Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Happy Death Day 2U (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Hands up if you laughed your way through this one? *throws hands up in the air*
This is where I love the horror genre, although I wouldn't really say this is horror. It's light-hearted and knows it doesn't need to take itself too seriously. It's sort of a horror comedy... A homedy? A corror? Definitely a homedy.
The trailer was a little misleading, I went in thinking that we were going to see them all stuck in the time loop which isn't the case. I'm probably happy that it ended up being different because I couldn't work out how they were going to do it otherwise.
When the original came out I was so happy to have discovered it. Horror is probably my least favourite genre but throw some homedy (it's happening people, go with it!) at me and I'm there for it. It's why I love the Screams and Final Destinations. HDD2U took it to another level, or should I say dimension?
While I loved this we could now have a potential problem, the third one could step over into Sharknado territory and become the parody but we'll have to cross that bridge when we come to it... and if I'm honest, this one was pretty close to that line anyway.
There's no way to deny the fact that 2 is riding on the coattails of its predecessor. It concentrates more on solving the cause of the loop rather than the mystery of who the killer is now and it isn't quite as compelling to watch. Neither is the fact that in this new loop we're given altered versions of the existing characters. We see a lot more of Danielle which if I'm honest isn't a good thing. She's still totes annoying but this time she brings a thespian side that leads to a truly terrible slapstick scene.
For sheer enjoyment as a follow on film it's brilliant but taken on its own merit it wouldn't get such high praise, but I had fun and that's what counts. I did see this for a second time and it unfortunately gave me more time to consider all the slightly dubious bits of it. It really hits hard on the sci-fi side of things, particularly in the mid-credit scene, and it doesn't feel quite right... now I'm wondering if it has already become its own parody...
What you should do
If you enjoyed the first one then you should totally see it, it's entertaining and much less serious about itself than the first but it's also much more ridiculous. Do remember to stay for the credit scene, you'll be able to see why I'm a little worried about any future endeavours.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd probably still want Tree's fearlessness and resilience, but without having to die repeatedly to attain it.
This is where I love the horror genre, although I wouldn't really say this is horror. It's light-hearted and knows it doesn't need to take itself too seriously. It's sort of a horror comedy... A homedy? A corror? Definitely a homedy.
The trailer was a little misleading, I went in thinking that we were going to see them all stuck in the time loop which isn't the case. I'm probably happy that it ended up being different because I couldn't work out how they were going to do it otherwise.
When the original came out I was so happy to have discovered it. Horror is probably my least favourite genre but throw some homedy (it's happening people, go with it!) at me and I'm there for it. It's why I love the Screams and Final Destinations. HDD2U took it to another level, or should I say dimension?
While I loved this we could now have a potential problem, the third one could step over into Sharknado territory and become the parody but we'll have to cross that bridge when we come to it... and if I'm honest, this one was pretty close to that line anyway.
There's no way to deny the fact that 2 is riding on the coattails of its predecessor. It concentrates more on solving the cause of the loop rather than the mystery of who the killer is now and it isn't quite as compelling to watch. Neither is the fact that in this new loop we're given altered versions of the existing characters. We see a lot more of Danielle which if I'm honest isn't a good thing. She's still totes annoying but this time she brings a thespian side that leads to a truly terrible slapstick scene.
For sheer enjoyment as a follow on film it's brilliant but taken on its own merit it wouldn't get such high praise, but I had fun and that's what counts. I did see this for a second time and it unfortunately gave me more time to consider all the slightly dubious bits of it. It really hits hard on the sci-fi side of things, particularly in the mid-credit scene, and it doesn't feel quite right... now I'm wondering if it has already become its own parody...
What you should do
If you enjoyed the first one then you should totally see it, it's entertaining and much less serious about itself than the first but it's also much more ridiculous. Do remember to stay for the credit scene, you'll be able to see why I'm a little worried about any future endeavours.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd probably still want Tree's fearlessness and resilience, but without having to die repeatedly to attain it.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Woman in the Window (2021) in Movies
May 24, 2021
It is NOT Rear Window
A piece of advice for you when you start to watch the “Alfred Hitchcock-esque” thriller, THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW. If you are at all a Hitchcock fan, you will be spending the first part of this film comparing it to the 1954 classic REAR WINDOW and this would be a disservice to this film.
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
For…THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is no Rear Window, nor is it intended to be. It has many, many elements that are the same as Rear Window (most notably, the setup: a housebound person thinks they have witnessed a murder in a neighboring apartment), and THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW is just like Rear Window…until it isn’t.
And that’s when I started to like this film, when I stopped comparing it (in my head) to Rear Window.
Based on the Best Seller by A.J. Finn (adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts who also appears in the film), THE WOMAN IN THE WINDOW tells the tale of Anna Fox, an agoraphobic who watches life go on outside her window. When she thinks she has witnessed a murder, she (and the audience) must decide is it real? Did she truly witness a murder? If so, who dunnit? If not, is she just hallucinating things? Is Anna crazy?
The answers to these questions were satisfying enough to me that I ended up enjoying the film experience that I had - but I have to be honest and tell you that, for awhile, my enjoyment of this film was hanging by a thread.
Amy Adams (ENCHANTED) is terrific - if unspectacular - in the title role. Her Anna Fox is murkey (that is meant as a compliment) and struggles through most of the film trying to determine what is real and what is an illusion. Adams does a “journeyman’s” job with this role. She acts her way through it in such a workmanlike fashion that I almost forgot that it is Adams on the screen.
Wyatt Russell (Kurt’s son who is also the new Captain America in THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER) fares the best of the Supporting players for he has the most to do. Unfortunately, Director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) and Screenwriter Letts wastes such strong actors as Gary Oldman (DARKEST HOUR), Julianne Moore (STILL ALICE), Anthony Mackie (The Falcon in the Marvel Movies), Jennifer Jason Leigh (HATEFUL 8), Brian Tyree Henry (GET OUT) and Letts himself in terribly underwritten roles that serve (mostly) as red herrings - and each of their characters are interchangeable and forgettable.
And that, ultimately, is where this film comes apart. While I cared about Anna and the solution to the mystery - I didn’t care very much about the other characters involved.
Which is why, I think, I’ll pull my DVD of Rear Window out and watch that film for the umpteenth time.
Letter Grade: B
7 Stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Creed II (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Since his spectacular fight which ended in a loss at the conclusion of “Creed”, Adonis Johnson Creed (Michael B. Jordan) has won his next six bouts and then pulls off an impressive victory to become the new Heavyweight Champion.
Life is good for the new champion as he believes he has moved out of the shadow of his legendary father and is ready to settle down with Bianca (Tessa Thompson) and move ahead with life.
At the same time, former Russian Champion Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren) is training his son Viktor (Florian Munteanu) in Kiev to become and even more devastating boxer than he was. Ivan has suffered much since losing to Rocky in “Rocky IV” as his wife has left him and he has been shunned and cast out of the country which once lauded him as their prize athlete. Losing to Rocky in Moscow in front of numerous dignitaries has ruined him and made his life a shell of what he was leaving him and his son cold, bitter, and driven.
When the opportunity for Viktor and Adonis to box is presented, Rocky (Sylvester Stallone) advises Adonis not to take the match. Rocky recounts that not only did Ivan kill his father in the ring, but in beating him, Rocky suffered injuries which ended his boxing career and have never fully healed.
Despite the warnings, Adonis takes the match and is unprepared for the raw brutality that Viktor presents and sufferers a horrific beating but manages to hold his title due to a technicality.
The film then follows a standard redemption story of Adonis trying to recover, face his fears, train, and find a new level of strength that he has never shown before. The climatic fight is very entertaining and well-staged and had fans at our screening reacting with cheers and dismay as the punches landed.
The film does follow some very familiar territory for the series from the emotional highs and lows of the ring, battling yourself as well as an opponent, the grueling training session, and of course the big match at the end.
Stallone gives another moving and solid performance as the aging Rocky showing that his Academy Award nominated turn in the prior film was not a fluke. What was also impressive was how Dolph Lundgren returned to a role he initially had reservations about doing and gave Drago a sympathetic side even though he is a bad guy in the film. We see a man desperate to recover what he was and who is devastated by what life has dealt him but forces himself to examine the past as he guides his son’s future.
Jordan carries a lot of swagger with his character and while the story attempts to show a softer side of his character; he is not as sympathetic as he was in the past film. I noted that Rocky was much easier to get behind as he was a more sympathetic underdog at times. That is part of what makes the series so interesting in that Rocky is still there as a presence over Adonis to guide and inform him to try to make him a true champion while allowing him to have his own identity and style.
If you are a fan of the series, then you should enjoy this next offering as long as you do not mind the formula for much of the series repeated.
http://sknr.net/2018/11/20/creed-ii/
Life is good for the new champion as he believes he has moved out of the shadow of his legendary father and is ready to settle down with Bianca (Tessa Thompson) and move ahead with life.
At the same time, former Russian Champion Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren) is training his son Viktor (Florian Munteanu) in Kiev to become and even more devastating boxer than he was. Ivan has suffered much since losing to Rocky in “Rocky IV” as his wife has left him and he has been shunned and cast out of the country which once lauded him as their prize athlete. Losing to Rocky in Moscow in front of numerous dignitaries has ruined him and made his life a shell of what he was leaving him and his son cold, bitter, and driven.
When the opportunity for Viktor and Adonis to box is presented, Rocky (Sylvester Stallone) advises Adonis not to take the match. Rocky recounts that not only did Ivan kill his father in the ring, but in beating him, Rocky suffered injuries which ended his boxing career and have never fully healed.
Despite the warnings, Adonis takes the match and is unprepared for the raw brutality that Viktor presents and sufferers a horrific beating but manages to hold his title due to a technicality.
The film then follows a standard redemption story of Adonis trying to recover, face his fears, train, and find a new level of strength that he has never shown before. The climatic fight is very entertaining and well-staged and had fans at our screening reacting with cheers and dismay as the punches landed.
The film does follow some very familiar territory for the series from the emotional highs and lows of the ring, battling yourself as well as an opponent, the grueling training session, and of course the big match at the end.
Stallone gives another moving and solid performance as the aging Rocky showing that his Academy Award nominated turn in the prior film was not a fluke. What was also impressive was how Dolph Lundgren returned to a role he initially had reservations about doing and gave Drago a sympathetic side even though he is a bad guy in the film. We see a man desperate to recover what he was and who is devastated by what life has dealt him but forces himself to examine the past as he guides his son’s future.
Jordan carries a lot of swagger with his character and while the story attempts to show a softer side of his character; he is not as sympathetic as he was in the past film. I noted that Rocky was much easier to get behind as he was a more sympathetic underdog at times. That is part of what makes the series so interesting in that Rocky is still there as a presence over Adonis to guide and inform him to try to make him a true champion while allowing him to have his own identity and style.
If you are a fan of the series, then you should enjoy this next offering as long as you do not mind the formula for much of the series repeated.
http://sknr.net/2018/11/20/creed-ii/
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated 100 Speeches that roused the world 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 href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://i1.wp.com/diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Book-Review-Banner-86.png?resize=768%2C432&ssl=1"/>;
<b><i>Boy, oh boy, do I have mixed feelings about 100 Speeches That Roused the World by Colin Salter.</i></b>
The reason I picked up this book is because I have always been in love with speeches and orators. I believe that the ability to speak in front of an audience is a very powerful skill, and I admire it as such. Many great leaders and many successful people use this skill to make people listen and act in a way they want them to. That is where the true art is, and I really admire this aspect. The fact that you can listen to two or more people tell you the same thing, and only one being able to convince you to do something or believe in something they say is a true gift.
Which takes us to the second reason I picked this book up. To find out more about the people who had this ability in history and made a difference in one way or another. And for the most part, I was pleased. There are speeches of many great (and not so great) leaders out there, speeches of people that made breakthroughs in their fields, people who fought for their rights.
<b><i>But there was a pattern I noticed in these 100 speeches.</i></b>
Most of these speeches were either from the UK or USA. And most of them were presidents, prime ministers,royalty or leaders in any other way. And all their speeches were speeches during the wars. Telling their people to fight for their nations.
And I have nothing against those speeches. They were perfect for their time and they did their purpose at the time. What I had a problem with is that there were so many more important times in history when a speech was made and it represented a change.
What about all the speeches that philosophers have given in ancient Rome and Greece? For Rome, where is Julius Caesar’s speech to the senate? For Greece, how about the movement for freedom of speech? What about the speeches during humanism and renaissance? What about some of the groundbreaking speeches that scientists have given over the years?
I was a bit disappointed with the format of the book as well, as the speeches were mostly short paragraphs, followed by a full page of the author’s notes, mostly quoting the same speech again. It was very helpful to know the background of how the speech made a difference in the world, but when most of those speeches didn’t really make any difference, and I was involved in a history lesson of the most important wars in history, it wasn’t much of a fun read.
<b><i>To conclude, this book wasn’t what I was looking for, both format and content wise. The 100 Speeches mentioned in this book didn’t do enough justice for me. I believe that title is misleading, but I can also understand that some people can still learn a lot by reading it.</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 href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://i1.wp.com/diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Book-Review-Banner-86.png?resize=768%2C432&ssl=1"/>;
<b><i>Boy, oh boy, do I have mixed feelings about 100 Speeches That Roused the World by Colin Salter.</i></b>
The reason I picked up this book is because I have always been in love with speeches and orators. I believe that the ability to speak in front of an audience is a very powerful skill, and I admire it as such. Many great leaders and many successful people use this skill to make people listen and act in a way they want them to. That is where the true art is, and I really admire this aspect. The fact that you can listen to two or more people tell you the same thing, and only one being able to convince you to do something or believe in something they say is a true gift.
Which takes us to the second reason I picked this book up. To find out more about the people who had this ability in history and made a difference in one way or another. And for the most part, I was pleased. There are speeches of many great (and not so great) leaders out there, speeches of people that made breakthroughs in their fields, people who fought for their rights.
<b><i>But there was a pattern I noticed in these 100 speeches.</i></b>
Most of these speeches were either from the UK or USA. And most of them were presidents, prime ministers,royalty or leaders in any other way. And all their speeches were speeches during the wars. Telling their people to fight for their nations.
And I have nothing against those speeches. They were perfect for their time and they did their purpose at the time. What I had a problem with is that there were so many more important times in history when a speech was made and it represented a change.
What about all the speeches that philosophers have given in ancient Rome and Greece? For Rome, where is Julius Caesar’s speech to the senate? For Greece, how about the movement for freedom of speech? What about the speeches during humanism and renaissance? What about some of the groundbreaking speeches that scientists have given over the years?
I was a bit disappointed with the format of the book as well, as the speeches were mostly short paragraphs, followed by a full page of the author’s notes, mostly quoting the same speech again. It was very helpful to know the background of how the speech made a difference in the world, but when most of those speeches didn’t really make any difference, and I was involved in a history lesson of the most important wars in history, it wasn’t much of a fun read.
<b><i>To conclude, this book wasn’t what I was looking for, both format and content wise. The 100 Speeches mentioned in this book didn’t do enough justice for me. I believe that title is misleading, but I can also understand that some people can still learn a lot by reading it.</i></b>
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Forever Layla in Books
Apr 3, 2019
David Foster is 17 years old, a few days away from being 18, on the road as a sound guy for his best friend, Michael's Band, and his life is about to change forever.
Layla is 24. She's in town from California and when she see David for the first time, like this, she's not quite sure what to do.
How does Layla know so much about David? Did his friends put her up to this as a prank for his birthday? But Layla knows things he would never tell Michael. So as David gets to know Layla better and as she gets to know the David she already knows in a whole other way, they form a bond that is not so easily broken.
Forever Layla is a story of love, happiness, trust, and science all wrapped up in one. David is living in 1994 and Layla shows up in his life from 2014. David is the kind of man every girl dreams of meeting, but Layla is afraid to mess up his life what she already knows. How can she make a life with him without giving away too much about who she is and how and why is now in his life.
This is a very well written book and it was very difficult to put down.
I loved the story of David and Layla. I was rooting for them to be together Forever as the title suggests. Their love was intense and amazing. To have a love like that with someone that you are willing to give up so much of yourself in order to make them happy and make their dreams come true.
Layla is 24. She's in town from California and when she see David for the first time, like this, she's not quite sure what to do.
How does Layla know so much about David? Did his friends put her up to this as a prank for his birthday? But Layla knows things he would never tell Michael. So as David gets to know Layla better and as she gets to know the David she already knows in a whole other way, they form a bond that is not so easily broken.
Forever Layla is a story of love, happiness, trust, and science all wrapped up in one. David is living in 1994 and Layla shows up in his life from 2014. David is the kind of man every girl dreams of meeting, but Layla is afraid to mess up his life what she already knows. How can she make a life with him without giving away too much about who she is and how and why is now in his life.
This is a very well written book and it was very difficult to put down.
I loved the story of David and Layla. I was rooting for them to be together Forever as the title suggests. Their love was intense and amazing. To have a love like that with someone that you are willing to give up so much of yourself in order to make them happy and make their dreams come true.
I have never been too interested in historical accounts of disasters, natural or man-made. I got this book free from Amazon for Kindle and I genuinely could not put it down from start to finish. It is a really harrowing modern account of one of the worst man-made disasters in world history and it takes you though the entire history and backstory of nuclear power and the Chernobyl disaster, including what became of everyone involved at the time, the global political backlash and comparisons with much more recent nuclear accidents such as Fukushima.
In between chapters, the narrator simultaneously includes his own first-person account of his visit to Chernobyl and the neighbouring ghost town of Pripyat, some 32 years after the fallout which killed, injured and displaced so many people in the Ukraine.
Included in the text are photographs of the sarcophagus, the ghost town of Pripyat and documentation from the official enquiry (in translation from the original Cyrillic text). One of the most enthralling chapters is a very stomach-churning, matter-of-fact detail of what actually happens to a human body when affected by radiation poisoning. This chapter is seriously not for the faint-hearted!!
Leatherbarrow has done an absolutely fantastic job here, over 5 years of research to build an account of something I have heard of all my life but no writing has quite enthralled me like this book did. The juxtaposition of the historical and the modern help to transform this text from the dryly historical account that it could have been into a thoroughly readable and dare I say unputdownable account of one the the worlds biggest nuclear disasters.
In between chapters, the narrator simultaneously includes his own first-person account of his visit to Chernobyl and the neighbouring ghost town of Pripyat, some 32 years after the fallout which killed, injured and displaced so many people in the Ukraine.
Included in the text are photographs of the sarcophagus, the ghost town of Pripyat and documentation from the official enquiry (in translation from the original Cyrillic text). One of the most enthralling chapters is a very stomach-churning, matter-of-fact detail of what actually happens to a human body when affected by radiation poisoning. This chapter is seriously not for the faint-hearted!!
Leatherbarrow has done an absolutely fantastic job here, over 5 years of research to build an account of something I have heard of all my life but no writing has quite enthralled me like this book did. The juxtaposition of the historical and the modern help to transform this text from the dryly historical account that it could have been into a thoroughly readable and dare I say unputdownable account of one the the worlds biggest nuclear disasters.
Deborah (162 KP) rated The Queen's Governess in Books
Dec 21, 2018
This is the first book I've read by this author but I thought the concept sounded interesting, even if I do think that perhaps the Tudors are starting to be a bit done to death! The story is in many ways about Elizabeth I, but the narrative character is Kat Ashley, Elizabeth's governess (as from the title!) and later her chief lady of the bedchamber.
The novel is written in the first person, which can be a little clumsy in the hands of an unskilled author, but Harper carried it off well. I was interested in her historical note at the end, as Kat Ashley's origins are a little obscure - I do like to know what is fact and what the author's imagination, but of course fact is often stranger than fiction! I'm not totally sure if the relationship with Cromwell as shown in the novel is based on historical fact or more on conjecture on the author's part.
I did spot a couple of errors in the text - I know they do move county boundaries now and then, but I do beleive that Stamford is in Lincolnshire and not Northamptonshire. Yes, I know it's picky, but it's that sort of thing that makes me stop and think "Are you sure?".
The novel starts with the demise of Anne Boleyn and then takes us back to Kat's earlier life in Devon, leading up to the moment we see in the prologue. We are carried through all the trials and tribulations of the reigns of her half siblings finally followed by Elizabeth's accession and some way into her reign.
The novel is written in the first person, which can be a little clumsy in the hands of an unskilled author, but Harper carried it off well. I was interested in her historical note at the end, as Kat Ashley's origins are a little obscure - I do like to know what is fact and what the author's imagination, but of course fact is often stranger than fiction! I'm not totally sure if the relationship with Cromwell as shown in the novel is based on historical fact or more on conjecture on the author's part.
I did spot a couple of errors in the text - I know they do move county boundaries now and then, but I do beleive that Stamford is in Lincolnshire and not Northamptonshire. Yes, I know it's picky, but it's that sort of thing that makes me stop and think "Are you sure?".
The novel starts with the demise of Anne Boleyn and then takes us back to Kat's earlier life in Devon, leading up to the moment we see in the prologue. We are carried through all the trials and tribulations of the reigns of her half siblings finally followed by Elizabeth's accession and some way into her reign.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Inn at Hidden Run (Tree of Life #1) in Books
Jun 21, 2019
Hidden Run is a B&B in the small town of Canyon Mines, just outside of Denver, Colorado. When a stranger comes to town looking lost, Jillian and her father Nolan are determined to help her find her way. Meri comes from a family of doctors, but that is not what she wants to do. Maybe coming to Colorado, a place she last felt like herself will help her to find the future that is best for her.
Thank you to NetGalley & Barbour Publishing for the opportunity to read and review this book.
The title of this book really isn't fitting for what it contains. It's much more than the Inn. That is where Meri is situated while in Colorado, but it's really about the people in the town that help her when she is lost. Meri loves her family, but doesn't feel the calling to be a doctor like everyone else for generations has been. When she comes to Canyon Mines, Jillian, who is a genealogist, helps her to find her family roots and maybe explain while she feels the way she does.
I gave this book three stars, because it didn't grasp my attention right away. At times it felt as if the story line kept repeating the same things, like the author copy and pasted a line from one chapter to all the other chapters in the book. Overall the book is enjoyable, trading from modern day Colorado, to 1800's Memphis during the yellow fever outbreak. This is a good book for those the enjoy historical fiction. I did learn a lot about that epidemic which includes some very factual details in this story.
Thank you to NetGalley & Barbour Publishing for the opportunity to read and review this book.
The title of this book really isn't fitting for what it contains. It's much more than the Inn. That is where Meri is situated while in Colorado, but it's really about the people in the town that help her when she is lost. Meri loves her family, but doesn't feel the calling to be a doctor like everyone else for generations has been. When she comes to Canyon Mines, Jillian, who is a genealogist, helps her to find her family roots and maybe explain while she feels the way she does.
I gave this book three stars, because it didn't grasp my attention right away. At times it felt as if the story line kept repeating the same things, like the author copy and pasted a line from one chapter to all the other chapters in the book. Overall the book is enjoyable, trading from modern day Colorado, to 1800's Memphis during the yellow fever outbreak. This is a good book for those the enjoy historical fiction. I did learn a lot about that epidemic which includes some very factual details in this story.
Kaz (232 KP) rated 'Impression of a Dilemma' in Books
Jun 30, 2019 (Updated Jun 30, 2019)
A fun Read
'Impression of A Dillemma' at first glance, looks as if it's going to be a crime based novel. However, it's much more than that.
This is a book which revolves around several diverse, quirky, but believable characters and their take on the same, shocking event. This book really gets into the minds of these characters and is very well written. I liked the almost poetic flow of the writing and the gentle humour.
In some novels which have multiple characters, in the end, they all become indistinguishable. However with this novel, everyone is completely different.
There was one character in particular, who at first, took some time for me to connect with. In reflection, I think this was good, because not many books include characters with such a quirky way of expressing themselves. So for this reason, I wouldn't say that this was a negative, but a change from having 'conventional' characters.
The pace of the novel was very good, at no point did it drag, I wanted to know what was going to happen next.
In fact, when I reached the end of the book, although I felt that it's ending was satisfactory, I couldn't help feeling like I wanted to know more about what the characters were going to do next. I'm not sure whether there will be any more books containing these characters or whether it's a stand alone novel, but I would be quite happy to read more about them, because they are so diverse and interesting.
I would definitely recommend this novel, if you like something quirky.
This is a book which revolves around several diverse, quirky, but believable characters and their take on the same, shocking event. This book really gets into the minds of these characters and is very well written. I liked the almost poetic flow of the writing and the gentle humour.
In some novels which have multiple characters, in the end, they all become indistinguishable. However with this novel, everyone is completely different.
There was one character in particular, who at first, took some time for me to connect with. In reflection, I think this was good, because not many books include characters with such a quirky way of expressing themselves. So for this reason, I wouldn't say that this was a negative, but a change from having 'conventional' characters.
The pace of the novel was very good, at no point did it drag, I wanted to know what was going to happen next.
In fact, when I reached the end of the book, although I felt that it's ending was satisfactory, I couldn't help feeling like I wanted to know more about what the characters were going to do next. I'm not sure whether there will be any more books containing these characters or whether it's a stand alone novel, but I would be quite happy to read more about them, because they are so diverse and interesting.
I would definitely recommend this novel, if you like something quirky.
Scroogenomics: Why You Shouldn't Buy Presents for the Holidays
Book
Christmas is a time of seasonal cheer, family get-togethers, holiday parties, and-gift giving. Lots...