Search
Clash of Kings - CoK
Games and Entertainment
App
Battle against rival clans, strike down enemies with real time strategy and build an empire in CoK,...
Sea Weather Professional
Weather and Education
App
Sea Weather Professional provides nautical Information for the Atlantic, Pacific, North Sea, Baltic...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Thor (2011) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019 (Updated Jun 11, 2019)
Marvel films have become a staple for any movie fan’s diet over the past few years. We’ve had some bloody fantastic ones; Spiderman 2, Iron Man and the second X-Men to name a few; and we’ve had some pretty rubbish ones, Hulk, The Fantastic Four and Spiderman 3 are ones that spring to mind.
Here we stand, two years before the release of the much anticipated Avengers movie and the latest offering from Marvel blasts onto our screens: Thor, but is it a success?
Kenneth ‘Thespian’ Brannagh helms this more unknown superhero flick and surprisingly with his track record of Shakespearean cinema, makes one hell of a film.
Chris Hemsworth from Home & Away stars as the Viking god himself and is the perfect choice for the role; I can’t think of anyone better suited to playing him. 6 foot 6 with blonde hair and blue eyes, come on; it can’t just be a coincidence surely? Natalie Portman (Black Swan) and Stellen Skarsgard (Mamma Mia) also star but are unfortunately largely forgettable; Portman certainly won’t be receiving an Oscar for her performance here.
Thor takes place in the fictional realm of Asgard, ruled by an ill looking, but perfect as usual Anthony Hopkins as King Odin. Of course Asgard is created via special effects and these are flawless; from the rainbow bridge that connects that world to Earth, to the sweeping shots of the enemy Frost Giant’s home. It is here, in this beautiful place that Thor really shines, the story is dense and succinct with beautiful performances from all
the actors. The sheer scope of the film is literally immense and this could’ve dwarfed the characters, but thankfully it doesn’t.
Unfortunately, Thor’s banishment to Earth for reckless behaviour isn’t as exciting and these portions of the film feel a little flat in comparison to the bright lights of Asgard. Thankfully, Hemsworth makes sure that the usual Marvel humour is included which stops these scenes from being a complete failure. Portman and Skarsgard feel lost next to Hemsworth’s fantastic characterisation which is unfortunate as they have both proved themselves to be brilliant actors.
The constant tie-in’s with the upcoming Avengers film are shameless and an obvious marketing probe but they do little to detract from the film itself, the inclusion of S.H.I.E.L.D doesn’t feel as laboured as it could have done and thankfully they play a good part in the film – even if it is in the less interesting Earth scenes.
Thor is a film as mighty as the legendary hammer its title character uses; it’s loud, occasionally obnoxious and unashamedly reliant on special effects, more-so than any other Marvel film, but this time, it works.
Kenneth Brannagh’s influence is apparent from the off, with the Shakespearean narrative at the beginning being a real highlight of the film. Thankfully, the highlights don’t stop there and apart from a few lapses in judgement, the film steamrolls itself to a decent, if little underwhelming climax.
Overall, Thor is fabulous, a really good attempt at creating a brilliant film from a rather unknown superhero. If Iron Man hadn’t been released, it would most definitely be the best of the Marvel films to date, as a result, it comes a really close second. A real treat!
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/05/19/thor-2011/
Here we stand, two years before the release of the much anticipated Avengers movie and the latest offering from Marvel blasts onto our screens: Thor, but is it a success?
Kenneth ‘Thespian’ Brannagh helms this more unknown superhero flick and surprisingly with his track record of Shakespearean cinema, makes one hell of a film.
Chris Hemsworth from Home & Away stars as the Viking god himself and is the perfect choice for the role; I can’t think of anyone better suited to playing him. 6 foot 6 with blonde hair and blue eyes, come on; it can’t just be a coincidence surely? Natalie Portman (Black Swan) and Stellen Skarsgard (Mamma Mia) also star but are unfortunately largely forgettable; Portman certainly won’t be receiving an Oscar for her performance here.
Thor takes place in the fictional realm of Asgard, ruled by an ill looking, but perfect as usual Anthony Hopkins as King Odin. Of course Asgard is created via special effects and these are flawless; from the rainbow bridge that connects that world to Earth, to the sweeping shots of the enemy Frost Giant’s home. It is here, in this beautiful place that Thor really shines, the story is dense and succinct with beautiful performances from all
the actors. The sheer scope of the film is literally immense and this could’ve dwarfed the characters, but thankfully it doesn’t.
Unfortunately, Thor’s banishment to Earth for reckless behaviour isn’t as exciting and these portions of the film feel a little flat in comparison to the bright lights of Asgard. Thankfully, Hemsworth makes sure that the usual Marvel humour is included which stops these scenes from being a complete failure. Portman and Skarsgard feel lost next to Hemsworth’s fantastic characterisation which is unfortunate as they have both proved themselves to be brilliant actors.
The constant tie-in’s with the upcoming Avengers film are shameless and an obvious marketing probe but they do little to detract from the film itself, the inclusion of S.H.I.E.L.D doesn’t feel as laboured as it could have done and thankfully they play a good part in the film – even if it is in the less interesting Earth scenes.
Thor is a film as mighty as the legendary hammer its title character uses; it’s loud, occasionally obnoxious and unashamedly reliant on special effects, more-so than any other Marvel film, but this time, it works.
Kenneth Brannagh’s influence is apparent from the off, with the Shakespearean narrative at the beginning being a real highlight of the film. Thankfully, the highlights don’t stop there and apart from a few lapses in judgement, the film steamrolls itself to a decent, if little underwhelming climax.
Overall, Thor is fabulous, a really good attempt at creating a brilliant film from a rather unknown superhero. If Iron Man hadn’t been released, it would most definitely be the best of the Marvel films to date, as a result, it comes a really close second. A real treat!
https://moviemetropolis.net/2011/05/19/thor-2011/
Debbiereadsbook (1092 KP) rated Where It All Began (Manx Cat Guardians Prequel) in Books
Jul 21, 2018
best book of the three!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
I am incredibly frustrated about this book! Not WITH the book, ABOUT this book. Let me try to explain.
Reading books one and two, I was left with questions. Lots and lots of questions, mostly about how the Manx Cat Guardians came to be. I had high hopes that THIS book would answer those questions.
BUT!!!
While there IS a brief mention of why they were created ( The King of the Otherworld created them to counteract the rise of the new religion, Christianity, and it's belief that same sex couples were against nature and therefore abhorrent) the book is more about Maximillian, the big white cat who arrived on the island, along with Aadan, to help Stuart and Joe. And how Maximillian became the bearer of not one soul, but two.
So the questions I had were mostly NOT answered. And I'm still left with questions. This is where I get frustrated. Because I KNOW my mind is not happy, and that it still has questions, but I also know that I can't figure out what those questions are!! And if I don't know what those questions are, how is an author supposed to answer them, hmm??? So, once I got over my spit-your-dummy-out, throw-your-toys-out-the-pram and I'll-scream-and-scream-and-scream-until-I'm-sick kind of tantrum, here's what I thought about this book.
I found THIS book, is, in my opinion, the best of the three! Viking Olafr (I've been pronouncing this Olfa) has feelings for Magnus, a lowly servant. He knows he shouldn't but he cannot fight them any longer and for one glorious night, Magnus is his. What follows is extremely painful reading. Not because of the writing but because you feel Olafr's pain. You feel every single heart wrenching torment, his decision, and what he has to do. It's exceptional writing, when you can feel so much pain. I cried for Olafr and Magnus I really did. I'm being vague, I know but I work hard NOT to give spoilers!
Olafr and Maximillian have the majority voice, along with a young Aadan, when he was a child. Magnus does not have a say though. I did want him to, but when THAT happened, I'm so glad he didn't. That would have been too much, on top of Olafr's pain, I think.
It gives you a little bit more about when Aadan and Maximillian landed on the island, and what the cat felt at finally coming home. It gives me an unhealthy need for book three! At least I hope there is book three, about Aadan and Greg, who appears in book two. Because, given the way I read that bit, and the way my mind ran away with itself, I have a feeling that book ( I beg, PLEEEEEEEEEEEEZE let there be another book!) will be a far emotional and heart wrenching than the other two, and they weren't a picnic in the park either!
The author's skill at her craft is growing, and it shows!
So, even though I had a hissy fit, even though my (unvoiced) questions were not answered, and even though this is a MIGHTY painful read . . .
5 stars.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
I am incredibly frustrated about this book! Not WITH the book, ABOUT this book. Let me try to explain.
Reading books one and two, I was left with questions. Lots and lots of questions, mostly about how the Manx Cat Guardians came to be. I had high hopes that THIS book would answer those questions.
BUT!!!
While there IS a brief mention of why they were created ( The King of the Otherworld created them to counteract the rise of the new religion, Christianity, and it's belief that same sex couples were against nature and therefore abhorrent) the book is more about Maximillian, the big white cat who arrived on the island, along with Aadan, to help Stuart and Joe. And how Maximillian became the bearer of not one soul, but two.
So the questions I had were mostly NOT answered. And I'm still left with questions. This is where I get frustrated. Because I KNOW my mind is not happy, and that it still has questions, but I also know that I can't figure out what those questions are!! And if I don't know what those questions are, how is an author supposed to answer them, hmm??? So, once I got over my spit-your-dummy-out, throw-your-toys-out-the-pram and I'll-scream-and-scream-and-scream-until-I'm-sick kind of tantrum, here's what I thought about this book.
I found THIS book, is, in my opinion, the best of the three! Viking Olafr (I've been pronouncing this Olfa) has feelings for Magnus, a lowly servant. He knows he shouldn't but he cannot fight them any longer and for one glorious night, Magnus is his. What follows is extremely painful reading. Not because of the writing but because you feel Olafr's pain. You feel every single heart wrenching torment, his decision, and what he has to do. It's exceptional writing, when you can feel so much pain. I cried for Olafr and Magnus I really did. I'm being vague, I know but I work hard NOT to give spoilers!
Olafr and Maximillian have the majority voice, along with a young Aadan, when he was a child. Magnus does not have a say though. I did want him to, but when THAT happened, I'm so glad he didn't. That would have been too much, on top of Olafr's pain, I think.
It gives you a little bit more about when Aadan and Maximillian landed on the island, and what the cat felt at finally coming home. It gives me an unhealthy need for book three! At least I hope there is book three, about Aadan and Greg, who appears in book two. Because, given the way I read that bit, and the way my mind ran away with itself, I have a feeling that book ( I beg, PLEEEEEEEEEEEEZE let there be another book!) will be a far emotional and heart wrenching than the other two, and they weren't a picnic in the park either!
The author's skill at her craft is growing, and it shows!
So, even though I had a hissy fit, even though my (unvoiced) questions were not answered, and even though this is a MIGHTY painful read . . .
5 stars.
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
How To Train Your Dragon- Kids Book HD
Book and Entertainment
App
★ Oscar Nomination for Best Animated Film ★ Featured by Apple in "Staff Favorites" for 2010 ★...
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Three Heart Echo in Books
May 16, 2018
Three Heart Echo by Keary Taylor ended up on my reading list by yet another mislabeling on NetGalley, I must admit. As seen in the title image above, the book is a paranormal suspense. If you’ve read my blog for any length of time, you’ll no doubt guess that I grabbed it from the horror genre titles. Fortunately, after revisiting its cover I can at least say that its actual genre is the right one. While Three Heart Echo does have some elements of horror, it reads more like a paranormal-themed Lifetime movie.
Taking place soon after the death of Jack Caraway, Three Heart Echo tells the story of two vastly different people meeting and, you guessed it, falling in love. It’s not that simple though, and several of the more twisted things that one might expect from a horror novel surface throughout the plot. Iona Faye, a frail woman mourning the death of her fiance, seeks out Sully Whitmore, a man rumored to be able to speak to the dead. Together, the two unravel the darkness of Jack’s past while racing against time to unravel not one, but two curses.
The plot is fairly linear, with only one unexpected twist at the end. That twist defines much of the book though, and I have to admit that I actually felt anger flare up within me. I’ve gotta give Taylor kudos for that one. What I don’t like, besides the heavily romantic subplot, is the fact that, as readers see in many romance books, we’re dealing with two Mary Sue characters. Iona is described as a beautiful fawn whilst Sully is a giant Viking of a man. Catch my drift? Oh, and poor dead Jack? Apparently, he’s a stunner too.
While the plot is straightforward, Taylor also alternates between perspectives on chapters. Now, as a reader, you may think I mean she goes back and forth between past and present. It’s common enough when we read books, after all. Unfortunately, what I mean is that Taylor switches between perspectives of Sully and Iona. For the most part, the switches follow a pattern. There is some story overlap/repetition within those shifts, but it isn’t terrible. What perturbs me about these perspectives is that every now and then, there’s a break to the pattern where it may take some readers a moment to realize that the book has suddenly shifted to the past without warning.
Back to the romance side of things, there are far too many cliches. Poor, helpless main character gets an indescribable pain in their chest and they can’t fathom why it feels like their heart races when they look upon their love interest. As if that’s not bad enough, you know from the get-go that there’s going to be a love story involved. It’s not well enough to leave it a paranormal suspense, we might as well make it a romance too. Because y’know, two attractive people can’t simply be friends!
Speaking of chest pain, there’s another thing about this book that absolutely irked me. I could understand if one character had an odd need to count things. It happens and OCD is a real thing; but, what I’m referring to, is the need by both characters to take exactly five steps, to blink four times, to wait for three heartbeats before they do something so much as take a breath.
Finally, what the hell is a grand opus? The actual term is magnum opus. I’lll hope it was just a typo that was fixed in the final, published copy of the Three Heart Echo. Overall, the story itself is engaging to a degree, but it definitely wasn’t my style. I think it belongs more in the paranormal romance genre than it does horror.
I’d like to thank NetGalley and the author for providing me with a free copy for the purpose of review.
Taking place soon after the death of Jack Caraway, Three Heart Echo tells the story of two vastly different people meeting and, you guessed it, falling in love. It’s not that simple though, and several of the more twisted things that one might expect from a horror novel surface throughout the plot. Iona Faye, a frail woman mourning the death of her fiance, seeks out Sully Whitmore, a man rumored to be able to speak to the dead. Together, the two unravel the darkness of Jack’s past while racing against time to unravel not one, but two curses.
The plot is fairly linear, with only one unexpected twist at the end. That twist defines much of the book though, and I have to admit that I actually felt anger flare up within me. I’ve gotta give Taylor kudos for that one. What I don’t like, besides the heavily romantic subplot, is the fact that, as readers see in many romance books, we’re dealing with two Mary Sue characters. Iona is described as a beautiful fawn whilst Sully is a giant Viking of a man. Catch my drift? Oh, and poor dead Jack? Apparently, he’s a stunner too.
While the plot is straightforward, Taylor also alternates between perspectives on chapters. Now, as a reader, you may think I mean she goes back and forth between past and present. It’s common enough when we read books, after all. Unfortunately, what I mean is that Taylor switches between perspectives of Sully and Iona. For the most part, the switches follow a pattern. There is some story overlap/repetition within those shifts, but it isn’t terrible. What perturbs me about these perspectives is that every now and then, there’s a break to the pattern where it may take some readers a moment to realize that the book has suddenly shifted to the past without warning.
Back to the romance side of things, there are far too many cliches. Poor, helpless main character gets an indescribable pain in their chest and they can’t fathom why it feels like their heart races when they look upon their love interest. As if that’s not bad enough, you know from the get-go that there’s going to be a love story involved. It’s not well enough to leave it a paranormal suspense, we might as well make it a romance too. Because y’know, two attractive people can’t simply be friends!
Speaking of chest pain, there’s another thing about this book that absolutely irked me. I could understand if one character had an odd need to count things. It happens and OCD is a real thing; but, what I’m referring to, is the need by both characters to take exactly five steps, to blink four times, to wait for three heartbeats before they do something so much as take a breath.
Finally, what the hell is a grand opus? The actual term is magnum opus. I’lll hope it was just a typo that was fixed in the final, published copy of the Three Heart Echo. Overall, the story itself is engaging to a degree, but it definitely wasn’t my style. I think it belongs more in the paranormal romance genre than it does horror.
I’d like to thank NetGalley and the author for providing me with a free copy for the purpose of review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Cold Pursuit (2019) in Movies
Mar 1, 2019
Doesn't Quite Succeed In What It Was Attempting To Do
Liam Neeson has stated that COLD PURSUIT is going to be his last action film. And, if that is the case, he certainly picked an interesting one to go out on.
Based on the Norwegian film KRAFTIDIOTEN and Directed by the same person (Hans Peter Moland), COLD PURSUIT follows snowplow driver Nels Coxman (Neeson) who's son dies of a drug overdose. It's not long before Coxman uses his "certain set of skills" to settle the score.
And that is how this movie was marketed (taking advantage of Neeson's past 10 years of action hero status) and that is too bad for those who are going into this film expecting a "standard Neeson kick butt revenge action flick) are going to be disappointed, for Cold Pursuit has parts of that, but it also has an element to it that is going to take some getting used to - it's "Norwegian sense of humor".
To say this film is a "Dark Comedy" does not do it justice, for the comedy in this film (and there IS comedy) is so rooted in the violence and action of the proceedings that, at first, the audience does not know how to react to it. By the end, it is clear that this is a comedy - and I wished that it would have worn it's comedic elements just a little more on it's sleeve. But then, I guess, I would be missing the point of what makes up the "Norwegian sense of humor" - oddity and subtlety. And this film IS odd from the setting (a remote ski resort village outside of Denver) to the warring drug gangs (city thugs vs. Native Americans) to the lazy Sherriff and laid back townspeople to Coxman's hippy, drug addled wife (Laura Dern). It is an odd assortment of people and circumstances, but not quite as add as...say...Twin Peaks.
And that's what hurts it. It IS a subtle film with subtle humor and subtle quirks, but (at times) is TOO subtle for an American audience that is used to being hit over the head with themes and quirks and violence.
One who is NOT subtle in this film is Neeson as Coxman. He brings the rugged, dependable man of action that one has come to expect during his action-hero phase. Also not subtle (not by a long-shot) is Tom Bateman as the main bad guy, Viking (they all have nicknames) who telegraphs that he is a bad guy by being over-the-top, doing everything but kicking a puppy and twirling his mustache.
Domenick Lombardozzi as Mustang (one of Vikings' henchmen) and Tom Jackson as White Bull (leader of the Native American clan) find the right line between subtlety and over-acting and ground this film (for the most part). The rest of the cast (including John Doman and Emmy Rossum as the town Sheriffs) flit through this film, uneventfully and uninterestingly, neither adding nor detracting from the events. Only William Forsythe, as Neeson's shady brother and Elizabeth Thais (as his wife Anne) manage to rise above things in the limited amount of screen time they are given. And, finally, Laura Dern is wasted in an underwritten - and under-performed - role of Neeson's wife.
I can hear Director Moland screaming to his cast "Less, less...give me less...no more...More...MORE!!!" and the result is an uneven film that is underplayed too much in some ways and overplayed WAY too much in others. And this is too bad, for he had an interesting concept going, he just didn't execute it (at least not with this group of performers) very well. I'll be interested in seeing the original Norwegian film, KRAFTIDIOTEN, to see if it worked there.
Letter Grade: B- (for I applaud what it was trying to do)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Based on the Norwegian film KRAFTIDIOTEN and Directed by the same person (Hans Peter Moland), COLD PURSUIT follows snowplow driver Nels Coxman (Neeson) who's son dies of a drug overdose. It's not long before Coxman uses his "certain set of skills" to settle the score.
And that is how this movie was marketed (taking advantage of Neeson's past 10 years of action hero status) and that is too bad for those who are going into this film expecting a "standard Neeson kick butt revenge action flick) are going to be disappointed, for Cold Pursuit has parts of that, but it also has an element to it that is going to take some getting used to - it's "Norwegian sense of humor".
To say this film is a "Dark Comedy" does not do it justice, for the comedy in this film (and there IS comedy) is so rooted in the violence and action of the proceedings that, at first, the audience does not know how to react to it. By the end, it is clear that this is a comedy - and I wished that it would have worn it's comedic elements just a little more on it's sleeve. But then, I guess, I would be missing the point of what makes up the "Norwegian sense of humor" - oddity and subtlety. And this film IS odd from the setting (a remote ski resort village outside of Denver) to the warring drug gangs (city thugs vs. Native Americans) to the lazy Sherriff and laid back townspeople to Coxman's hippy, drug addled wife (Laura Dern). It is an odd assortment of people and circumstances, but not quite as add as...say...Twin Peaks.
And that's what hurts it. It IS a subtle film with subtle humor and subtle quirks, but (at times) is TOO subtle for an American audience that is used to being hit over the head with themes and quirks and violence.
One who is NOT subtle in this film is Neeson as Coxman. He brings the rugged, dependable man of action that one has come to expect during his action-hero phase. Also not subtle (not by a long-shot) is Tom Bateman as the main bad guy, Viking (they all have nicknames) who telegraphs that he is a bad guy by being over-the-top, doing everything but kicking a puppy and twirling his mustache.
Domenick Lombardozzi as Mustang (one of Vikings' henchmen) and Tom Jackson as White Bull (leader of the Native American clan) find the right line between subtlety and over-acting and ground this film (for the most part). The rest of the cast (including John Doman and Emmy Rossum as the town Sheriffs) flit through this film, uneventfully and uninterestingly, neither adding nor detracting from the events. Only William Forsythe, as Neeson's shady brother and Elizabeth Thais (as his wife Anne) manage to rise above things in the limited amount of screen time they are given. And, finally, Laura Dern is wasted in an underwritten - and under-performed - role of Neeson's wife.
I can hear Director Moland screaming to his cast "Less, less...give me less...no more...More...MORE!!!" and the result is an uneven film that is underplayed too much in some ways and overplayed WAY too much in others. And this is too bad, for he had an interesting concept going, he just didn't execute it (at least not with this group of performers) very well. I'll be interested in seeing the original Norwegian film, KRAFTIDIOTEN, to see if it worked there.
Letter Grade: B- (for I applaud what it was trying to do)
6 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (2019) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
Universal Pictures is wrapping up its How To Train Your Dragon Trilogy with the release of the film: How To Train Your Dragon: Hidden World, set to release on Friday, February 22, 2019.
The film brings back the same core cast of characters as the previous two movies, with Hiccup (Jay Baruchel), Astrid, (America Ferrera), Valka (Cate Blanchet), Eret (Kit Harrington), Gobber (Craig Ferguson), Snotlout (Jonah Hill), Ruffnutt (Kristen Wiig), Tuffnut (TJ Miller), Fishlegs (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), and flashback appearances of Stoic (Gerard Butler).
The story opens on what is supposed to be a “stealthy raid” but isn’t, quite.
We learn that Hiccup and his band of friends (both Dragon and human) are on a continuous mission to rescue captured Dragons from the poachers determined to capture and exploit them.
Hiccup and his friends then bring the rescued dragons back to Berk which is now a “Dragon-Viking utopia”. This arrangement, however idyllic, does not appear to be sustainable in the long-term. It is crowded and messy and Berk is just simply running out of room to house any more Dragons! Astrid and Gobber are concerned that housing all the Dragons on Berk makes the settlement a target for the Dragon hunters, endangering the entire community.
Hiccup is still exploring and reading his father’s old records, and remains convinced that there is “more” out there. He enlists Astrid’s help in finding the hidden world where he believes that all of Berk could move to, with their Dragons to leave in peace and secrecy.
After an attack on Berk, the rest of the community is convinced that Hiccup is right (even as he is not fully convinced himself of his ability to lead them successfully) and agrees to follow him in his search for the Hidden World sanctuary.
The story follows them on their quest and the dangers and successes of the journey to find a new, more suitable home.
The music, animation, and scenery in this movie is great. The details are phenomenal, from the characters’ hair, to the movements of the Dragons, to the Hidden World cave details, really show the attention that was paid in making this movie stand out!
The story line itself, as a continuation of the previous two movies, flows well, and follows an appropriate arc, both as far as relationships as well as time.
The addition of a new Dragon, and the relationship that evolves between the Light Fury and Toothless brings a new level of evolution to the existing relationship between Toothless and Hiccup, and plays on the adage of “if you love something, set it free”.
I laughed throughout the movie, at the dragons’ antics and expressions and interactions with their humans and each other. I held my breath in anticipation at some aspects, and heard myself say ‘oh no!” under my breath at one point as well. Dragons 3 drew me in from the start, and didn’t let go till the very end of the credit rolled. (We stayed until the lights came back up, and even the credits had me smiling with their small surprises!)
I found myself both wishing that this installment wouldn’t be “the end” as well as acknowledging that this story provided a fitting end to the series of films.
If there MUST be an end, this film wraps up the story nicely and provides closure, while yet leaving enough room to imagine what might come next.
I would give this movie 5 out of 5 stars, and while we did not see it in IMAX or 3D, if you have those options available, I would recommend that as well!
The film brings back the same core cast of characters as the previous two movies, with Hiccup (Jay Baruchel), Astrid, (America Ferrera), Valka (Cate Blanchet), Eret (Kit Harrington), Gobber (Craig Ferguson), Snotlout (Jonah Hill), Ruffnutt (Kristen Wiig), Tuffnut (TJ Miller), Fishlegs (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), and flashback appearances of Stoic (Gerard Butler).
The story opens on what is supposed to be a “stealthy raid” but isn’t, quite.
We learn that Hiccup and his band of friends (both Dragon and human) are on a continuous mission to rescue captured Dragons from the poachers determined to capture and exploit them.
Hiccup and his friends then bring the rescued dragons back to Berk which is now a “Dragon-Viking utopia”. This arrangement, however idyllic, does not appear to be sustainable in the long-term. It is crowded and messy and Berk is just simply running out of room to house any more Dragons! Astrid and Gobber are concerned that housing all the Dragons on Berk makes the settlement a target for the Dragon hunters, endangering the entire community.
Hiccup is still exploring and reading his father’s old records, and remains convinced that there is “more” out there. He enlists Astrid’s help in finding the hidden world where he believes that all of Berk could move to, with their Dragons to leave in peace and secrecy.
After an attack on Berk, the rest of the community is convinced that Hiccup is right (even as he is not fully convinced himself of his ability to lead them successfully) and agrees to follow him in his search for the Hidden World sanctuary.
The story follows them on their quest and the dangers and successes of the journey to find a new, more suitable home.
The music, animation, and scenery in this movie is great. The details are phenomenal, from the characters’ hair, to the movements of the Dragons, to the Hidden World cave details, really show the attention that was paid in making this movie stand out!
The story line itself, as a continuation of the previous two movies, flows well, and follows an appropriate arc, both as far as relationships as well as time.
The addition of a new Dragon, and the relationship that evolves between the Light Fury and Toothless brings a new level of evolution to the existing relationship between Toothless and Hiccup, and plays on the adage of “if you love something, set it free”.
I laughed throughout the movie, at the dragons’ antics and expressions and interactions with their humans and each other. I held my breath in anticipation at some aspects, and heard myself say ‘oh no!” under my breath at one point as well. Dragons 3 drew me in from the start, and didn’t let go till the very end of the credit rolled. (We stayed until the lights came back up, and even the credits had me smiling with their small surprises!)
I found myself both wishing that this installment wouldn’t be “the end” as well as acknowledging that this story provided a fitting end to the series of films.
If there MUST be an end, this film wraps up the story nicely and provides closure, while yet leaving enough room to imagine what might come next.
I would give this movie 5 out of 5 stars, and while we did not see it in IMAX or 3D, if you have those options available, I would recommend that as well!
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Thursday Murder Club in Books
Oct 5, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a
<a href="https://ko-fi.com/diaryofdifference">Ko-fi</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Book-Review-Banner-82.png"/>;
I am so happy I am able to be part of the instagram tour for The Thursday Murder Club by Richard Osman. Thank you to the amazing team at Penguin Random House and Viking, for sending me an ARC copy of this book.
<b><i>Synopsis:</i></b>
We follow Elizabeth, Joyce, Ron and Ibrahim, who all meet up on Thursdays and solve mysteries. But when a murder happens in their environment, they cannot stay idle. Having their own tricks up their sleeves, they uncover evidence and keep getting closer to solving the mystery. But one mystery leads to another, and another, and before they know it, they are tangled in a mystery where everyone is a suspect and no one can be trusted.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
Their personalities, especially the ability to be brutally honest and not care what they say or do is what kept me giggling throughout. Their resilience and perseverance, and the ability to trick people as well as be a nuisance was so refreshing to read, because it was so real, and I have seen it before.
I used to work in a care home with people that were suffering from dementia, and I am glad that there is a book like this one, that realistically describes how the elderly spend their free time and how mischievous they can be.
Sometimes they help the police, and sometimes they hide things and manipulate so much that I just couldn’t believe the audacity (which was funny on its own). But I think what I loved the most was how much fun they have while they are doing what they want to do - solve mysteries. And they are very good at it!
<b><i>“In life, you have to count the good days. You have to tuck them in your pocket and carry them around with you.”</i></b>
As a foreigner, I thought I wouldn’t understand the British humor.
But I suppose living with a British partner and working in the UK does help a lot. Damn, I’ve been here too long :D Although, there was one part that I did not get, and my partner had to assist me with.
I didn’t understand the meaning of “What forty-six kilos was in real money". And when explained, let me tell you, I was not impressed. :D
<b><i>“People without a sense of humour will never forgive you for being funny.”</i></b>
On the subject of mystery, because in the end, this is a mystery novel, it does deliver. There are multiple mysteries, shall I say multi-layered, and some of the mysteries did keep me wondering until the end. Some of them, I did guess quite early in the book. I kept thinking that all the mysteries would somehow end up connected, and they do, but not in the way I expect - that’s all I will say, without revealing too much.
<b><i>I loved the The Thursday Murder Club.</i></b>
It made me giggle, it made me wonder and try to solve the multi-layer mystery, it made me sad and surprised. It got all the emotions out of me, and I loved it! I would definitely recommend this book!
<b><i>“Tony is not a believer in luck, he’s a believer in hard work. If you fail to prepare, you prepare to fail.”</i></b>
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a
<a href="https://ko-fi.com/diaryofdifference">Ko-fi</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Book-Review-Banner-82.png"/>;
I am so happy I am able to be part of the instagram tour for The Thursday Murder Club by Richard Osman. Thank you to the amazing team at Penguin Random House and Viking, for sending me an ARC copy of this book.
<b><i>Synopsis:</i></b>
We follow Elizabeth, Joyce, Ron and Ibrahim, who all meet up on Thursdays and solve mysteries. But when a murder happens in their environment, they cannot stay idle. Having their own tricks up their sleeves, they uncover evidence and keep getting closer to solving the mystery. But one mystery leads to another, and another, and before they know it, they are tangled in a mystery where everyone is a suspect and no one can be trusted.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
Their personalities, especially the ability to be brutally honest and not care what they say or do is what kept me giggling throughout. Their resilience and perseverance, and the ability to trick people as well as be a nuisance was so refreshing to read, because it was so real, and I have seen it before.
I used to work in a care home with people that were suffering from dementia, and I am glad that there is a book like this one, that realistically describes how the elderly spend their free time and how mischievous they can be.
Sometimes they help the police, and sometimes they hide things and manipulate so much that I just couldn’t believe the audacity (which was funny on its own). But I think what I loved the most was how much fun they have while they are doing what they want to do - solve mysteries. And they are very good at it!
<b><i>“In life, you have to count the good days. You have to tuck them in your pocket and carry them around with you.”</i></b>
As a foreigner, I thought I wouldn’t understand the British humor.
But I suppose living with a British partner and working in the UK does help a lot. Damn, I’ve been here too long :D Although, there was one part that I did not get, and my partner had to assist me with.
I didn’t understand the meaning of “What forty-six kilos was in real money". And when explained, let me tell you, I was not impressed. :D
<b><i>“People without a sense of humour will never forgive you for being funny.”</i></b>
On the subject of mystery, because in the end, this is a mystery novel, it does deliver. There are multiple mysteries, shall I say multi-layered, and some of the mysteries did keep me wondering until the end. Some of them, I did guess quite early in the book. I kept thinking that all the mysteries would somehow end up connected, and they do, but not in the way I expect - that’s all I will say, without revealing too much.
<b><i>I loved the The Thursday Murder Club.</i></b>
It made me giggle, it made me wonder and try to solve the multi-layer mystery, it made me sad and surprised. It got all the emotions out of me, and I loved it! I would definitely recommend this book!
<b><i>“Tony is not a believer in luck, he’s a believer in hard work. If you fail to prepare, you prepare to fail.”</i></b>
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Haunting of Hill House in Books
May 16, 2018
Several years ago, I watched The Haunting (1999). It was not an intentional watching of the movie and I actually forgot that I had watched it shortly after. Now and then, I would recall a scene and try to remember where it was from without much luck. At that time, I was not aware that it was an adaptation of Shirley Jackson's novel, The Haunting of Hill House. In fact, it wasn't until more recently that I returned to my long forgotten passion for the written word. In a way, I'm a bit glad that I read the book - or in this case, listened to it.
One of the largest determining factors for me when I'm listening to an audio book is the quality of the narration, and in this case I highly suggest the version narrated by David Warner over Bernadette Dunne. Warner's voice is far gentler on the ears and his heavy English lends an utterly unique feeling to the story. I only listened to a sample of Dunne's version and found it very painful on my ears. Warner's reading is published by Phoenix, whereas Dunne's is from Blackstone Audio. Considering that I use audiobooks in order to help me relax along the hour long commute to and from work, the quality of the recording is vital to whether or not I am capable of stomaching the book (and for this reason, I nearly dropped House).
The Haunting of Hill House was published in 1959 by Viking, six years before Shirley Jackson's death. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Jackson"; target="new">The book itself is lauded as a classic example of haunted house fiction, earning praise from my all time favorite author, Stephen King.</a> It is a story in which four individuals take up summer residence in the famed Hill House, where they embark upon an unexpectedly brief journey to learn more about the supernatural - and perhaps even about their own selves. Each character is riddled with their own flaws and, to my great surprise, are not filled with the incessantly needy yearning for romance that is so common in other books.
I can also admit that none of the characters are particularly likable. The character that I find most tolerable is Eleanor Vance, our star for this read who clearly suffers from mental illness. Given the time in which the book takes place, it is almost heartbreaking how little others are able to pick up regarding her mental state and, when they finally do, the disdain they treat her with is extremely painful to watch. My least favorite of the cast is Mrs. Montague and her planchette. Mrs. Montague seems rather incapable of caring about anyone other than herself and goes to great lengths to undermine her husband. Her short fuse makes her utterly unbearable and, were I to cross paths with her, I can't promise that I wouldn't want to throttle her.
As far as the haunting of the manse itself goes, there's very little to it. While Jackson's prose is meticulous and gorgeous to behold, at no point did I feel any sense of unease. Much of what is meant to be unsettling is not supernatural in origin, but derived from the interactions of the characters. In a way, the reader is simply a passenger along for the ride in Eleanor's descent into madness, and it is from this that unease can be felt than by anything ethereal.
I enjoyed The Haunting of Hill House and I find it to be a pleasant read (or in this case, listen), but it is not among my favorites when it comes to horror. I felt no real need to keep going and none of the edge-of-your-seat anxiety that horror fans like myself thrive on. It is certainly a beautiful book and Hill House has a hauntingly sad past, but other than that I did not find the story to be overly impressive. While some of this could be attributed to the fact that I had seen the movie in the past, I don't really feel that is the case - especially since I seem to be in agreement with several other readers.
One of the largest determining factors for me when I'm listening to an audio book is the quality of the narration, and in this case I highly suggest the version narrated by David Warner over Bernadette Dunne. Warner's voice is far gentler on the ears and his heavy English lends an utterly unique feeling to the story. I only listened to a sample of Dunne's version and found it very painful on my ears. Warner's reading is published by Phoenix, whereas Dunne's is from Blackstone Audio. Considering that I use audiobooks in order to help me relax along the hour long commute to and from work, the quality of the recording is vital to whether or not I am capable of stomaching the book (and for this reason, I nearly dropped House).
The Haunting of Hill House was published in 1959 by Viking, six years before Shirley Jackson's death. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Jackson"; target="new">The book itself is lauded as a classic example of haunted house fiction, earning praise from my all time favorite author, Stephen King.</a> It is a story in which four individuals take up summer residence in the famed Hill House, where they embark upon an unexpectedly brief journey to learn more about the supernatural - and perhaps even about their own selves. Each character is riddled with their own flaws and, to my great surprise, are not filled with the incessantly needy yearning for romance that is so common in other books.
I can also admit that none of the characters are particularly likable. The character that I find most tolerable is Eleanor Vance, our star for this read who clearly suffers from mental illness. Given the time in which the book takes place, it is almost heartbreaking how little others are able to pick up regarding her mental state and, when they finally do, the disdain they treat her with is extremely painful to watch. My least favorite of the cast is Mrs. Montague and her planchette. Mrs. Montague seems rather incapable of caring about anyone other than herself and goes to great lengths to undermine her husband. Her short fuse makes her utterly unbearable and, were I to cross paths with her, I can't promise that I wouldn't want to throttle her.
As far as the haunting of the manse itself goes, there's very little to it. While Jackson's prose is meticulous and gorgeous to behold, at no point did I feel any sense of unease. Much of what is meant to be unsettling is not supernatural in origin, but derived from the interactions of the characters. In a way, the reader is simply a passenger along for the ride in Eleanor's descent into madness, and it is from this that unease can be felt than by anything ethereal.
I enjoyed The Haunting of Hill House and I find it to be a pleasant read (or in this case, listen), but it is not among my favorites when it comes to horror. I felt no real need to keep going and none of the edge-of-your-seat anxiety that horror fans like myself thrive on. It is certainly a beautiful book and Hill House has a hauntingly sad past, but other than that I did not find the story to be overly impressive. While some of this could be attributed to the fact that I had seen the movie in the past, I don't really feel that is the case - especially since I seem to be in agreement with several other readers.