Search
Sarah (7798 KP) rated The Gentlemen (2020) in Movies
Jan 6, 2020
Ritchie back on form
It's about time Guy Ritchie went back to what he does best. After the terrible Aladdin and King Arthur over the past couple of years, and the ok but not great Man from UNCLE and Sherlock Holmes films, Ritchie really needs something good. And whilst for me this didn't quite meet the high expectations set by Snatch and Lock, Stock, it's by far the best thing he's done since 2000's Snatch.
This is the gangster film reimagined for the 21st century. Weed farms, chavvy kids and even Brexit gets a mention at one point, proving that the gangster flick has definitely been modernised. It's filmed in Ritchie's usual cut away style that works very well and the plot is interesting albeit maybe a tad predictable. The violence does is present although does appear to have been toned down. But the best thing about this is by far the stellar cast. The stars of the show are without doubt Hugh Grant, Charlie Hunham and Colin Farrell. Hunham plays a fairly unassuming and almost lovable and witty gangster, Farrell is the rather funny and Irish coach and Hugh Grant had me gobsmacked by his completely gobsmacked. I barely recognised him with that accent, which is miles away from the Grant we know as the foppish posh gent. These three are also responsible for the funniest moments of the film, either when there's more than one of them on screen together. I must also give a nod to Henry Golding who makes up for his dire performance in Last Christmas.
This film doesn't quite meet Ritchie's high gangster standards though. There are some funny and witty moments, however for me there wasn't enough. Especially not when you compare it with the likes of Snatch. And I think he has really overused the C-word - I'm not bothered by the word itself but there are a lot of other swear words he could've chosen to give it a less repetitive feel. Also the first 20 mins or so dragged a little for me and seemed slow, although I did get into it eventually. My only other gripe would be the opening credit sequence. It's been a while since I've seen a proper opening credits on a film, and this one just seemed ill-fitting with the film itself and the time. Or maybe I just wasn't expecting it.
Overall this is a good attempt at a modern gangster film, definitely enjoyable even if it doesn't quite match up to Ritchie's earlier efforts.
This is the gangster film reimagined for the 21st century. Weed farms, chavvy kids and even Brexit gets a mention at one point, proving that the gangster flick has definitely been modernised. It's filmed in Ritchie's usual cut away style that works very well and the plot is interesting albeit maybe a tad predictable. The violence does is present although does appear to have been toned down. But the best thing about this is by far the stellar cast. The stars of the show are without doubt Hugh Grant, Charlie Hunham and Colin Farrell. Hunham plays a fairly unassuming and almost lovable and witty gangster, Farrell is the rather funny and Irish coach and Hugh Grant had me gobsmacked by his completely gobsmacked. I barely recognised him with that accent, which is miles away from the Grant we know as the foppish posh gent. These three are also responsible for the funniest moments of the film, either when there's more than one of them on screen together. I must also give a nod to Henry Golding who makes up for his dire performance in Last Christmas.
This film doesn't quite meet Ritchie's high gangster standards though. There are some funny and witty moments, however for me there wasn't enough. Especially not when you compare it with the likes of Snatch. And I think he has really overused the C-word - I'm not bothered by the word itself but there are a lot of other swear words he could've chosen to give it a less repetitive feel. Also the first 20 mins or so dragged a little for me and seemed slow, although I did get into it eventually. My only other gripe would be the opening credit sequence. It's been a while since I've seen a proper opening credits on a film, and this one just seemed ill-fitting with the film itself and the time. Or maybe I just wasn't expecting it.
Overall this is a good attempt at a modern gangster film, definitely enjoyable even if it doesn't quite match up to Ritchie's earlier efforts.
Snake and ladder: Board battle
Games and Entertainment
App
Snakes and Ladders is the simplest and best time Passing game with lots of fun! Main Feature:...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
And so to the latest incarnation in Spider-man Homecoming. After seeing Tom Holland in Civil War, well, let's just say that I was not convinced. Then the adverts where he's making the home movie of everything... yeah that began to grate a bit.
There's no origin story with this one, or with his appearance in Civil War. I'm not sure how I feel about no Uncle Ben, or that they're regressing Aunt May every time she appears. But I do love Marisa Tomei, and she does get a fantastic last line.
Somewhere before this film went into production I reckon someone thought "We need something that's not quite a bad a Spider-man, but not quite as serious as The Amazing Spider-man." Someone else was walking by and overheard. "You should zhush it up with the Avengers treatment."... and so Homecoming was born.
The effects are of course way better than 2002, and everything is pretty bright and shiny since it was properly Marvelised. As much as I initially didn't like Tom Holland, I have to admit that he makes a good film. My only major issue is that it seems more concerned about bringing him into the Marvel Universe than leaving him out there developing his own film.
For a nerd, Peter has got game. We're on the third incarnation of films this side of 2000, and we're on the third (and potential fourth) love interest. I like that they're jumping that around a little, it does help make each lot feel slightly different, but it does get confusing... and obviously you can keep an eye out for other love interests who make appearances.
It seems unfair to compare all three films (which is a bit tricky as that was partly the idea of this whole post) because each of them have their own bit of the movie spectrum. The daft, the heart-wrenching and the blockbuster, all have their place in the collection. Gun against my head I'd probably still pick Andrew Garfield as my favourite, but Holland is right there too.
That being said, I still don't like Spider-man as a superhero...
*ducks under the table to avoid the barrage of abuse*
He's too chaotic, he's just too young (in this one) to really understand the full implications of what he's doing. I personally don't understand why he would be worthy of movie fame over other characters. It has been pointed out to me that as he's just a "regular Joe", that people can identify with him more over the other options of Gods or mutants... but hell... I'm mutant and proud!
There's no origin story with this one, or with his appearance in Civil War. I'm not sure how I feel about no Uncle Ben, or that they're regressing Aunt May every time she appears. But I do love Marisa Tomei, and she does get a fantastic last line.
Somewhere before this film went into production I reckon someone thought "We need something that's not quite a bad a Spider-man, but not quite as serious as The Amazing Spider-man." Someone else was walking by and overheard. "You should zhush it up with the Avengers treatment."... and so Homecoming was born.
The effects are of course way better than 2002, and everything is pretty bright and shiny since it was properly Marvelised. As much as I initially didn't like Tom Holland, I have to admit that he makes a good film. My only major issue is that it seems more concerned about bringing him into the Marvel Universe than leaving him out there developing his own film.
For a nerd, Peter has got game. We're on the third incarnation of films this side of 2000, and we're on the third (and potential fourth) love interest. I like that they're jumping that around a little, it does help make each lot feel slightly different, but it does get confusing... and obviously you can keep an eye out for other love interests who make appearances.
It seems unfair to compare all three films (which is a bit tricky as that was partly the idea of this whole post) because each of them have their own bit of the movie spectrum. The daft, the heart-wrenching and the blockbuster, all have their place in the collection. Gun against my head I'd probably still pick Andrew Garfield as my favourite, but Holland is right there too.
That being said, I still don't like Spider-man as a superhero...
*ducks under the table to avoid the barrage of abuse*
He's too chaotic, he's just too young (in this one) to really understand the full implications of what he's doing. I personally don't understand why he would be worthy of movie fame over other characters. It has been pointed out to me that as he's just a "regular Joe", that people can identify with him more over the other options of Gods or mutants... but hell... I'm mutant and proud!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Split (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
“We are what we believe we are”.
M. Night Shyamalan fizzed into movie consciousness in 1999 with “The Sixth Sense” which – having rewatched it again recently – still has the power to unnerve and impress even after knowing the famous ‘twist’. Since that film and his next, “Unbreakable” in 2000, Shyamalan has ‘done a bit of an Orson Welles’ by never really living up to that early promise. Here with “Split” he returns to better form with a psychological thriller that is heavy on the psycho.
James McAvoy plays Kevin… and Dennis, and Patricia, and Hedwig, and Barry, and Orwell, and Jade, and… if the running time permitted… another 17 characters. But this is no “Kind Hearts and Coronets”: McAvoy plays all these varied personalities in the same body. For Kevin suffers from Multiple Personality Disorder, a rare condition where his different schisms not only affect his speech and attitude but also his whole physique. One personality for example is diabetic and needs insulin: all his others are fine.
Under the care of MPD specialist Dr Karen Fletcher (Betty Buckley, “Carrie”), Kevin seems to be making good progress. But all is not as it seems. Dennis, one of the more evil of Kevin’s personalities, has kidnapped three teens – Claire (Haley Lu Richardson), Marcia (Jessica Sula) and Casey (Anya Taylor-Joy) – and is holding them captive in his home.
It’s all going so well. Kevin (James McAvoy) getting much needed treatment from Dr Fletcher (Betty Buckley).
While Claire and Marcia are good friends, Casey is the wild-card in the pack: a moody and aloof teen that doesn’t fit in with the crowd. We see the abduction unfold largely through her intelligent and analytical eyes, with her experiences causing flashbacks to hunting trips in the woods as a five-year-old child with her father and uncle.
This is McAvoy’s film, with his different personalities being very well observed and the scenes where he switches from one to the other being particularly impressive as piece of acting. Of the youngsters, Anya Taylor-Joy is the most impressive, with the denouement of her particular sub-plot being my favourite part of the film.
Shyamalan, who also wrote the script, is treading a well worn cinematic path here (since often the MPD element is the surprise twist, to list any films here inevitably risks major spoilers – – but there is a decent list here). But this is a film that seems to have generated a lot of interest, particularly with a younger audience (I have seldom been quizzed more with the “Ooh, have you seen this yet” question). As a result this may be a modest sleeper hit.
Girl pray or Girl prey? Casey deep in the psycho’s lair.
Where I think the movie missteps is in its casting of the three cute and scantily dressed teens as the abductees. From the plot of the film that emerges this appears to be unnecessary and exploitative, especially since they are made to progressively dis-robe as the film progresses. The film would actually have been made more interesting if a family unit, or at least a mixed variety of individuals, had been taken.
Marcia (Jessica Sula) doesn’t necessarily appreciate the floral gift.
Unfortunately Shyamalan also over-gilds the lily for the finale by going from medical improbability into outright science fiction: and dilutes what was up to that point a stylish thriller. As a result it’s a decent popcorn film, and worth seeing for McAvoy’s clever performance, but its not going to go down in my book as a classic.
Watch out by the way for a nice final cameo scene: a clever reference to past glories.
James McAvoy plays Kevin… and Dennis, and Patricia, and Hedwig, and Barry, and Orwell, and Jade, and… if the running time permitted… another 17 characters. But this is no “Kind Hearts and Coronets”: McAvoy plays all these varied personalities in the same body. For Kevin suffers from Multiple Personality Disorder, a rare condition where his different schisms not only affect his speech and attitude but also his whole physique. One personality for example is diabetic and needs insulin: all his others are fine.
Under the care of MPD specialist Dr Karen Fletcher (Betty Buckley, “Carrie”), Kevin seems to be making good progress. But all is not as it seems. Dennis, one of the more evil of Kevin’s personalities, has kidnapped three teens – Claire (Haley Lu Richardson), Marcia (Jessica Sula) and Casey (Anya Taylor-Joy) – and is holding them captive in his home.
It’s all going so well. Kevin (James McAvoy) getting much needed treatment from Dr Fletcher (Betty Buckley).
While Claire and Marcia are good friends, Casey is the wild-card in the pack: a moody and aloof teen that doesn’t fit in with the crowd. We see the abduction unfold largely through her intelligent and analytical eyes, with her experiences causing flashbacks to hunting trips in the woods as a five-year-old child with her father and uncle.
This is McAvoy’s film, with his different personalities being very well observed and the scenes where he switches from one to the other being particularly impressive as piece of acting. Of the youngsters, Anya Taylor-Joy is the most impressive, with the denouement of her particular sub-plot being my favourite part of the film.
Shyamalan, who also wrote the script, is treading a well worn cinematic path here (since often the MPD element is the surprise twist, to list any films here inevitably risks major spoilers – – but there is a decent list here). But this is a film that seems to have generated a lot of interest, particularly with a younger audience (I have seldom been quizzed more with the “Ooh, have you seen this yet” question). As a result this may be a modest sleeper hit.
Girl pray or Girl prey? Casey deep in the psycho’s lair.
Where I think the movie missteps is in its casting of the three cute and scantily dressed teens as the abductees. From the plot of the film that emerges this appears to be unnecessary and exploitative, especially since they are made to progressively dis-robe as the film progresses. The film would actually have been made more interesting if a family unit, or at least a mixed variety of individuals, had been taken.
Marcia (Jessica Sula) doesn’t necessarily appreciate the floral gift.
Unfortunately Shyamalan also over-gilds the lily for the finale by going from medical improbability into outright science fiction: and dilutes what was up to that point a stylish thriller. As a result it’s a decent popcorn film, and worth seeing for McAvoy’s clever performance, but its not going to go down in my book as a classic.
Watch out by the way for a nice final cameo scene: a clever reference to past glories.
The Bandersnatch (199 KP) rated The Wonderful Wizard of Oz in Books
Nov 7, 2019
The Book was Published by George M. Hill Company with an advanced publication date of September 1900. The public heard of it at a book fair in Chicago around July 5th to 20th with its copyright registered by August 1st. The books sold out quickly and the second editions went just as quickly as the first. When Hills company became bankrupt in 1901, Bobbs-Merrill Company resumed publishing the book. By 1933 there were more than a million copies printed and by 1956 the sales had grown to three million printed. Because The Wizard of Oz was so popular it became the first in a thirteen book series.
I had known about the wizard of oz ever since I was a child but this was due to the 1939 Movie by MGM of the same name starring Judy Garland. As such I didn't read the book until I was nearly an adult. The book is highly different to the movie with Dorothy having to do more to get home and for both the Wizard and Oz as a whole. The major differences between book and movie is the fact that the Ruby slippers from the movie are silver in the book and the flying monkeys are controlled by a magical cap and Dorothy having protection from Glinda the good witch of the north. I have to admit I am a stickler for details and I prefer the book rather than the movie, despite the movie being good. I recommend this book to everyone and give the book a 9/10
Lyman Frank Baum was born May 15th 1856 in Chittenango, New York to a devout Methodist family the seventh of nine children of Cynthia and Benjamin Baum. Only Baum and five of his siblings survived to adulthood. Lyman hated his first name despite being named for an uncle and liked his middle name better, he was known as Frank for most of his life. Baum married his wife Maud Gage on November 9th 1882 and by 1888 had moved to Aberdeen, Dakota Territory where he operated his own store for a while before turning to writing full time which he loved to do since he was a child. By the time of his death on May 6th 1919 Baum had written the thirteen book Oz series, a plethora of other books and several musicals and radio plays. Baum had died of a stroke and passed away in his sleep, he's buried in Glendale's Forest Lawn Memorial Park Cemetery. L. Frank Baum certainly has my respect for both his writing of the Oz series and the craziness that his life had been.
I had known about the wizard of oz ever since I was a child but this was due to the 1939 Movie by MGM of the same name starring Judy Garland. As such I didn't read the book until I was nearly an adult. The book is highly different to the movie with Dorothy having to do more to get home and for both the Wizard and Oz as a whole. The major differences between book and movie is the fact that the Ruby slippers from the movie are silver in the book and the flying monkeys are controlled by a magical cap and Dorothy having protection from Glinda the good witch of the north. I have to admit I am a stickler for details and I prefer the book rather than the movie, despite the movie being good. I recommend this book to everyone and give the book a 9/10
Lyman Frank Baum was born May 15th 1856 in Chittenango, New York to a devout Methodist family the seventh of nine children of Cynthia and Benjamin Baum. Only Baum and five of his siblings survived to adulthood. Lyman hated his first name despite being named for an uncle and liked his middle name better, he was known as Frank for most of his life. Baum married his wife Maud Gage on November 9th 1882 and by 1888 had moved to Aberdeen, Dakota Territory where he operated his own store for a while before turning to writing full time which he loved to do since he was a child. By the time of his death on May 6th 1919 Baum had written the thirteen book Oz series, a plethora of other books and several musicals and radio plays. Baum had died of a stroke and passed away in his sleep, he's buried in Glendale's Forest Lawn Memorial Park Cemetery. L. Frank Baum certainly has my respect for both his writing of the Oz series and the craziness that his life had been.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Guncle in Books
Jul 22, 2021
A beautiful, funny, and sweet story of finding hope after loss
Patrick and Sara were best friends in college. Then she married his brother, had two kids, and life went on. Until Sara dies, leaving Patrick's niece and nephew motherless. Patrick has always adored Maisie and Grant--for small time periods. But when his brother Greg asks Patrick, aka "Gay Uncle Patrick," or "GUP," to take the kids for a bit, he's faced with a dilemma. It's time to actually step up. So GUP and the kids head to Patrick's house in Palm Springs, where Patrick leads the life of a very single (and gay) slightly faded actor. Once there, he institutes the "Guncle Rules" and they set out trying to survive. But as Patrick bumbles his way through parenting and trying to help his little charges heal, he realizes they may be helping them more than he could have ever imagined.
"He promised when they'd met that he would never let her go. And then life intervened. She went north and married his brother. He went west and found fame on TV. And slowly, over time, he did. Let go."
Oh this book. I'm not sure a book has ever made me cry so many times, yet I loved it so much. It's often sad but also incredibly funny and heartwarming. Rowley does something special here, capturing Patrick, Maisie, and Grant so beautifully and authentically. This is a lovely story about family and coming together after loss.
There's not much I can say to do this wonderful book justice. The Guncle is made up of a million little moments--obviously Maisie and Grant are hurting, but you learn Patrick is as well. Who needs who more? Patrick is bitingly caustic, and he talks to the kids as if they are tiny adults. But the warmth and love that comes across in his humor--that he uses as his shield--is so clear. The book is a quiet and beautiful journey of all three characters learning to live again, and it's so well-done. It's such a tender and honest story. And the acceptance that comes across here--oh, it just warmed my heart. (A scene where Maisie didn't want to wear her bathing suit, and Patrick didn't force her, but let her wear a t-shirt instead, promising to buy her a rash guard--well it brought tears to my eyes.)
I promise if you give this sweet book a try, you will love it. I love Patrick, Maisie, and Grant. I adored the welcoming message of the book. It's a sad premise, but a hopeful book. 4.5+ stars.
"He promised when they'd met that he would never let her go. And then life intervened. She went north and married his brother. He went west and found fame on TV. And slowly, over time, he did. Let go."
Oh this book. I'm not sure a book has ever made me cry so many times, yet I loved it so much. It's often sad but also incredibly funny and heartwarming. Rowley does something special here, capturing Patrick, Maisie, and Grant so beautifully and authentically. This is a lovely story about family and coming together after loss.
There's not much I can say to do this wonderful book justice. The Guncle is made up of a million little moments--obviously Maisie and Grant are hurting, but you learn Patrick is as well. Who needs who more? Patrick is bitingly caustic, and he talks to the kids as if they are tiny adults. But the warmth and love that comes across in his humor--that he uses as his shield--is so clear. The book is a quiet and beautiful journey of all three characters learning to live again, and it's so well-done. It's such a tender and honest story. And the acceptance that comes across here--oh, it just warmed my heart. (A scene where Maisie didn't want to wear her bathing suit, and Patrick didn't force her, but let her wear a t-shirt instead, promising to buy her a rash guard--well it brought tears to my eyes.)
I promise if you give this sweet book a try, you will love it. I love Patrick, Maisie, and Grant. I adored the welcoming message of the book. It's a sad premise, but a hopeful book. 4.5+ stars.
Kara Skinner (332 KP) rated Chained in Books
Sep 10, 2019
As acting high lord of the house of Toustain, it’s Lady Gwendolyn’s job to manage affairs of Dinasdale, and that includes managing her new unruly prisoner, Caden Maignart. Unfortunately it looks like the only way she’ll be able to manage him is to have him chained up in her bedchamber.
After thirty years of peace, tensions are mounting between Daleria and Dinasdale again. After receiving reports of Dalerians massacring a Dinasdale village and Gwen’s brothers vanishing after being attacked, Gwen won’t take any chances with the Dalerian intruders found on Dinasdalian land. But she quickly realizes just throwing them into the dungeon won’t work, not when one of them is willing to stir up as much trouble as he possibly can to be freed. Chaining him up in her bedchamber keeps him secure, but it causes a whole new set of problems. Like how she can’t hide her thoughts and feelings from him. Not to mention the growing attraction she feels towards him, despite him being the enemy and her being engaged to another.
I will say this: Elise Marion can world-build. Like damn! Not only did she bring two completely different cultures to life, but she also wrote intricate histories for both of them. And it is definitely amazing. I love both Dinasdale and Daleria equally even though I think I’d rather live in Daleria. It’s all woods and mountains and women can become knights instead of just marrying for status. And honestly, I like red meat, not fish, which is the main food in Dinasdale. Yeah. Marion can world-build. These feel like real regions instead of fictional ones.
Unfortunately, the world-building choked the story a little bit at the beginning. In the prologue, when the three kings met, I was having trouble just trying to remember who belonged to which country, let alone keeping the reason for their conflict straight. I reread entire passages three times or so before I gave up on matching the names to the countries and points of contentions. Luckily as the story goes on, I could figure it out better.
Another thing that was frustrating was how much this plot relied on slow communication. I mean, if this world had email then not nearly as many people would have been killed. I’m reading the second book now, and that is still the main plot device, which makes me impatient for the characters to get caught up to speed on what’s happening. But hey, it works, right? The dramatic irony was killing me.
Mostly, I really love this story. I mean as soon as I finished the first one I bought the second, which is very rare for me. But I love it a lot. In addition to the seriously realistic world-building, there is also a really great plot full of political corruption and mystery. Even though I don’t think Rowan’s character is at all realistic, I like the story. There’s a lot going on at once. My summary up top doesn’t really do the plot of the book justice, honestly. It’s very hard to explain how intricate the plot really is, so I highly recommend you read it.
And yes, the love story between Caden and Gwen is fantastic. Caden is a really decent guy, even to Gwen despite the fact that he’s chained to her bedroom wall. Despite being the high lord heir for Daleria he’s very just and noble, which is way more than what can be said for King Rowan or Prince Gawain. I mean, I just get angry when I think about those two. And Gwen is a perfect match for him. She’s as headstrong and clever as you can get, not to mention beautiful (and can I just say that I love that she’s not caucasian? Too often romances like these are very monocolored unless it’s really relevant to the plot. The different races is only mentioned as an identifying trait between Dalerian and Dinasdale, but not a point of contention between them. It’s incredibly refreshing).
She is definitely wasted as Gawain’s fiancee. She holds her own really well and unlike other “strong” female heroines I see sometimes in books like these, she’s actually really smart and fierce instead of being just sassy. I mean, she killed three men in the first scene. She rocks. Her family makes me angry, though. How can they expect her to just be married off to Gawain? Her mother is delusional and selfish, so I understand why she wants her daughter to act all ladylike, but her brothers should know better and so should her uncle! It’s really frustrating to see how they want to coddle her and get her out of the way all the time.
Gwen and Caden are fantastic together. I love the chemistry between them and how sweet Caden is to Gwen. The gods know she needs it after her rough handling from Gawain. One thing I didn’t like, however, is how Caden was reluctant to be with Gwen because of her engagement to Gawain. Yeah, I admire the need for loyalty, but when Gwen didn’t want to marry Gawain in the first place, Gawain tried to rape her, and he probably caused the rift between Daleria and Dinasdale, the value of an engagement should probably be meaningless. It’s also frustrating that he kept saying that she belonged to someone else. Like her family, he sees her a little bit like a possession, which was really annoying. I know that probably has nothing to do with her sex. He would probably say the same thing about a guy engaged. But that didn’t stop me from disliking him a little bit.
After thirty years of peace, tensions are mounting between Daleria and Dinasdale again. After receiving reports of Dalerians massacring a Dinasdale village and Gwen’s brothers vanishing after being attacked, Gwen won’t take any chances with the Dalerian intruders found on Dinasdalian land. But she quickly realizes just throwing them into the dungeon won’t work, not when one of them is willing to stir up as much trouble as he possibly can to be freed. Chaining him up in her bedchamber keeps him secure, but it causes a whole new set of problems. Like how she can’t hide her thoughts and feelings from him. Not to mention the growing attraction she feels towards him, despite him being the enemy and her being engaged to another.
I will say this: Elise Marion can world-build. Like damn! Not only did she bring two completely different cultures to life, but she also wrote intricate histories for both of them. And it is definitely amazing. I love both Dinasdale and Daleria equally even though I think I’d rather live in Daleria. It’s all woods and mountains and women can become knights instead of just marrying for status. And honestly, I like red meat, not fish, which is the main food in Dinasdale. Yeah. Marion can world-build. These feel like real regions instead of fictional ones.
Unfortunately, the world-building choked the story a little bit at the beginning. In the prologue, when the three kings met, I was having trouble just trying to remember who belonged to which country, let alone keeping the reason for their conflict straight. I reread entire passages three times or so before I gave up on matching the names to the countries and points of contentions. Luckily as the story goes on, I could figure it out better.
Another thing that was frustrating was how much this plot relied on slow communication. I mean, if this world had email then not nearly as many people would have been killed. I’m reading the second book now, and that is still the main plot device, which makes me impatient for the characters to get caught up to speed on what’s happening. But hey, it works, right? The dramatic irony was killing me.
Mostly, I really love this story. I mean as soon as I finished the first one I bought the second, which is very rare for me. But I love it a lot. In addition to the seriously realistic world-building, there is also a really great plot full of political corruption and mystery. Even though I don’t think Rowan’s character is at all realistic, I like the story. There’s a lot going on at once. My summary up top doesn’t really do the plot of the book justice, honestly. It’s very hard to explain how intricate the plot really is, so I highly recommend you read it.
And yes, the love story between Caden and Gwen is fantastic. Caden is a really decent guy, even to Gwen despite the fact that he’s chained to her bedroom wall. Despite being the high lord heir for Daleria he’s very just and noble, which is way more than what can be said for King Rowan or Prince Gawain. I mean, I just get angry when I think about those two. And Gwen is a perfect match for him. She’s as headstrong and clever as you can get, not to mention beautiful (and can I just say that I love that she’s not caucasian? Too often romances like these are very monocolored unless it’s really relevant to the plot. The different races is only mentioned as an identifying trait between Dalerian and Dinasdale, but not a point of contention between them. It’s incredibly refreshing).
She is definitely wasted as Gawain’s fiancee. She holds her own really well and unlike other “strong” female heroines I see sometimes in books like these, she’s actually really smart and fierce instead of being just sassy. I mean, she killed three men in the first scene. She rocks. Her family makes me angry, though. How can they expect her to just be married off to Gawain? Her mother is delusional and selfish, so I understand why she wants her daughter to act all ladylike, but her brothers should know better and so should her uncle! It’s really frustrating to see how they want to coddle her and get her out of the way all the time.
Gwen and Caden are fantastic together. I love the chemistry between them and how sweet Caden is to Gwen. The gods know she needs it after her rough handling from Gawain. One thing I didn’t like, however, is how Caden was reluctant to be with Gwen because of her engagement to Gawain. Yeah, I admire the need for loyalty, but when Gwen didn’t want to marry Gawain in the first place, Gawain tried to rape her, and he probably caused the rift between Daleria and Dinasdale, the value of an engagement should probably be meaningless. It’s also frustrating that he kept saying that she belonged to someone else. Like her family, he sees her a little bit like a possession, which was really annoying. I know that probably has nothing to do with her sex. He would probably say the same thing about a guy engaged. But that didn’t stop me from disliking him a little bit.
Beckie Shelton (40 KP) rated If You Dare (The Lightkeepers, #2) in Books
Feb 8, 2018
🌟🌟🌟🌟 Fabulous Stars.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/one-way-or-an-author-review_zpsphyl14uy.png.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/one-way-or-an-author-review_zpsphyl14uy.png~original"; border="0" alt=" photo one-way-or-an-author-review_zpsphyl14uy.png"/></a>
Reviewed By Beckie Bookworm
https://www.beckiebookworm.com
I didn't realise If You Dare (The Lightkeepers #2) By Erica Splinder was the second book in this series.
It probably would have been better to read book one first despite this "If You Dare" was very easy to interpret and told the back-story of this series splendidly.
Now You could technically read this as a standalone, but my recommendation would be start at the very beginning, it's a very good place to start usually ha ha.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/images%203_zps3qrbdz7u.jpg.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/images%203_zps3qrbdz7u.jpg~original"; border="0" alt=" photo images 3_zps3qrbdz7u.jpg"/></a>
Now after playing some catch up I quickly fell into the story of dark and light bearers and the age old battle of good versus evil.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/Starved-Rock_zpse4w1zaf3.jpg.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/Starved-Rock_zpse4w1zaf3.jpg~original"; border="0" alt=" photo Starved-Rock_zpse4w1zaf3.jpg"/></a>
Erica Spindler has really managed to create a vivid world that was so easy to get absorbed into, immersing myself fully into this other domain.
The book picks up where the previous one leaves us.
we have Our two detectives, Mikki, who has recovered from her injuries but is feeling that a lot is being kept from her, she feels on the outside partially, out in the cold, but not understanding exactly why.
Then there's her partner Zach who is half/ half lighter but is much more in the picture regarding information sharing and has been ordered to keep stum. keeping his partner in the dark is something he struggles with as well as certain feelings towards Mikki he so shouldn't be entertaining.
There's also Angel eighteen and struggling with her independence and Mikki's set boundaries, A Rebellious teenager in love for the first time with the mysterious Seth who comes with a very creepy but rich uncle.
This whole story is a puzzle with the pieces just waiting to be slotted together and everybody has a part to play in the bigger picture.
There are so many interesting and diverse secondary character's in this tale as well as the three main players Mikki, Zach and Angel. I love that we get to crawl inside this trios heads seeing different interpretations of events as they unfolded.
All the characters here were fleshed out well and the story just flowed for me effortlessly, keeping my attention throughout.
I found reading If You Dare an enjoyable experience and I would be happy to recommend it to others, my only advice would be Start at book one first before proceeding to the Finish line makes things a whole lot easier overall.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/start-and-finish_zpsnsodo1jc.jpg.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/start-and-finish_zpsnsodo1jc.jpg~original"; border="0" alt=" photo start-and-finish_zpsnsodo1jc.jpg"/></a>
Thank you to the Publisher and NetGalley for providing me with an arc of If You Dare, this is my own honest and unbiased opinion.
Reviewed By Beckie Bookworm
https://www.beckiebookworm.com/
https://www.facebook.com/beckiebookworm/
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/one-way-or-an-author-review_zpsphyl14uy.png.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/one-way-or-an-author-review_zpsphyl14uy.png~original"; border="0" alt=" photo one-way-or-an-author-review_zpsphyl14uy.png"/></a>
Reviewed By Beckie Bookworm
https://www.beckiebookworm.com
I didn't realise If You Dare (The Lightkeepers #2) By Erica Splinder was the second book in this series.
It probably would have been better to read book one first despite this "If You Dare" was very easy to interpret and told the back-story of this series splendidly.
Now You could technically read this as a standalone, but my recommendation would be start at the very beginning, it's a very good place to start usually ha ha.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/images%203_zps3qrbdz7u.jpg.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/images%203_zps3qrbdz7u.jpg~original"; border="0" alt=" photo images 3_zps3qrbdz7u.jpg"/></a>
Now after playing some catch up I quickly fell into the story of dark and light bearers and the age old battle of good versus evil.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/Starved-Rock_zpse4w1zaf3.jpg.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/Starved-Rock_zpse4w1zaf3.jpg~original"; border="0" alt=" photo Starved-Rock_zpse4w1zaf3.jpg"/></a>
Erica Spindler has really managed to create a vivid world that was so easy to get absorbed into, immersing myself fully into this other domain.
The book picks up where the previous one leaves us.
we have Our two detectives, Mikki, who has recovered from her injuries but is feeling that a lot is being kept from her, she feels on the outside partially, out in the cold, but not understanding exactly why.
Then there's her partner Zach who is half/ half lighter but is much more in the picture regarding information sharing and has been ordered to keep stum. keeping his partner in the dark is something he struggles with as well as certain feelings towards Mikki he so shouldn't be entertaining.
There's also Angel eighteen and struggling with her independence and Mikki's set boundaries, A Rebellious teenager in love for the first time with the mysterious Seth who comes with a very creepy but rich uncle.
This whole story is a puzzle with the pieces just waiting to be slotted together and everybody has a part to play in the bigger picture.
There are so many interesting and diverse secondary character's in this tale as well as the three main players Mikki, Zach and Angel. I love that we get to crawl inside this trios heads seeing different interpretations of events as they unfolded.
All the characters here were fleshed out well and the story just flowed for me effortlessly, keeping my attention throughout.
I found reading If You Dare an enjoyable experience and I would be happy to recommend it to others, my only advice would be Start at book one first before proceeding to the Finish line makes things a whole lot easier overall.
<a href="http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/rosella1974/media/start-and-finish_zpsnsodo1jc.jpg.html"; target="_blank"><img src="http://i1376.photobucket.com/albums/ah5/rosella1974/start-and-finish_zpsnsodo1jc.jpg~original"; border="0" alt=" photo start-and-finish_zpsnsodo1jc.jpg"/></a>
Thank you to the Publisher and NetGalley for providing me with an arc of If You Dare, this is my own honest and unbiased opinion.
Reviewed By Beckie Bookworm
https://www.beckiebookworm.com/
https://www.facebook.com/beckiebookworm/
Forced premise (2 more)
Storytelling & writing that drives you insane
Not interesting
You'll probably love it or hate it
Dustin Tillman is a psychologist in Ohio; he's married with two sons and rarely even thinks about the horrific incident of his childhood, when his adopted brother, Rusty, murdered Dustin's parents and his aunt and uncle. Dustin was just a child then, and his brother was arrested largely on the testimony of Dustin and his cousin Kate and the 1980s' fears over satanism. But now Dustin learns that Rusty is being released from prison; his appeal has been granted, and his verdict overturned based on DNA evidence. Meanwhile, Dustin is struggling with one of his patients, Aqil, a former police officer who believes there is a link among a group of drunken college boys who have died by drowning. As more and more things start going wrong in Dustin's life, he gets drawn into Aqil's paranoia-- and he threatens to bring down his family with him.
This book had an interesting premise: linking two sets of crimes in the past and present, but I felt like that premise was a little forced/falsified, and I never got into the book, or the characters. As a reader, you'll probably find the way it's written either brilliant or incredibly irritating, and I fell squarely into the irritating camp. There are very abrupt chapter switches between the present and the past that are quite annoying, making it difficult to tell exactly where you are in time. The changes in point of view aren't as bad, allowing you to hear from Dustin, his son, and others, but it still gets confusing quickly. (Sidebar: doesn't anyone just tell a linear story from one person's point of view anymore?)
Even more, the story is written quite like the characters think--which is fine in theory--for instance, this includes Dustin's tendency to just stop mid-sentence, something his family teases him about. After a bit you get somewhat used to the random sentences that end mid-thought, or the weird white spaces, but it's still strange. Other parts are the story are split into two or three parts on a page and told almost in parallel, causing you to flip back and forth to read each set. I never was quite sure of the point of that. Yes, people in the novel are going crazy and on drugs. I could get that concept and not have to flip back and forth constantly to read chunks of the story. It's one of those storytelling devices that, to me, could be amazing, but just winds up driving you slightly insane.
This novel is also very dark. Again, that's fine. I just finished The Roanoke Girls, which was incredibly dark, and loved it. But this one: I just didn't find it that interesting. I found myself finishing it more out of a vague curiosity and duty than anything else. I figured out one of the main plot points pretty on and wasn't engaged with any of the characters. Then, after all of this, the ending is awful and vague, and there's no resolution, and I found myself just throwing the whole thing down in disgust. Definitely not one of my favorites. I can see the potential for others, but it wasn't for me.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you) in return for an unbiased review.
This book had an interesting premise: linking two sets of crimes in the past and present, but I felt like that premise was a little forced/falsified, and I never got into the book, or the characters. As a reader, you'll probably find the way it's written either brilliant or incredibly irritating, and I fell squarely into the irritating camp. There are very abrupt chapter switches between the present and the past that are quite annoying, making it difficult to tell exactly where you are in time. The changes in point of view aren't as bad, allowing you to hear from Dustin, his son, and others, but it still gets confusing quickly. (Sidebar: doesn't anyone just tell a linear story from one person's point of view anymore?)
Even more, the story is written quite like the characters think--which is fine in theory--for instance, this includes Dustin's tendency to just stop mid-sentence, something his family teases him about. After a bit you get somewhat used to the random sentences that end mid-thought, or the weird white spaces, but it's still strange. Other parts are the story are split into two or three parts on a page and told almost in parallel, causing you to flip back and forth to read each set. I never was quite sure of the point of that. Yes, people in the novel are going crazy and on drugs. I could get that concept and not have to flip back and forth constantly to read chunks of the story. It's one of those storytelling devices that, to me, could be amazing, but just winds up driving you slightly insane.
This novel is also very dark. Again, that's fine. I just finished The Roanoke Girls, which was incredibly dark, and loved it. But this one: I just didn't find it that interesting. I found myself finishing it more out of a vague curiosity and duty than anything else. I figured out one of the main plot points pretty on and wasn't engaged with any of the characters. Then, after all of this, the ending is awful and vague, and there's no resolution, and I found myself just throwing the whole thing down in disgust. Definitely not one of my favorites. I can see the potential for others, but it wasn't for me.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you) in return for an unbiased review.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Last House on the Left (2009) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
In 1972, horror icon Wes Craven made a name for himself by writing and directing a film called “The Last House on the Left.” The film was very controversial and helped launch a new genre of terror and suspense films that pushed the limits of the times. The film was notorious for its content which included rape, torture, humiliation, and violence and contains to this day some of the most disturbing images ever captured on film. In this age of remakes, prequels, and sequels, Wes Craven has stepped aside to produce a new version of his classic and this remake is sure to be as controversial and disturbing as the original was.
The film centers around 17 year old Mari Collingwood (Sara Paxton), who is taking time off from her competitive swimming and school to spend the summer with her parents Emma and John (Monica Potter and Tony Goldwyn), at their remote cabin in the woods. The family is coming to grips with the loss of their son, and Mari is anxious to spend some time with her friend Paige (Martha MacIssac), whom she has not seen in a while.
Despite concerns from her mother, Mari is given the keys to the car by her father and travels into town to see Paige. The two girls meet a boy named Justin (Spencer Treat Clark), and proceed to go back to his room to party. The three of them are having a great time until Justin’s father Krug (Garrett Dillahunt), as well as his uncle and father’s girlfriend return unexpectedly. Krug and the group are wanted convicts after a bloody escape that has left two officers dead and Krug and his family the subject of an intense manhunt. The presence of Paige and Mari is an unwanted complication and the two girls are kidnapped and taken deep into the woods. After a failed escape attempt, the unstable group set upon the girls in a series of violent physical and psychological torture and acts before brutally finishing with them and leaving them for dead.
When an unexpected storm arrives, the fugitives take refuge at the only house in the area which happens to be Mari’s home. The Collingwood’s take the stranded group in and render medical assistance thanks to John’s background as a doctor. Unaware of the evil they have let into their home, the Collingwood’s life is turned upside down when their nearly dead daughter appears on their doorstep and forces the family to do whatever it takes to survive.
What follows is a dark, violent, and intense finale that goes to extreme measures to underscore the brutality and desperation the family has been driven to in order to survive. This may lead to some using the popular phrase “torture porn” to describe the film, but that would imply a film that existed in no other context but to titillate an audience with pain and suffering. The film is thin on plot and character development, making it simply a film about revenge and the depths people will go to in order to survive and protect their loved ones. The film is a bit slow at parts but few people will forget some of the more intense moments of the film include the finale. As with “The Hills Have Eyes”, Craven created settings where ideal families were driven to extreme measures when confronted with life outside of the safe suburbs in which they dwelled. The film will shock and dismay some, but few will forget the disturbing images anytime soon.
The film centers around 17 year old Mari Collingwood (Sara Paxton), who is taking time off from her competitive swimming and school to spend the summer with her parents Emma and John (Monica Potter and Tony Goldwyn), at their remote cabin in the woods. The family is coming to grips with the loss of their son, and Mari is anxious to spend some time with her friend Paige (Martha MacIssac), whom she has not seen in a while.
Despite concerns from her mother, Mari is given the keys to the car by her father and travels into town to see Paige. The two girls meet a boy named Justin (Spencer Treat Clark), and proceed to go back to his room to party. The three of them are having a great time until Justin’s father Krug (Garrett Dillahunt), as well as his uncle and father’s girlfriend return unexpectedly. Krug and the group are wanted convicts after a bloody escape that has left two officers dead and Krug and his family the subject of an intense manhunt. The presence of Paige and Mari is an unwanted complication and the two girls are kidnapped and taken deep into the woods. After a failed escape attempt, the unstable group set upon the girls in a series of violent physical and psychological torture and acts before brutally finishing with them and leaving them for dead.
When an unexpected storm arrives, the fugitives take refuge at the only house in the area which happens to be Mari’s home. The Collingwood’s take the stranded group in and render medical assistance thanks to John’s background as a doctor. Unaware of the evil they have let into their home, the Collingwood’s life is turned upside down when their nearly dead daughter appears on their doorstep and forces the family to do whatever it takes to survive.
What follows is a dark, violent, and intense finale that goes to extreme measures to underscore the brutality and desperation the family has been driven to in order to survive. This may lead to some using the popular phrase “torture porn” to describe the film, but that would imply a film that existed in no other context but to titillate an audience with pain and suffering. The film is thin on plot and character development, making it simply a film about revenge and the depths people will go to in order to survive and protect their loved ones. The film is a bit slow at parts but few people will forget some of the more intense moments of the film include the finale. As with “The Hills Have Eyes”, Craven created settings where ideal families were driven to extreme measures when confronted with life outside of the safe suburbs in which they dwelled. The film will shock and dismay some, but few will forget the disturbing images anytime soon.