Search
Search results
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2171 KP) rated Sunny Side Up in Books
Sep 19, 2018
Cruise of Murder and Bullies
Liam Johnson is thrilled to have landed a job on the prestigious Howard Cruise Line as a waiter. His family needs the money he will be making. However, he quickly discovers that his boss hates him and some of the customers he must deal with delight in making his life miserable as well. That doesn't prepare him for finding the body of one of the passengers dead on the Sunbathing Deck. The ship's doctor is quick to rule it an accidental death due to sunstroke, but Liam isn't so sure. Several things about the scene are off. Can he prove it was murder before the cruise ends?
I really thought this book sounded like fun, but it turned out to be much more somber than I was expecting it to be. Liam faces quite a bit of abuse and bullying over the course of the story, and I didn't find it that fun to read. Even his friends on the ship turn on him regularly. The mystery is well put together with plenty of clues. I did feel things were a bit overly complex, but the clues were all there when Liam explains things at the end. This books definitely falls on the traditional side of the spectrum with a smattering of language and talk about sex (but nothing on the page) that keep it from being a true cozy. This wasn’t' truly a bad book, but I did hope for something sunnier when I picked it up.
I really thought this book sounded like fun, but it turned out to be much more somber than I was expecting it to be. Liam faces quite a bit of abuse and bullying over the course of the story, and I didn't find it that fun to read. Even his friends on the ship turn on him regularly. The mystery is well put together with plenty of clues. I did feel things were a bit overly complex, but the clues were all there when Liam explains things at the end. This books definitely falls on the traditional side of the spectrum with a smattering of language and talk about sex (but nothing on the page) that keep it from being a true cozy. This wasn’t' truly a bad book, but I did hope for something sunnier when I picked it up.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated R.I.P.D. (2013) in Movies
Oct 24, 2018
So bad it’s actually vaguely enjoyable
I remember watching this when it first came out at the cinema and I wasn’t particularly impressed, however on watching it again recently I can admit that this is definitely one of those films that’s so bad it’s actually quite entertaining. Mostly due to Jeff Bridges.
Let’s start with this obvious: I know this is based on a comic, but this is such a blatant rip off of Men in Black, it’s just a shame it comes off as a much poorer relation. Everything about this from the plot progression to the deados just echoes MIB, and that’s high expectations to live up to.
The main humour from this film comes from how the characters look normally versus how they appear in the real world, which admittedly is pretty hilarious but this is the only decent attempt at humour. The plot is completely dull and the Kevin Bacon as the villain is uninteresting too. The special effects are surprisingly good in parts, but then ruined by the downright terrible effects used on the deados. The true saviours of this film are Jeff Bridges and Ryan Reynolds. The relationship and communication between their characters is the most entertaining thing about this film and Jeff Bridges is in fine form hamming it up to the max as Roy. He may be going a little over the top, but it’s damn funny to watch. Just a shame they couldn’t have put more effort into the rest of the story.
Let’s start with this obvious: I know this is based on a comic, but this is such a blatant rip off of Men in Black, it’s just a shame it comes off as a much poorer relation. Everything about this from the plot progression to the deados just echoes MIB, and that’s high expectations to live up to.
The main humour from this film comes from how the characters look normally versus how they appear in the real world, which admittedly is pretty hilarious but this is the only decent attempt at humour. The plot is completely dull and the Kevin Bacon as the villain is uninteresting too. The special effects are surprisingly good in parts, but then ruined by the downright terrible effects used on the deados. The true saviours of this film are Jeff Bridges and Ryan Reynolds. The relationship and communication between their characters is the most entertaining thing about this film and Jeff Bridges is in fine form hamming it up to the max as Roy. He may be going a little over the top, but it’s damn funny to watch. Just a shame they couldn’t have put more effort into the rest of the story.
I've read a couple of other historical novels by this author, which were quite enjoyable, but not great. I had to review this after finishing this morning as it was so much better and a really rewarding read.
The novel covers the reign of Henry VIII from the point of view of Will Somers, the man who becomes the king's jester or fool. This gives the book a totally different twist and insight from something concentrating on the usual courtly suspects. Will is in the thick of things, with a front row seat in the course of history, if you like, but he's not one of the players in the drama.
The novel is actually written in the first person, and it's very rarely that I like this because in the hands of most authors it is clunky, but here I had to go back and check that this was so, as it seemed so natural.
Obviously, hindsight is a wonderful thing in history and some of the points made are from the point of view of someone with historical hindsight, but there's also a lot of psychological truth in there and you can quite clearly see why characters act the way they do.
Now, my only problem is that MCB was not a writer of authorial afterwords, like many present authors. What I really want to know is how much of the story is true (within the bounds of fictional probability!) and what is fiction/surmise - and what happened to Will Somers next?!
The novel covers the reign of Henry VIII from the point of view of Will Somers, the man who becomes the king's jester or fool. This gives the book a totally different twist and insight from something concentrating on the usual courtly suspects. Will is in the thick of things, with a front row seat in the course of history, if you like, but he's not one of the players in the drama.
The novel is actually written in the first person, and it's very rarely that I like this because in the hands of most authors it is clunky, but here I had to go back and check that this was so, as it seemed so natural.
Obviously, hindsight is a wonderful thing in history and some of the points made are from the point of view of someone with historical hindsight, but there's also a lot of psychological truth in there and you can quite clearly see why characters act the way they do.
Now, my only problem is that MCB was not a writer of authorial afterwords, like many present authors. What I really want to know is how much of the story is true (within the bounds of fictional probability!) and what is fiction/surmise - and what happened to Will Somers next?!
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Like Water in Books
Dec 17, 2018
I'm always interested in queer young adult books, and this one especially caught my eye with its mention of "performing mermaids." Because y'all know I love my mermaid books! So Savannah isn't a real mermaid, she just plays one at a water park. But it was enough to make me pick up the book, and it's a good book. Young adult books about discovering your identity are always needed, and this book is about Savannah realizing she's bisexual.
Much of the angst in this book comes from Savannah not knowing if she has the same disease her father does, and she's not sure if she wants to know. Altogether, in this book we have chronic illness, hispanic teens, bisexual, lesbian, and genderqueer teens, small-town angst....there's really a LOT of demographics covered in this book.
I like Savannah, but I don't like her love interest, Leigh, very much. Leigh does NOT have her shit together, and between drinking and doing drugs, all while underage, she poses a very real threat to Savannah's well-being.
I'm a little nonplussed by the ending of the book. It leaves a few questions unanswered, but not in a cliff-hanger-y way. It's more of a possibilities-left-open kind of way. Which makes sense for a "first love" romance. It's not necessarily a "true love" story. It reminds me of John Green novels in that way.
So - it's a great book for representation, but don't expect a tidy, wrapped-up ending. You won't find that here.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Much of the angst in this book comes from Savannah not knowing if she has the same disease her father does, and she's not sure if she wants to know. Altogether, in this book we have chronic illness, hispanic teens, bisexual, lesbian, and genderqueer teens, small-town angst....there's really a LOT of demographics covered in this book.
I like Savannah, but I don't like her love interest, Leigh, very much. Leigh does NOT have her shit together, and between drinking and doing drugs, all while underage, she poses a very real threat to Savannah's well-being.
I'm a little nonplussed by the ending of the book. It leaves a few questions unanswered, but not in a cliff-hanger-y way. It's more of a possibilities-left-open kind of way. Which makes sense for a "first love" romance. It's not necessarily a "true love" story. It reminds me of John Green novels in that way.
So - it's a great book for representation, but don't expect a tidy, wrapped-up ending. You won't find that here.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Gareth von Kallenbach (977 KP) rated Tag (2018) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
When you hear about a movie being based on a true story, especially this film, the first thing you ask yourself, “Wait a second, this actually happened in real life?” This movie is about 5 lifelong friends who have been playing the kids’ game Tag for 30 years. Every year during the month of May, it’s no holds barred attempt at tagging each other.
The movie starts out with Hoagie (Ed Helms) trying to procure a janitor job at his friend Callahan’s (Jon Hamm) company for the sole purpose of the game. This year, Hoagie is on a dire mission to tag Jerry (Jeremy Renner), who has never been tagged. After heading out to tag Chilli (Jake Johnson), and Sable (Hannibal Burress), the guys find out they were not invited to Jerry’s wedding mainly because he didn’t want to get tagged.
Jerry has spent decades calculating every move and hidden attempts and is hellbent on never being tagged. You can pretty much guess what ensues once the gang arrives to the wedding. There is an exorbitant amount of slapstick humor in this film, that it masks the absolute absurdity of adults playing tag. There isn’t very much substance to this movie’s storyline. It’s pretty much vulgar humor, physical antics, and everything you’ve wanted in a film about adults playing a kids game. If you’re looking to spend 2 hours laughing immensely at a movie that will most likely win a Razzie, go see this one.
You’ll think it’s unbelievably ridiculous, you can’t help but love it!
The movie starts out with Hoagie (Ed Helms) trying to procure a janitor job at his friend Callahan’s (Jon Hamm) company for the sole purpose of the game. This year, Hoagie is on a dire mission to tag Jerry (Jeremy Renner), who has never been tagged. After heading out to tag Chilli (Jake Johnson), and Sable (Hannibal Burress), the guys find out they were not invited to Jerry’s wedding mainly because he didn’t want to get tagged.
Jerry has spent decades calculating every move and hidden attempts and is hellbent on never being tagged. You can pretty much guess what ensues once the gang arrives to the wedding. There is an exorbitant amount of slapstick humor in this film, that it masks the absolute absurdity of adults playing tag. There isn’t very much substance to this movie’s storyline. It’s pretty much vulgar humor, physical antics, and everything you’ve wanted in a film about adults playing a kids game. If you’re looking to spend 2 hours laughing immensely at a movie that will most likely win a Razzie, go see this one.
You’ll think it’s unbelievably ridiculous, you can’t help but love it!
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2171 KP) rated Murder Cuts the Mustard in Books
Nov 3, 2019
Murder Adds Spice to Life
Walmsley Parva is facing yet another murder. It’s now June of 1921, and the body of Hector Lomax has been found in the graveyard. Hector was not a well-liked or respected man in town, and that holds true for Simpkins, Edwina’s elderly gardener. Simpkins was Hector’s brother-in-law, and they shared a house, so naturally, he becomes a suspect in Hector’s death. However, that isn’t the only surprise the day has in store for Simpkins and, by extension, Edwina and Beryl. It quickly becomes clear the pair of friends need to get to the bottom of what is happening for their own sake as well as that of Simpkins. Can they do it?
I love this duo. Edwina and Beryl complement each other perfectly, and with the book’s excellent use of limited third person, we get to know both of them. The growth in them continues here as well. The rest of the cast is just as strong. I did feel the plot got a little sidetracked in the middle, but I was always entertained and the book ramps up again for a logical climax. Since the story is set in 1921, we get an interesting look at the changes that were going on in the larger society at the time. I had never given these changes much thought, but I enjoy seeing how the characters are reacting to them. If you haven’t started this series yet, you really should. If you are already a fan, you’ll love our third visit with Beryl and Edwina.
I love this duo. Edwina and Beryl complement each other perfectly, and with the book’s excellent use of limited third person, we get to know both of them. The growth in them continues here as well. The rest of the cast is just as strong. I did feel the plot got a little sidetracked in the middle, but I was always entertained and the book ramps up again for a logical climax. Since the story is set in 1921, we get an interesting look at the changes that were going on in the larger society at the time. I had never given these changes much thought, but I enjoy seeing how the characters are reacting to them. If you haven’t started this series yet, you really should. If you are already a fan, you’ll love our third visit with Beryl and Edwina.
Rebecca Billcliff (2409 KP) rated Eragon (2006) in Movies
Nov 11, 2019
Pile of Dragon Dropings
Where do I start? I read the Inheretance series and fell madly in love. When they announced a film I was so excited. Realy have I been more disappointing.
The design is apauling, did anyone read the descriptions in the book? Sapphire "Brightscales" with feathers, the Urgls. Nuff said.
The script, apauling.
Why do they hate montages? I mean, Saphera needs to grow, okay, great, I get you don't have time to show all the months this took, but what the hell!? She flies into the air, and when she lands she is massive??? No explanation. You know what would have worked... her flying up, the when she comes back down, there is snow, showing the passage of time!!! Even a dam "3 months later" would have been better!
Sorry, moving on.
I know adapting a story from one medium to another is not easy, but this was a shocking way of doing things.
It was like no one read the actual book. One of the main themes running through the books is the power of language, how knowing something's true name gives followed over it. So when you give a dragon called "brightscales" feathers, and have the Gedwe Insignia ( meaning "shiny plam) as a crappy scar, you are missing the dam point!
Even if it had been popular enough for a sequel, it would not realy have worked, given all the changes they made.
To sum up... READ. THE. DAM BOOK!
The design is apauling, did anyone read the descriptions in the book? Sapphire "Brightscales" with feathers, the Urgls. Nuff said.
The script, apauling.
Why do they hate montages? I mean, Saphera needs to grow, okay, great, I get you don't have time to show all the months this took, but what the hell!? She flies into the air, and when she lands she is massive??? No explanation. You know what would have worked... her flying up, the when she comes back down, there is snow, showing the passage of time!!! Even a dam "3 months later" would have been better!
Sorry, moving on.
I know adapting a story from one medium to another is not easy, but this was a shocking way of doing things.
It was like no one read the actual book. One of the main themes running through the books is the power of language, how knowing something's true name gives followed over it. So when you give a dragon called "brightscales" feathers, and have the Gedwe Insignia ( meaning "shiny plam) as a crappy scar, you are missing the dam point!
Even if it had been popular enough for a sequel, it would not realy have worked, given all the changes they made.
To sum up... READ. THE. DAM BOOK!
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Inherit the Wind (1960) in Movies
Feb 1, 2020
I found this movie incredibly interesting. Not only is it based on a true story, I think it's a film that transcends time because of its themes. All of the issues discussed in this movie are ones that we still talk about today. We see all the time arguments for more religion in schools or less, and religion itself is argued and where its place is in our lives. I think this movie does a beautiful job of pushing those boundaries and causing you to question why it is we believe what we do and why we're so set on others believing it too.
As far as the cast and the acting, I think it's phenomenal. Obviously, with powerhouses like Gene Kelly, Spencer Tracy, and Fredric March, their performances are incredible. I find the women in the film to be less believable but I think it's more the time and the way women acted in the '60s and less to do with the women themselves. The overdramatic, falling after their husband or fiancé, in one case, is just played out - but that also might just be me speaking from my own experience.
Overall, I think this movie is great. It holds up 60 years after its initial release and I'm sure it will hold up for another 60 years. I think it pushes positive conversations and forces you to think outside of your own experiences and your own life and in general, I think that's what art (in any form) should do. Would definitely recommend this film.
As far as the cast and the acting, I think it's phenomenal. Obviously, with powerhouses like Gene Kelly, Spencer Tracy, and Fredric March, their performances are incredible. I find the women in the film to be less believable but I think it's more the time and the way women acted in the '60s and less to do with the women themselves. The overdramatic, falling after their husband or fiancé, in one case, is just played out - but that also might just be me speaking from my own experience.
Overall, I think this movie is great. It holds up 60 years after its initial release and I'm sure it will hold up for another 60 years. I think it pushes positive conversations and forces you to think outside of your own experiences and your own life and in general, I think that's what art (in any form) should do. Would definitely recommend this film.
JT (287 KP) rated The Oxford Murders (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
From the first couple of scenes you’d half expect to see Inspector Morse and Lewis step out from behind one of the great pillars that surround Oxford University – sadly that is not going to be the case here. The story itself could have been taken right out of an Agatha Christie novel but the subsequent plot gets mixed up like the mathematical equation it is trying to lay out.
John Hurt plays Arthur Seldom a university professor whose life revolves around mathematical equations and whether or not we can prove truth and probability. Martin (Elijah Wood) is a graduate over from America looking at using Seldom to help him with his thesis.
The pair get mixed up in an altogether different set of circumstances when they must work together to solve a series of murders based around mathematical symbols. The Oxford Murders falls some way short of delivering on any tension or drama, which is a real shame. The script is over complicated and there is no real time to develop the characters before we are thrown head first into the first murder.
All in all it seemed rushed together. More strangely was the choice of director; Spanish born Álex de la Iglesia who also wrote the screenplay. A background largely based around foreign film I find it odd that he should have any idea about the true reflections of historic Oxford. Maybe that is where amongst other things The Oxford Murders falls down. In the hands of a more traditional English director we may have had a better outcome.
John Hurt plays Arthur Seldom a university professor whose life revolves around mathematical equations and whether or not we can prove truth and probability. Martin (Elijah Wood) is a graduate over from America looking at using Seldom to help him with his thesis.
The pair get mixed up in an altogether different set of circumstances when they must work together to solve a series of murders based around mathematical symbols. The Oxford Murders falls some way short of delivering on any tension or drama, which is a real shame. The script is over complicated and there is no real time to develop the characters before we are thrown head first into the first murder.
All in all it seemed rushed together. More strangely was the choice of director; Spanish born Álex de la Iglesia who also wrote the screenplay. A background largely based around foreign film I find it odd that he should have any idea about the true reflections of historic Oxford. Maybe that is where amongst other things The Oxford Murders falls down. In the hands of a more traditional English director we may have had a better outcome.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Red Joan (2018) in Movies
Apr 1, 2020
Forgettable
This is not the type of film that I'd willingly choose to watch. It didnt sound or look particularly appealing, however due to the requirement of social distancing my boyfriend and I are taking it in turns to pick films each evening to watch "together" (in our separate houses). This was his choice, and sadly it wasnt a very good one.
The main issue with this film is that is fairly predictable romance nonsense, and there really isnt enough Judi Dench. Nothing against Sophie Cookson, but to have Judi Dench in this film and barely use her is almost a travesty. It also seems to concentrate mostly on the romantic aspect of Joan's life, which gets rather frustrating as you watch a rather intelligent young woman turn into a naive lovelorn idiot the moment she gets involved with a vaguely handsome man. The concentration on the romance side for me made it feel like the rest of the film, and indeed the more important war related concerns, were pushed to one side and I felt like there was a lot of plot lines in this that weren't satisfactorily explained. I did also wonder why, if this film was inspired by a true story, that the central character wasnt named after the real person? Aside from the "Red Joan" makes for a catchier title.
Overall this isnt bad enough to switch off without making it to the end, but ultimately it winds up rather unsatisfying and entirely forgettable.
The main issue with this film is that is fairly predictable romance nonsense, and there really isnt enough Judi Dench. Nothing against Sophie Cookson, but to have Judi Dench in this film and barely use her is almost a travesty. It also seems to concentrate mostly on the romantic aspect of Joan's life, which gets rather frustrating as you watch a rather intelligent young woman turn into a naive lovelorn idiot the moment she gets involved with a vaguely handsome man. The concentration on the romance side for me made it feel like the rest of the film, and indeed the more important war related concerns, were pushed to one side and I felt like there was a lot of plot lines in this that weren't satisfactorily explained. I did also wonder why, if this film was inspired by a true story, that the central character wasnt named after the real person? Aside from the "Red Joan" makes for a catchier title.
Overall this isnt bad enough to switch off without making it to the end, but ultimately it winds up rather unsatisfying and entirely forgettable.