Search
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0aa6e/0aa6e26fea59acc32c28396b978ff3683cff7207" alt="40x40"
Amanda (96 KP) rated Wandering in Wonderland (Book #1) in Books
Apr 1, 2019
Lewis Carroll didn’t get it right?
A GIANT thank you and gratitude to The Parliament House publishing and the author for giving me this opportunity to read this book. I did a cover reveal and I knew right off the bat that I was going to love this book. I was right.
We follow Jessica whom eats a bit of cookie and winds up forgetting her past life. Once she is told that she has died and is now in Wonderland, Jessica struggles with the acclimation of this unique land that is only read in a book. She’s escorted by a White Rabbit named Horace (Not a genuine rabbit, but in this story, White Rabbits is Wonderland’s term for queen’s guards). She comes across Rion, the Caterpillar (but disguised as a man at the time) and he gives her a journal that belonged to a Hatter named Rorie (quite a few R names here.)
Anyway, she is taken to the Queen of Hearts, whom happens to be Alice. As a new comer to Wonderland, the new comers are to look through the Looking Glass to show where they are meant to be in Wonderland. You could be a Crafter or a part of the court, the Looking Glass shows you who you are. When Jessica looks through the glass, she is struck as are the other members of the palace that she is shown to be a Spade.
Spades declared ware on the palace before Alice took the throne. Wonderland is a magical place, but it can choose who it likes and doesn’t like, and who gets to leave and stay.
I don’t want to give away too much, so I’ll stop there for time being.
I’m going to be the first to say that Alice in Wonderland is not my favorite story. I don’t like the Disney cartoon (though I did as a child, what was I thinking?) I do love Tim Burton’s spin on it (IT’S NOT A REMAKE!) but the original story I just couldn’t get into it. The summary and the excerpt to this story was just too good to pass up. I had a feeling I would enjoy the story, I just didn’t realize how much I would.
I read this in days (would have been less if I didn’t have a full time job). It’s a unique spin on the story. This isn’t so much as a retelling as it is a what if or an addition to it if Alice became the queen of hearts. So don’t go into this story and think it’s a retelling, because it is not.
I adored the characters including Alice and Jessica. There are some dark moments, but me being a highly sensitive person, it wasn’t as triggering, but I will say there are some there. I loved the twists in the story and how Jessica really does come to terms with her new found role in Wonderland.
This is a first in a series. That’s my only complaint! Why must have the (im)patience for the next book and the wonder (lol) as to what is going to happen with Jessica? Can’t tell you the ending, Wonderland wants you to know it from beginning to end.
We follow Jessica whom eats a bit of cookie and winds up forgetting her past life. Once she is told that she has died and is now in Wonderland, Jessica struggles with the acclimation of this unique land that is only read in a book. She’s escorted by a White Rabbit named Horace (Not a genuine rabbit, but in this story, White Rabbits is Wonderland’s term for queen’s guards). She comes across Rion, the Caterpillar (but disguised as a man at the time) and he gives her a journal that belonged to a Hatter named Rorie (quite a few R names here.)
Anyway, she is taken to the Queen of Hearts, whom happens to be Alice. As a new comer to Wonderland, the new comers are to look through the Looking Glass to show where they are meant to be in Wonderland. You could be a Crafter or a part of the court, the Looking Glass shows you who you are. When Jessica looks through the glass, she is struck as are the other members of the palace that she is shown to be a Spade.
Spades declared ware on the palace before Alice took the throne. Wonderland is a magical place, but it can choose who it likes and doesn’t like, and who gets to leave and stay.
I don’t want to give away too much, so I’ll stop there for time being.
I’m going to be the first to say that Alice in Wonderland is not my favorite story. I don’t like the Disney cartoon (though I did as a child, what was I thinking?) I do love Tim Burton’s spin on it (IT’S NOT A REMAKE!) but the original story I just couldn’t get into it. The summary and the excerpt to this story was just too good to pass up. I had a feeling I would enjoy the story, I just didn’t realize how much I would.
I read this in days (would have been less if I didn’t have a full time job). It’s a unique spin on the story. This isn’t so much as a retelling as it is a what if or an addition to it if Alice became the queen of hearts. So don’t go into this story and think it’s a retelling, because it is not.
I adored the characters including Alice and Jessica. There are some dark moments, but me being a highly sensitive person, it wasn’t as triggering, but I will say there are some there. I loved the twists in the story and how Jessica really does come to terms with her new found role in Wonderland.
This is a first in a series. That’s my only complaint! Why must have the (im)patience for the next book and the wonder (lol) as to what is going to happen with Jessica? Can’t tell you the ending, Wonderland wants you to know it from beginning to end.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/db12d/db12d66a2dd4f6b0217a4efa1463ec4679235acc" alt="40x40"
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Duchess Deal in Books
Jun 6, 2019
^^ Returning from the war, scarred Duke of Ashbury decides he needs an heir, but that would mean a wife and she’d have to look upon his beastly war wounds, which would never do. So when he sets his sights on the vicar’s daughter Emma Gladstone and proposes a marriage of convenience deal, he begins to put some rules into place to protect her (or maybe himself) from seeing his disfigured body.
^^ But Emma is no fool, and insists on some rules of her own. She can see that beneath the scars, bad temper and his awfully stubborn ways, he’s quite simply just a lonely man needing companionship, and no different to her. Surely beauty is only skin deep and there’s much more to him than outward appearances.
^^ Oh, what a lovely story this is. Yes, on the surface this is what I’d call a sweet romance; a poor girl meets rich Duke love story. But deep down, below the surface of the title and cover, I uncovered some hidden gems. It’s a story of two lost souls trying to make the best of what they feel they have left to offer.
^^ The Duke is a great character, and yes, he does have his faults, and I’m not talking his appearance, but can he really be blamed after what he’s been through? The war has left the Duke scarred, physically and mentally. He may be a hero on the battlefield, but with his scars on show he’s found himself to be rather intimidating to others; children scream, dogs howl, honestly, if no one can bear to look at him, how is he ever going to produce an heir?
^^ Then we meet Emma, wise before her years, and not a woman to be messed around. But if that’s so, why would Emma choose to go into a loveless marriage with a man who only wants her for an heir? He’s already made it totally clear they’ll never have to sleep in the same bed ever again after their child is born. What on earth could possibly be in it for her? Well, maybe deep down, Emma’s not so confident after all. Perhaps, this wealthy Duke may be her last chance to have a child, and gain some security into her life. After all, if her father said “No decent man would ever want you!” as he banished her from their house, then maybe there’s some truth to it?
^^ I found myself thinking this is very much a charming Beauty and the Beast story. The way Emma and Ash get to know each other is both realistic and so endearing. This has some cracking dialogue with several laugh out loud moments, which made this such an enjoyable, fast read. I can’t wait to read more like this from Mills and Boon.
^^ Oh and I nearly forgot. It’s got it’s sexy bits in it too, and they are totally fitting and in line with this time period. What did make me smile, (and I thought it was a nice touch) was how, at the beginning of the book, there is a lovely dedication from the author (also once a vicar’s daughter) thanking her dad for being nothing like her character Emma’s father. Tessa Dare also mentions which chapters her father should miss out when reading. Don’t you realise that these pages will be where everyone visits first? ?
Overall: This is a charming Beauty and the Beast story, about love, honesty and mistakingly becoming the Monster of Mayfair! (Hilarious).
^^ But Emma is no fool, and insists on some rules of her own. She can see that beneath the scars, bad temper and his awfully stubborn ways, he’s quite simply just a lonely man needing companionship, and no different to her. Surely beauty is only skin deep and there’s much more to him than outward appearances.
^^ Oh, what a lovely story this is. Yes, on the surface this is what I’d call a sweet romance; a poor girl meets rich Duke love story. But deep down, below the surface of the title and cover, I uncovered some hidden gems. It’s a story of two lost souls trying to make the best of what they feel they have left to offer.
^^ The Duke is a great character, and yes, he does have his faults, and I’m not talking his appearance, but can he really be blamed after what he’s been through? The war has left the Duke scarred, physically and mentally. He may be a hero on the battlefield, but with his scars on show he’s found himself to be rather intimidating to others; children scream, dogs howl, honestly, if no one can bear to look at him, how is he ever going to produce an heir?
^^ Then we meet Emma, wise before her years, and not a woman to be messed around. But if that’s so, why would Emma choose to go into a loveless marriage with a man who only wants her for an heir? He’s already made it totally clear they’ll never have to sleep in the same bed ever again after their child is born. What on earth could possibly be in it for her? Well, maybe deep down, Emma’s not so confident after all. Perhaps, this wealthy Duke may be her last chance to have a child, and gain some security into her life. After all, if her father said “No decent man would ever want you!” as he banished her from their house, then maybe there’s some truth to it?
^^ I found myself thinking this is very much a charming Beauty and the Beast story. The way Emma and Ash get to know each other is both realistic and so endearing. This has some cracking dialogue with several laugh out loud moments, which made this such an enjoyable, fast read. I can’t wait to read more like this from Mills and Boon.
^^ Oh and I nearly forgot. It’s got it’s sexy bits in it too, and they are totally fitting and in line with this time period. What did make me smile, (and I thought it was a nice touch) was how, at the beginning of the book, there is a lovely dedication from the author (also once a vicar’s daughter) thanking her dad for being nothing like her character Emma’s father. Tessa Dare also mentions which chapters her father should miss out when reading. Don’t you realise that these pages will be where everyone visits first? ?
Overall: This is a charming Beauty and the Beast story, about love, honesty and mistakingly becoming the Monster of Mayfair! (Hilarious).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3554f/3554fcbee01eea24370e1b7f57d1d223799a6e1c" alt="40x40"
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Power Rangers (2017) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Anyone fancy a doughnut?
If I had a pound for every time someone said they wanted a live-action Power Rangers reboot, I’d have exactly… nothing. The popular television series isn’t the first franchise that comes to mind when imagining films that’ll draw in the crowds, especially considering its era was very much the 90s.
Nevertheless, production company Lionsgate has taken the chance and given the plucky superheroes their first film in 20 years. But does this classic brand have what it takes to excite 21st Century audiences?
Five ordinary teenagers must band together to become something extraordinary when they learn that their small town of Angel Grove – and the world – is on the verge of being obliterated by the villainous Rita Repulsa (Elizabeth Banks). Chosen by destiny, the new heroes quickly discover they are the only ones who can save the planet. But to do so, they will have to overcome the issues blighting their real lives and before it’s too late, band together as the Power Rangers.
Director Dean Israelite in his second feature film crafts a gritty, modern-day reimagining of the series that manages to lose nearly all the campy fun in the process. It’s such a shame that a film as progressive as Power Rangers gets bogged down in poor pacing, expositional dialogue, messy action sequences and hilariously obvious product placement for Krispy Kreme doughnuts.
“How is it progressive” I hear you say. Well, this is the first film to feature an autistic superhero and a female protagonist who appears to be questioning her sexuality and for that Power Rangers should be given huge applause.
There is also an impressive cast. Bryan Cranston playing wise former Ranger Zordon is one of the most bizarre casting choices in recent memory. He’s certainly very good, though why he would choose a project of this nature is beyond me. The new Rangers are all fine with RJ Cyler probably coming across best as the autistic Billy Cranston.
Unfortunately, Elizabeth Banks is the only person who seems to grasp the camp, cheesy nature of the original television series. Her completely over-the-top performance is one of the best parts of the film, but it feels at odds with the darker tone that’s been set.
Pacing is also not a strong point. At 124 minutes, you’d be forgiven for thinking there’s time to pop in an origins story, a nice training montage and a climactic battle. It’s there in some form, but our heroes don’t “suit up” until the final 20 minutes which then becomes a mess of brash CGI as the film-makers try to tie up all the loose ends.
Overall, Power Rangers isn’t the royal mess it could have been. It’s stylish, progressive and well-acted with a decent storyline that desperately tries to bring this 90s pop-culture phenomena very much into the 21st Century.
Unfortunately, Lionsgate haven’t realised that retro is all the rage and in updating Power Rangers for a modern audience, they’ve lost what made the series and its films so endearing in the first place. It’s definitely better than 2015’s Fantastic Four, but Guardians of the Galaxy it isn’t.
Anyone fancy a doughnut?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/04/08/anyone-for-doughnuts-power-rangers-review/
Nevertheless, production company Lionsgate has taken the chance and given the plucky superheroes their first film in 20 years. But does this classic brand have what it takes to excite 21st Century audiences?
Five ordinary teenagers must band together to become something extraordinary when they learn that their small town of Angel Grove – and the world – is on the verge of being obliterated by the villainous Rita Repulsa (Elizabeth Banks). Chosen by destiny, the new heroes quickly discover they are the only ones who can save the planet. But to do so, they will have to overcome the issues blighting their real lives and before it’s too late, band together as the Power Rangers.
Director Dean Israelite in his second feature film crafts a gritty, modern-day reimagining of the series that manages to lose nearly all the campy fun in the process. It’s such a shame that a film as progressive as Power Rangers gets bogged down in poor pacing, expositional dialogue, messy action sequences and hilariously obvious product placement for Krispy Kreme doughnuts.
“How is it progressive” I hear you say. Well, this is the first film to feature an autistic superhero and a female protagonist who appears to be questioning her sexuality and for that Power Rangers should be given huge applause.
There is also an impressive cast. Bryan Cranston playing wise former Ranger Zordon is one of the most bizarre casting choices in recent memory. He’s certainly very good, though why he would choose a project of this nature is beyond me. The new Rangers are all fine with RJ Cyler probably coming across best as the autistic Billy Cranston.
Unfortunately, Elizabeth Banks is the only person who seems to grasp the camp, cheesy nature of the original television series. Her completely over-the-top performance is one of the best parts of the film, but it feels at odds with the darker tone that’s been set.
Pacing is also not a strong point. At 124 minutes, you’d be forgiven for thinking there’s time to pop in an origins story, a nice training montage and a climactic battle. It’s there in some form, but our heroes don’t “suit up” until the final 20 minutes which then becomes a mess of brash CGI as the film-makers try to tie up all the loose ends.
Overall, Power Rangers isn’t the royal mess it could have been. It’s stylish, progressive and well-acted with a decent storyline that desperately tries to bring this 90s pop-culture phenomena very much into the 21st Century.
Unfortunately, Lionsgate haven’t realised that retro is all the rage and in updating Power Rangers for a modern audience, they’ve lost what made the series and its films so endearing in the first place. It’s definitely better than 2015’s Fantastic Four, but Guardians of the Galaxy it isn’t.
Anyone fancy a doughnut?
https://moviemetropolis.net/2017/04/08/anyone-for-doughnuts-power-rangers-review/
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4fda2/4fda2c4c494d86f13990b5b1da9faf2cd69f2c1d" alt="40x40"
Kyera (8 KP) rated Wintersong in Books
Jan 31, 2018
Wintersong is a fairytale re-telling based upon the German poem Der Erlkonig and stories of the Goblin King. The author takes a relatively short poem and breathes life into it, translating the dark words into an entire world. Liesl has heard tales of the Goblin King from her grandmother since she was a small child. Even played make-believe in the Goblin Grove with her Goblin King, but as she grew older she lost her faith in the old stories. Even her brother and sister seemed not to heed the old woman’s warnings. She warned Liesl that she must protect both siblings - she would be faced with a choice and mustn’t choose wrong.
This dire warning and her later choices set her on a journey to the Underworld. It is dark, earthy and primal, full of creatures that Liesl does not understand or trust. The land itself is well-described and forms itself within the reader’s mind. Though you would never hope to call it home, it has its own ancient and crude form of beauty.
The characters are unique, although generally not faceted or well-developed in their personalities. Perhaps our main character just does not know them as well as she believes, for her view is quite flat. Her sister, Kathe is beautiful and cares only about similarly pretty and frivolous things. Her brother, Josef is a talented musician who fears his music is a “gift” from the Devil. Her grandmother is superstitious, her mother hard-working and aloof, and her father a drunk. Sadly, we don’t get to see or experience any depth of personality, nor are they given the chance to develop over the course of the novel. As our main character is in the Underworld, the lack of development is understandable which is why I wish they were more fleshed out initially.
Liesl herself is a strange mix of traits with her love of music and composition, intense lack of confidence and anger stemming from her belief that she is ugly and unwanted. Her choices are both selfish and selfless. She is a mass of contradictions and broken beliefs. While she is an interesting character, I don’t find her to be particularly relatable. I didn’t connect with any of the characters in the novel, although I enjoyed the story itself. I’m sure there are others who would find similarities between themselves and one of the characters, making this book more impactful.
Finally, the Goblin King himself – who seems to be like two people in one. At times, we see the younger, more open man that he was and could be again while at others the cold, quick to anger Trickster of the Underworld is at the forefront. More intriguing than his present is his story, you wonder how did he become the Erlkonig? For he is not the first, nor shall he be the last. He is more human than his subjects and thus this difference is what fascinated me. I wanted that story, more than him demanding Liesl in her “entire” and her being unable to give of herself, fully, yet.
It was an interesting story even though I didn’t particularly care for the characters. I recommend this book for older young adult/teen readers who enjoy fantasy and fairytale books. The writing is very poetic and beautifully descriptive. I don’t regret reading this book, but I also wouldn’t personally go out and buy a physical copy of it for my shelf.
This dire warning and her later choices set her on a journey to the Underworld. It is dark, earthy and primal, full of creatures that Liesl does not understand or trust. The land itself is well-described and forms itself within the reader’s mind. Though you would never hope to call it home, it has its own ancient and crude form of beauty.
The characters are unique, although generally not faceted or well-developed in their personalities. Perhaps our main character just does not know them as well as she believes, for her view is quite flat. Her sister, Kathe is beautiful and cares only about similarly pretty and frivolous things. Her brother, Josef is a talented musician who fears his music is a “gift” from the Devil. Her grandmother is superstitious, her mother hard-working and aloof, and her father a drunk. Sadly, we don’t get to see or experience any depth of personality, nor are they given the chance to develop over the course of the novel. As our main character is in the Underworld, the lack of development is understandable which is why I wish they were more fleshed out initially.
Liesl herself is a strange mix of traits with her love of music and composition, intense lack of confidence and anger stemming from her belief that she is ugly and unwanted. Her choices are both selfish and selfless. She is a mass of contradictions and broken beliefs. While she is an interesting character, I don’t find her to be particularly relatable. I didn’t connect with any of the characters in the novel, although I enjoyed the story itself. I’m sure there are others who would find similarities between themselves and one of the characters, making this book more impactful.
Finally, the Goblin King himself – who seems to be like two people in one. At times, we see the younger, more open man that he was and could be again while at others the cold, quick to anger Trickster of the Underworld is at the forefront. More intriguing than his present is his story, you wonder how did he become the Erlkonig? For he is not the first, nor shall he be the last. He is more human than his subjects and thus this difference is what fascinated me. I wanted that story, more than him demanding Liesl in her “entire” and her being unable to give of herself, fully, yet.
It was an interesting story even though I didn’t particularly care for the characters. I recommend this book for older young adult/teen readers who enjoy fantasy and fairytale books. The writing is very poetic and beautifully descriptive. I don’t regret reading this book, but I also wouldn’t personally go out and buy a physical copy of it for my shelf.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f3a2b/f3a2b0b8ad46c9dc70539a40285719b8b93a3671" alt="40x40"
Zuky the BookBum (15 KP) rated The Girl Before in Books
Mar 15, 2018
Read my review here: https://bookbumzuky.wordpress.com/2017/02/04/review-the-girl-before-by-j-p-delaney/
<b><i>Please make a list of every possession you consider essential to your life.</b></i>
One Folgate Street is a minimalist house built by the mysterious, controlling and handsome Edward Monkford. To be granted lease, you must fill in a laborious questionnaire and attend a face-to-face meeting with Edward himself, and even then, you’re unlikely to be approved. There are a large number of rules you have to abide by when you live in the house, such as, no books (?!?!?!), no rugs, no curtains, and no leaving things out, such as clothes, toiletries etc, to name a few. You must also open your home for tours every so often and complete various questionnaires/assessments throughout your stay.
So, I know what you’re thinking, you’re thinking “who the hell would agree to that?” but as it happens, two women choose to live at One Folgate Street. Thanks to its low rent and dishy architect, both Jane and Emma are happy putting up with all the rules. Jane is the girl from now, and Emma is the girl before. Both women are troubled and both begin a relationship with architect Edward.
What follows is a novel full of mystery and sex. If you’re also not into the whole “daddy” thing then this won’t be for you.
Starting off this book, I was very worried I was going to hate it, because I’d seen a lot of people say the focus on kinky sex as a bit left field and overpowering to the plot. But, I managed to get over that when it started to appear in the story. In my opinion, it wasn’t as bad as many people had made it out to be and in any case, you can always skip over it. I thought it was going to go full 50 Shades at some moments, but it managed to avoid any of the scenes becoming too tactless.
The mystery of “the girl before” is certainly intriguing and kept me hooked (for the first half, at least). I liked the way this was set out as Emma (before) and Jane (now) and how the chapters often mirrored each other so we could see the similarities in each of the tenants lives and relationships with Edward.
What I didn’t like about this book was the characters, which I’m kind of assuming was the goal by Delaney? If not, then he/she (does anyone know and can inform me on their gender?) is pretty terrible at creating characters. Although Edward is set up to be our “villain”, I found Emma to be the most dislikable character, even after all was said and done. She was manipulative, unnecessarily forward, obnoxious and total putty in Edward’s hands. Women who can’t act on their own accord because of a man infuriate me, which is probably why I didn’t get on with this novel that well, as it’s kind of what the whole plot is about. I like my women strong and independent!
The ending of this novel, no word of a lie, infuriated me. What a total cop out. People are comparing this to <i>Gone Girl</i>, LOL. The conclusion to this novel is the most overused and uninspired “twist” you can ever imagine. What a way to ruin a perfectly OK novel.
Thanks to Netgalley and Quercus Books for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
<b><i>Please make a list of every possession you consider essential to your life.</b></i>
One Folgate Street is a minimalist house built by the mysterious, controlling and handsome Edward Monkford. To be granted lease, you must fill in a laborious questionnaire and attend a face-to-face meeting with Edward himself, and even then, you’re unlikely to be approved. There are a large number of rules you have to abide by when you live in the house, such as, no books (?!?!?!), no rugs, no curtains, and no leaving things out, such as clothes, toiletries etc, to name a few. You must also open your home for tours every so often and complete various questionnaires/assessments throughout your stay.
So, I know what you’re thinking, you’re thinking “who the hell would agree to that?” but as it happens, two women choose to live at One Folgate Street. Thanks to its low rent and dishy architect, both Jane and Emma are happy putting up with all the rules. Jane is the girl from now, and Emma is the girl before. Both women are troubled and both begin a relationship with architect Edward.
What follows is a novel full of mystery and sex. If you’re also not into the whole “daddy” thing then this won’t be for you.
Starting off this book, I was very worried I was going to hate it, because I’d seen a lot of people say the focus on kinky sex as a bit left field and overpowering to the plot. But, I managed to get over that when it started to appear in the story. In my opinion, it wasn’t as bad as many people had made it out to be and in any case, you can always skip over it. I thought it was going to go full 50 Shades at some moments, but it managed to avoid any of the scenes becoming too tactless.
The mystery of “the girl before” is certainly intriguing and kept me hooked (for the first half, at least). I liked the way this was set out as Emma (before) and Jane (now) and how the chapters often mirrored each other so we could see the similarities in each of the tenants lives and relationships with Edward.
What I didn’t like about this book was the characters, which I’m kind of assuming was the goal by Delaney? If not, then he/she (does anyone know and can inform me on their gender?) is pretty terrible at creating characters. Although Edward is set up to be our “villain”, I found Emma to be the most dislikable character, even after all was said and done. She was manipulative, unnecessarily forward, obnoxious and total putty in Edward’s hands. Women who can’t act on their own accord because of a man infuriate me, which is probably why I didn’t get on with this novel that well, as it’s kind of what the whole plot is about. I like my women strong and independent!
The ending of this novel, no word of a lie, infuriated me. What a total cop out. People are comparing this to <i>Gone Girl</i>, LOL. The conclusion to this novel is the most overused and uninspired “twist” you can ever imagine. What a way to ruin a perfectly OK novel.
Thanks to Netgalley and Quercus Books for giving me the opportunity to read this in exchange for an honest review.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f3dab/f3dabd6d440af208409dbafd2f49d8fff33f3f24" alt="40x40"
BookblogbyCari (345 KP) rated Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind in Books
Aug 5, 2018
This book was chosen to be the first book read and discussed in an online non-fiction book club I recently joined – and I’m glad we did choose this one!
The book is an overview of homo-sapiens as a species, and how we have changed over the ages, and what we have done, before finally touching on where we are going. As such the book is a cross-pollination of history, sociology, and economics.
As you may expect from a book with such a broad scope, there are some sweeping statements, and rather than being a neutral dispassionate account, Harari makes his opinions very evident. However rather than being irritating, I feel this makes for a more entertaining read.
The book begins by introducing the theme of homo-sapiens in the context of the presence of the other human species that used to exist. He then goes on to describe the cognitive and agricultural revolutions. Then it’s the establishment of patriarchal social hierarchies across the world, largely based on historical conventions. Next Harari states that the purpose of religion is to unify fragile societies with superhuman legitimacy.
Harari then moves on to the scientific revolution, describing how an admission of ignorance by Europeans, along with a desire to discover and conquer new lands was key to the movement.
The conversation moves swiftly then to economics, using the fact that a bank can loan £10 for every £1 it has, to argue that our economics is based on trust in the future. Harari states that a country’s credit rating is more important than its actual resources. Harari describes capitalism and consumerism as being 2 sides of the same coin with two commandments: rich must invest, rest of us must buy. Consumerism, he says, aims to convince people that indulgence is good and frugality is self-oppression.
Harari also argues that, now, instead of relying on local communities the individual relies on the market or the state. Parental authority no longer sacred, he says, and state intervenes. And so when Harari asks if we are any happier now than when we were hunter-gatherers, he argues that our rise of wealth is offset by the disintegration of community life.
Harari also speaks of ecological degradation and our tendency to treat other species as a means to an end, for example, the farming of cow's and chickens has cut years off the lives of both, since they are killed as soon as they reach their maximum weight.
In the final chapter, Harari speculates on the future of mankind. With improvements in medical knowledge comes new ethical conundrums, he says. How will we handle the options of genetic engineering? What will the advent of artificial intelligence mean for humanity?
In my book club, we found that the book generated a lot of talking points. What would the world be like now, had the other species of humans survived? Why have so many cultures across history and the world had patriarchal hierarchies? Can societies improve over time, or is one style better than another? Can communism be considered a religion? Are human rights really just a figment of our collective imagination?
Whilst not everyone in my book club enjoyed the book equally, I would say that it’s as enlightening as it is thought provoking. By the end, it was hard to argue with the author's conclusion that homo-sapiens are like dissatisfied and irresponsible gods.
The book is an overview of homo-sapiens as a species, and how we have changed over the ages, and what we have done, before finally touching on where we are going. As such the book is a cross-pollination of history, sociology, and economics.
As you may expect from a book with such a broad scope, there are some sweeping statements, and rather than being a neutral dispassionate account, Harari makes his opinions very evident. However rather than being irritating, I feel this makes for a more entertaining read.
The book begins by introducing the theme of homo-sapiens in the context of the presence of the other human species that used to exist. He then goes on to describe the cognitive and agricultural revolutions. Then it’s the establishment of patriarchal social hierarchies across the world, largely based on historical conventions. Next Harari states that the purpose of religion is to unify fragile societies with superhuman legitimacy.
Harari then moves on to the scientific revolution, describing how an admission of ignorance by Europeans, along with a desire to discover and conquer new lands was key to the movement.
The conversation moves swiftly then to economics, using the fact that a bank can loan £10 for every £1 it has, to argue that our economics is based on trust in the future. Harari states that a country’s credit rating is more important than its actual resources. Harari describes capitalism and consumerism as being 2 sides of the same coin with two commandments: rich must invest, rest of us must buy. Consumerism, he says, aims to convince people that indulgence is good and frugality is self-oppression.
Harari also argues that, now, instead of relying on local communities the individual relies on the market or the state. Parental authority no longer sacred, he says, and state intervenes. And so when Harari asks if we are any happier now than when we were hunter-gatherers, he argues that our rise of wealth is offset by the disintegration of community life.
Harari also speaks of ecological degradation and our tendency to treat other species as a means to an end, for example, the farming of cow's and chickens has cut years off the lives of both, since they are killed as soon as they reach their maximum weight.
In the final chapter, Harari speculates on the future of mankind. With improvements in medical knowledge comes new ethical conundrums, he says. How will we handle the options of genetic engineering? What will the advent of artificial intelligence mean for humanity?
In my book club, we found that the book generated a lot of talking points. What would the world be like now, had the other species of humans survived? Why have so many cultures across history and the world had patriarchal hierarchies? Can societies improve over time, or is one style better than another? Can communism be considered a religion? Are human rights really just a figment of our collective imagination?
Whilst not everyone in my book club enjoyed the book equally, I would say that it’s as enlightening as it is thought provoking. By the end, it was hard to argue with the author's conclusion that homo-sapiens are like dissatisfied and irresponsible gods.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b2c5a/b2c5a3e6b9ac454c702bc4bbbe405b22e2321309" alt="40x40"
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Turn of The Key in Books
Aug 16, 2019
Rowan Caine feels like her life is at a bit of a dead end when she finds the advertisement: it's for a live-in nanny, and the pay is amazing. Rowan has a background in nannying and working with children, so she submits her CV and crosses her fingers. Still, she can't believe her luck when she interviews at the gorgeous Heatherbrae House in Scotland. It's isolated, but beautiful. And then she gets the job caring for four seemingly lovely children: Rhiannon, 14; Maddie, 8; Ellie, 5; and Petra, eighteen months. But the position isn't all it cracked up to be. The children are nothing like the sweet kids they appeared when she interviewed. The entire house is a smart home, controlled by a home management app, and it seems to go haywire constantly. The parents leave nearly the moment she arrives. And it really seems like the rumors of ghosts and a haunted house that drove away the past four nannies are true. We know Rowan is writing about all of this from prison--jailed for the death of one of the children. She claims she's innocent. What really happened at Heatherbrae House?
This was a very intriguing, eerie thriller, made all the more creepy by reading it alone in a cabin in the woods with no one beside me but my dog. Perhaps choosing this read for my short getaway was a mistake? Ha, I actually liked getting a little spooked by this Gothic mystery. It was an enjoyable slow-burning read that kept me hooked.
As mentioned, the entire book is told in letter form--albeit mostly one long letter--as Rowan sits in Scottish prison, trying to convince a Mr. Wrexham to take up her case. She's innocent, she says, and here is her story. And quite a story it is. From the moment Rowan arrives at the Elincourt's beautiful home, Heatherbrae House, it seems like things go wrong--she hasn't memorized the 300-page "manual" required to watch the girls, the "smart" house is out of control, and the children are absolute terrors.
"I guess it comes down to this in the end. I am the nanny in the Elincourt case, Mr. Wrexham. And I didn't kill that child."
But the more we hear from Rowan, we learn she may not be completely guilt-free in all of this, as perhaps there is more to her story than meets the eye. It all unfurls easily in Ware's deft hands. It may take a while to get to some of the major twists and turns, but there's plenty of little bits of creepiness along the way. Rowan is sure she's being haunted, and it's quite fun to try to figure out what exactly is happening. Ghosts? The smart house gone awry? While Rowan isn't always the easiest character to root for, I still sympathized with her (I wouldn't want to be left with four combative children) and yet I found myself getting attached to the kids anyway (clearly they didn't choose to be left behind by their rich and distracted parents).
"I need you to understand why I did what I did."
Overall, this one is a fun, eerie read. I enjoyed the combination of creepy Gothic plus smart home craziness. I also couldn't always foresee what was coming up next, which I appreciated. It's engaging and surprising, despite our limited cast of characters. 4 stars.
This was a very intriguing, eerie thriller, made all the more creepy by reading it alone in a cabin in the woods with no one beside me but my dog. Perhaps choosing this read for my short getaway was a mistake? Ha, I actually liked getting a little spooked by this Gothic mystery. It was an enjoyable slow-burning read that kept me hooked.
As mentioned, the entire book is told in letter form--albeit mostly one long letter--as Rowan sits in Scottish prison, trying to convince a Mr. Wrexham to take up her case. She's innocent, she says, and here is her story. And quite a story it is. From the moment Rowan arrives at the Elincourt's beautiful home, Heatherbrae House, it seems like things go wrong--she hasn't memorized the 300-page "manual" required to watch the girls, the "smart" house is out of control, and the children are absolute terrors.
"I guess it comes down to this in the end. I am the nanny in the Elincourt case, Mr. Wrexham. And I didn't kill that child."
But the more we hear from Rowan, we learn she may not be completely guilt-free in all of this, as perhaps there is more to her story than meets the eye. It all unfurls easily in Ware's deft hands. It may take a while to get to some of the major twists and turns, but there's plenty of little bits of creepiness along the way. Rowan is sure she's being haunted, and it's quite fun to try to figure out what exactly is happening. Ghosts? The smart house gone awry? While Rowan isn't always the easiest character to root for, I still sympathized with her (I wouldn't want to be left with four combative children) and yet I found myself getting attached to the kids anyway (clearly they didn't choose to be left behind by their rich and distracted parents).
"I need you to understand why I did what I did."
Overall, this one is a fun, eerie read. I enjoyed the combination of creepy Gothic plus smart home craziness. I also couldn't always foresee what was coming up next, which I appreciated. It's engaging and surprising, despite our limited cast of characters. 4 stars.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4517d/4517dfd1d4104eb3dac17ffb948494474d1f62d5" alt="40x40"
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Girl Behind the Red Rope in Books
Oct 15, 2019
I'm a fan of dystopian novels, so when I heard about The Girl Behind the Red Rope by Ted Dekker and Rachelle Dekker, I knew it was a book that I just had to read sooner rather than later. Everything about the synopsis was calling out my name. Luckily, this book lived up to the hype.
As I stated previously, the synopsis of The Girl Behind the Red Rope definitely left me intrigued. Grace has seen what not following her religious community's strict rules can bring. However, when a young boy makes his way into their tight community, Grace begins to question everything she's been taught which puts her in extreme danger.
Everything flowed so smoothly including the pacing which never let me down. I was constantly finding excuses to finish reading The Girl Behind the Red Rope since I had to know what would happen next. While I felt the plot was predictable more often than not, I still really enjoyed this book. I felt like their were no cliff hangers, and all of my questions were answered by the ending.
As for the Christian aspect of this book, it didn't read like a Christian novel most of the way through. I'd say it was probably around the last quarter of the book where Christianity came into play. I didn't think it was overly preachy although I think that those who aren't very spiritual or who are agnostic or are atheist may feel it's a tad on the preachy side. I would say The Girl Behind the Red Rope is more anti-religion and pro-Christianity overall. That's what I took from it anyway. It does have a really good message regarding love though which I found really nice to read about.
I very much enjoyed how every character in The Girl Behind the Red Rope was written. I felt like I was actually part of their world, stuck in the same community with them. Grace is a very likable character. I loved how the characters made her feel like a real person by giving her the conflicting thoughts as to who was to be believed throughout the novel. I enjoyed Grace's thought process about everything throughout the book. While I knew who and what she should choose, it was easy to see why she was so torn. Bobbie and Sylous were both very intriguing characters. I never trusted Sylous from the start, but Bobbie was one character that I wasn't sure if she actually had Grace's best interest at heart or if she had ulterior motives. There were times I despised Rose, not because she wasn't written poorly, in fact, she was written perfectly, but because of how much trust she put into Sylous and how overly judgmental she could be sometimes. I know that Rose was only going on what she thought to be true, but there were just so many times I wanted Rose to disappear! My favorite character was Eli. I loved his innocence and how happy go lucky he was.
Trigger warnings for The Girl Behind the Red Rope include cult mentality, violence, and murder.
All in all, The Girl Behind the Red Rope is such a fantastic read with such a powerful message. The characters are written beautifully, and the plot is done superbly. I would definitely recommend The Girl Behind the Red Rope by Ted Dekker and Rachelle Dekker to those aged 15+. Christians will definitely enjoy this book, but I think even non-Christians will probably love it as well.
As I stated previously, the synopsis of The Girl Behind the Red Rope definitely left me intrigued. Grace has seen what not following her religious community's strict rules can bring. However, when a young boy makes his way into their tight community, Grace begins to question everything she's been taught which puts her in extreme danger.
Everything flowed so smoothly including the pacing which never let me down. I was constantly finding excuses to finish reading The Girl Behind the Red Rope since I had to know what would happen next. While I felt the plot was predictable more often than not, I still really enjoyed this book. I felt like their were no cliff hangers, and all of my questions were answered by the ending.
As for the Christian aspect of this book, it didn't read like a Christian novel most of the way through. I'd say it was probably around the last quarter of the book where Christianity came into play. I didn't think it was overly preachy although I think that those who aren't very spiritual or who are agnostic or are atheist may feel it's a tad on the preachy side. I would say The Girl Behind the Red Rope is more anti-religion and pro-Christianity overall. That's what I took from it anyway. It does have a really good message regarding love though which I found really nice to read about.
I very much enjoyed how every character in The Girl Behind the Red Rope was written. I felt like I was actually part of their world, stuck in the same community with them. Grace is a very likable character. I loved how the characters made her feel like a real person by giving her the conflicting thoughts as to who was to be believed throughout the novel. I enjoyed Grace's thought process about everything throughout the book. While I knew who and what she should choose, it was easy to see why she was so torn. Bobbie and Sylous were both very intriguing characters. I never trusted Sylous from the start, but Bobbie was one character that I wasn't sure if she actually had Grace's best interest at heart or if she had ulterior motives. There were times I despised Rose, not because she wasn't written poorly, in fact, she was written perfectly, but because of how much trust she put into Sylous and how overly judgmental she could be sometimes. I know that Rose was only going on what she thought to be true, but there were just so many times I wanted Rose to disappear! My favorite character was Eli. I loved his innocence and how happy go lucky he was.
Trigger warnings for The Girl Behind the Red Rope include cult mentality, violence, and murder.
All in all, The Girl Behind the Red Rope is such a fantastic read with such a powerful message. The characters are written beautifully, and the plot is done superbly. I would definitely recommend The Girl Behind the Red Rope by Ted Dekker and Rachelle Dekker to those aged 15+. Christians will definitely enjoy this book, but I think even non-Christians will probably love it as well.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dbef4/dbef4e5378d7c12d214d5e7b8df27e634f6ba5e5" alt="40x40"
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
Over a year on from this novelty being the first fully interactive film released by Netflix there is still no evidence of a similarly user controlled show out there. The streaming service had promised, after scooping a primetime Emmy for outstanding TV movie, that it was commissioning many more like it. But as of January 2020 they are nowhere to be seen.
Could it be that without the context of being a Black Mirror mind game, wrapped in Charlie Brooker’s clever if flimsy script, that it would just feel too intrusive and unnecessary for a mainstream drama audience? Not to mention the extra cost and hassle of filming multiple scenarios on a production. It’s fine as a distracting experiment, but would we want to have choices as a normal part of watching something?
Especially when looking back on Bandersnatch and realising that without this gimmick it is probably one of the weaker entries under the banner of Black Mirror quality. I can see how it would work well in children’s programming, as a way of keeping young audiences engaged. But beyond that, why not just play an actual video game, if an immersive interactive story that you control is what you want?
Fionn Whitehead of Dunkirk fame, does a fine job as 80s teen computer geek Stefan, as does the versatile yet under-used Will Poulter, in roles that in a straight drama would feel massively under-written. The impressive thing is how smooth the whole experience is. And you do feel increasingly uncomfortable the more you begin to influence Stefan, choosing more and more sinister actions simply out of a dark curiosity of where that will take him, and you!
The idea of reaching a dead end and having to go back to relive a moment, whilst cleverly woven in here to reflect a “choose your own adventure” book, does become a fault and a bit annoying. Something of a cheat! What would be truly impressive would be to branch the story in ways that never allow you to go back, but still results in the story making sense. Although the logistics of that script boggles the mind.
I do like the idea of no two people ever watching the same film, sort of. I also hate it. Because a good film has enough ambiguity to encourage debate anyway, and knowing everyone has watched the same story as you feels like a shared experience. No matter how interesting it might be in theory, you can’t escape the fact that Xbox and Playstation have this covered, especially as VR gaming becomes more common.
And that is the ultimate failing of Bandersnatch, in that you can’t really talk about the story in any other way than to wonder which ending you got? Apparently, it has five possible outcomes. By the time I had gone over it and found three, I was pretty much done with it. My curiosity certainly didn’t extend to going back and discovering the consequences of every possible choice.
Would I still recommend it? Well, yes. Anyone that hasn’t tried it probably should, at least have a go, to be able to say been there, done that. Would I like to see interaction as a part of my favourite shows? Definitely not.
Could it be that without the context of being a Black Mirror mind game, wrapped in Charlie Brooker’s clever if flimsy script, that it would just feel too intrusive and unnecessary for a mainstream drama audience? Not to mention the extra cost and hassle of filming multiple scenarios on a production. It’s fine as a distracting experiment, but would we want to have choices as a normal part of watching something?
Especially when looking back on Bandersnatch and realising that without this gimmick it is probably one of the weaker entries under the banner of Black Mirror quality. I can see how it would work well in children’s programming, as a way of keeping young audiences engaged. But beyond that, why not just play an actual video game, if an immersive interactive story that you control is what you want?
Fionn Whitehead of Dunkirk fame, does a fine job as 80s teen computer geek Stefan, as does the versatile yet under-used Will Poulter, in roles that in a straight drama would feel massively under-written. The impressive thing is how smooth the whole experience is. And you do feel increasingly uncomfortable the more you begin to influence Stefan, choosing more and more sinister actions simply out of a dark curiosity of where that will take him, and you!
The idea of reaching a dead end and having to go back to relive a moment, whilst cleverly woven in here to reflect a “choose your own adventure” book, does become a fault and a bit annoying. Something of a cheat! What would be truly impressive would be to branch the story in ways that never allow you to go back, but still results in the story making sense. Although the logistics of that script boggles the mind.
I do like the idea of no two people ever watching the same film, sort of. I also hate it. Because a good film has enough ambiguity to encourage debate anyway, and knowing everyone has watched the same story as you feels like a shared experience. No matter how interesting it might be in theory, you can’t escape the fact that Xbox and Playstation have this covered, especially as VR gaming becomes more common.
And that is the ultimate failing of Bandersnatch, in that you can’t really talk about the story in any other way than to wonder which ending you got? Apparently, it has five possible outcomes. By the time I had gone over it and found three, I was pretty much done with it. My curiosity certainly didn’t extend to going back and discovering the consequences of every possible choice.
Would I still recommend it? Well, yes. Anyone that hasn’t tried it probably should, at least have a go, to be able to say been there, done that. Would I like to see interaction as a part of my favourite shows? Definitely not.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dbef4/dbef4e5378d7c12d214d5e7b8df27e634f6ba5e5" alt="40x40"
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Making A Murderer - Season 1 in TV
Mar 3, 2020
The phenomenon of “true crime” as entertainment is disturbing. What we are saying when we subscribe to watch these compellingly morbid shows is that, of course, we don’t “enjoy” or condone the crimes themselves. But, we do increasingly expect that without the grotesque detail of primary crime scene evidence, documented visually, we can switch over to another show that will give us our macabre kick. So, it is a dangerous precedent to say that without that factor we won’t engage.
What does make us want to know, and solve, and understand the worst criminal minds of the last century? Do we place ourselves as amateur sleuths and psychologists, so we can have our own opinions on a difficult subject, or do we just want to see the very worst of humanity to satisfy a need to be shocked? One thing for sure is that there is no end to this kind of docu-drama available, especially on Netflix, if we choose to stomach it.
I watched three recently in quick succession, and do feel like I have something to say about it…
First, was the extension of the Making A Murderer case of Steven Avery, which can be credited for re-imagining the scope of this kind of “reality” show on Netflix in late 2015. Without a doubt, the draw of the first series was in showing how corrupt, ambiguous and vague the American criminal system can be. We know this from circus shows such as the OJ Simpson case, that capture a curiosity in the public that must be explored and documented. There is no point in saying, no don’t do it, because eventually we have to know, and current forensic science and film techniques allow us to approach it. Carefully. Oh, so carefully!
In this case, the much criticised production extracts further detail from an undeniably fascinating case of criminal negligence and injustice, without ever providing a new revelation enough to definitively say we now know enough to put it to bed. It focuses largely on the power of Kathleen Zellner as a lawyer of impeccable motives and results to prove the innocence of convicted men.
What we then get is 10 episodes of contrivance that increasingly try to convince us further that this is a miscarriage of justice that must be addressed. The continual message is that there is a conspiracy here, which makes for good TV. Someone doesn’t want this show to have an influence. Who is covering up what? And why is the justice system adamant in disallowing the revelations this show throws up so regularly? In the end it becomes less about the victim and the crime, as an indictment of a process that does not want to be examined. The power of this show has always been that something is rotten in Denmark. But what exactly?
There is no doubt at all that once involved you have to keep watching. It is exceptionally presented, and therefore successful as an entertainment because of that. The complexity of the argument comes not in the real recordings of conversations and evidence, but in the form of presentation as a TV show. A question, I am certain, the film-makers themselves constantly ask. It is about finding “truth” for the families of the victims; a crusade that may or may not include individuals wrongly accused of a crime.
What does make us want to know, and solve, and understand the worst criminal minds of the last century? Do we place ourselves as amateur sleuths and psychologists, so we can have our own opinions on a difficult subject, or do we just want to see the very worst of humanity to satisfy a need to be shocked? One thing for sure is that there is no end to this kind of docu-drama available, especially on Netflix, if we choose to stomach it.
I watched three recently in quick succession, and do feel like I have something to say about it…
First, was the extension of the Making A Murderer case of Steven Avery, which can be credited for re-imagining the scope of this kind of “reality” show on Netflix in late 2015. Without a doubt, the draw of the first series was in showing how corrupt, ambiguous and vague the American criminal system can be. We know this from circus shows such as the OJ Simpson case, that capture a curiosity in the public that must be explored and documented. There is no point in saying, no don’t do it, because eventually we have to know, and current forensic science and film techniques allow us to approach it. Carefully. Oh, so carefully!
In this case, the much criticised production extracts further detail from an undeniably fascinating case of criminal negligence and injustice, without ever providing a new revelation enough to definitively say we now know enough to put it to bed. It focuses largely on the power of Kathleen Zellner as a lawyer of impeccable motives and results to prove the innocence of convicted men.
What we then get is 10 episodes of contrivance that increasingly try to convince us further that this is a miscarriage of justice that must be addressed. The continual message is that there is a conspiracy here, which makes for good TV. Someone doesn’t want this show to have an influence. Who is covering up what? And why is the justice system adamant in disallowing the revelations this show throws up so regularly? In the end it becomes less about the victim and the crime, as an indictment of a process that does not want to be examined. The power of this show has always been that something is rotten in Denmark. But what exactly?
There is no doubt at all that once involved you have to keep watching. It is exceptionally presented, and therefore successful as an entertainment because of that. The complexity of the argument comes not in the real recordings of conversations and evidence, but in the form of presentation as a TV show. A question, I am certain, the film-makers themselves constantly ask. It is about finding “truth” for the families of the victims; a crusade that may or may not include individuals wrongly accused of a crime.