor, etc. Things are described in great detail, and often, I found myself frustrated at that.
This not a plot-driven novel, but a character-driven one. Told from the alternating perspectives of Marianne and Connell over time, it examines various points in their life. At times, they may even go back in time in their various point-of-view segment, forcing you to keep up with exactly what is happening and when. There is much explaining and much examining. A lot of talk of feelings and such. It's a very complex novel. I definitely did grow to be interested in Marianne and Connell, but it did take some time.
As I said, I can see why this book earned such rave reviews, but it wasn't entirely for me. I was frustrated that Marianne and Connell couldn't just talk to each other. The ending of the book left me annoyed--all this for that--and I often wanted things to happen more quickly than they did. Still, I appreciated Rooney's lovely writing. If you want a complicated look at how one relationship can affect two so-called normal people over time, this one is definitely for you. 3 stars.
I'm not exactly sure what to say about this one. I listened to this book over a couple of months as I traveled off and on for work. It felt very slow, and while I know part of it was the stops and starts when I was traveling, but some of it was the book itself. I can definitely recognize the brilliance others found in this novel. Rooney is a wonderful writer, and there were passages that I wish I could capture and save to savor later. At other moments, I wanted to hurry things along quite badly... she turned the water on in the shower, the water came out, the water fell to the floor, etc. Things are described in great detail, and often, I found myself frustrated at that.
This not a plot-driven novel, but a character-driven one. Told from the alternating perspectives of Marianne and Connell over time, it examines various points in their life. At times, they may even go back in time in their various point-of-view segment, forcing you to keep up with exactly what is happening and when. There is much explaining and much examining. A lot of talk of feelings and such. It's a very complex novel. I definitely did grow to be interested in Marianne and Connell, but it did take some time.
As I said, I can see why this book earned such rave reviews, but it wasn't entirely for me. I was frustrated that Marianne and Connell couldn't just talk to each other. The ending of the book left me annoyed--all this for that--and I often wanted things to happen more quickly than they did. Still, I appreciated Rooney's lovely writing. If you want a complicated look at how one relationship can affect two so-called normal people over time, this one is definitely for you. 3 stars.
PO
Priest of Nature: The Religious Worlds of Isaac Newton
Book
Newton's unusual - or even downright heretical - religious opinions were well known to a number of...
Mel Rodriguez recommended GoodFellas (1990) in Movies (curated)
OA
Object-Orientation, Abstraction, and Data Structures Using Scala
Mark C. Lewis and Lisa L. Lacher
Book
Praise for the first edition: "The well-written, comprehensive book...[is] aiming to become a de...
Dinner Party: A Tragedy
Book
A MAJOR 2021 DEBUT FICTION LAUNCH, THIS REMARKABLE IRISH NOVEL ABOUT THE MESSINESS OF MODERN FAMILY...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Feb 9, 2018
Heady Trip
Christopher Nolan first burst onto the scene (for me) with MEMENTO, a 2000 film about a man with a rare condition - he cannot store any short term memories - and is looking for the man that murdered his wife and hit him on the head, thus causing this condition. The twist of the film - and the "trick" that makes this film work -is that it is told backwards (the last scene is first, the 2nd to last scene is 2nd...the first scene is last) so we, the audience, have no memory of what happened just before this scene and, thus, are suffering from the same inability to access what has happened just before as the main character.
This "trick" works very well and holds the film together, we are peeling apart the onion (or, more appropriately, we are putting the peels back on the onion) as the film progresses, gaining greater knowledge as we go along and, with each new piece of "old" information, we gain a new - and in most cases different - view of the scene that we just saw, keeping the audience off-balance for the entire film.
Nolan shows a sure-handedness in his direction of this film. It is clear he had a vision that he wanted to put on the screen and with the screenplay written by Nolan and his long-time collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan has a canvas to paint his off-kilter picture and play with the themes of time and memory - themes he would come back to over again.
As the man with the memory loss, Leonard, Guy Pearce solidified himself for me (at the time) as a fine actor that is worth watching (this, afterall, was just a few years after LA CONFIDENTIAL). His Leonard is earnest and straightforward and while he does have a "tick" to show that his memory is erasing (to clue us, the audience in), he marches (backward) through this film strongly.
Aiding Pearce is veteran character actor Joe Pantoliano as Teddy - a cop who is helping Leonard find his wife's killer (or is he?). "Joey Pants" (as he is known) is perfect for this type of ambiguous character, never really trusting him, but trusting him "just enough". Also jumping in is Trinity, herself, Carrie-Ann Moss - an actress that I thought was going to build on this (and the Matrix) and become quite the star. It didn't quite work out.
I enjoyed this mystery and was thinking about how well it works if you ran the scenes in chronological order - upon reflection, I realized that if you did that, holes get punched into things pretty quickly. So, don't do that, but do rent or stream or pull the old DVD of MEMENTO off your bookshelves, it is worth your time.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
This "trick" works very well and holds the film together, we are peeling apart the onion (or, more appropriately, we are putting the peels back on the onion) as the film progresses, gaining greater knowledge as we go along and, with each new piece of "old" information, we gain a new - and in most cases different - view of the scene that we just saw, keeping the audience off-balance for the entire film.
Nolan shows a sure-handedness in his direction of this film. It is clear he had a vision that he wanted to put on the screen and with the screenplay written by Nolan and his long-time collaborator, his brother Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan has a canvas to paint his off-kilter picture and play with the themes of time and memory - themes he would come back to over again.
As the man with the memory loss, Leonard, Guy Pearce solidified himself for me (at the time) as a fine actor that is worth watching (this, afterall, was just a few years after LA CONFIDENTIAL). His Leonard is earnest and straightforward and while he does have a "tick" to show that his memory is erasing (to clue us, the audience in), he marches (backward) through this film strongly.
Aiding Pearce is veteran character actor Joe Pantoliano as Teddy - a cop who is helping Leonard find his wife's killer (or is he?). "Joey Pants" (as he is known) is perfect for this type of ambiguous character, never really trusting him, but trusting him "just enough". Also jumping in is Trinity, herself, Carrie-Ann Moss - an actress that I thought was going to build on this (and the Matrix) and become quite the star. It didn't quite work out.
I enjoyed this mystery and was thinking about how well it works if you ran the scenes in chronological order - upon reflection, I realized that if you did that, holes get punched into things pretty quickly. So, don't do that, but do rent or stream or pull the old DVD of MEMENTO off your bookshelves, it is worth your time.
Letter Grade: A-
8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)