Search
Search results
Deborah (162 KP) rated Winter King: The Dawn of Tudor England in Books
Dec 21, 2018
There's an old Chinese curse that runs "may you live in interesting times". Penn throws some new light on an era that certainly can be described as 'interesting' and somewhere I'm sure I wouldn't want to be living!
The Winter King of the title is Henry Tudor. Although more a history of the reign than biography (his early life is described only in brief), Henry doesn't come across as particularly likeably - not someone you'd like to sit down to dinner with! His whole style of kingship seems to be based around control of everyone around him and control was often achieved through financial means rather than physical threat. The story unfolds as almost horrific where we see innocent people 'informed' against, imprisoned illegally, tried with 'packed' juries and presented with crippling fines! The wonder really is that such a king was not overthrown! We see here how the notorious Empson & Dudley really worked, and although in a way they were scapegoats for many in the old Henrician regieme when Henry VIII came to the throne, you can see how imprisoning and then executing this unpleasant pair would have been a great crowd-pleasing move!
This book also shines some light on other charaters; it goes someway to explaining the later behaviour of Henry VIII for starters! The insight into the relationship of Philip of Burgundy and Juana of Castile was brief, but enlightning.
Many Tudor writers go straight for the two obvious targets; the larger than life Henry VIII and his daughter, Elizabeth I, so here it made an interesting change to see the earlier Tudor world and how Henry VIII grew up in this; even if it was a place full of paranoid and insecurity!
The Winter King of the title is Henry Tudor. Although more a history of the reign than biography (his early life is described only in brief), Henry doesn't come across as particularly likeably - not someone you'd like to sit down to dinner with! His whole style of kingship seems to be based around control of everyone around him and control was often achieved through financial means rather than physical threat. The story unfolds as almost horrific where we see innocent people 'informed' against, imprisoned illegally, tried with 'packed' juries and presented with crippling fines! The wonder really is that such a king was not overthrown! We see here how the notorious Empson & Dudley really worked, and although in a way they were scapegoats for many in the old Henrician regieme when Henry VIII came to the throne, you can see how imprisoning and then executing this unpleasant pair would have been a great crowd-pleasing move!
This book also shines some light on other charaters; it goes someway to explaining the later behaviour of Henry VIII for starters! The insight into the relationship of Philip of Burgundy and Juana of Castile was brief, but enlightning.
Many Tudor writers go straight for the two obvious targets; the larger than life Henry VIII and his daughter, Elizabeth I, so here it made an interesting change to see the earlier Tudor world and how Henry VIII grew up in this; even if it was a place full of paranoid and insecurity!
Cut the Carbs: 100 Recipes to Help You Ditch White Carbs and Feel Great
Book
Do you want more energy? Do you want to lose weight and keep it off - without depriving yourself? Or...
Got Milked?: What You Don't Know About Dairy and the Truth About Calcium
Book
Refuting the milk industry's overwhelmingly popular campaign-"Got Milk?"-which has convinced us that...
Darren (1599 KP) rated 2012 (2009) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Based on Mayan superstition this is the end of the world, now how do man survive this?
First off Dr Adrien Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and one of his associates discover the world is overheating from the inside due to solar flares. so he gets a solution to the end of the world started up with governments all around the world. Now in 2012 things start to accelerate and time is running out.
Meanwhile a struggling divorced writer Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) gets a weekend camping with his two children. He takes them down to Yellowstone only to find out the Lake has nearly all gone and after approaching the army take them back to a base. Here he meets Dr Helmsley a fan and sounding like his only fan of his book. After the chatty chatty big fan speech the family get escorted of the land back tot he camp area. After arriving conspiracy nut Charlie Frost (Woody Harrleson) asks what is there and tells Jackson what he believes to be happening, Jackson just assumes he is crazy and ignores his warnings.
After dropping his kids back home he goes to his day job as a limo driver only to discover that Charlie might be making some sense, he rushes back to the house and get his kids ex wife and boyfriend. now we have one of the most amazing over the top car chase action sequences ever with a limo driving through town avoiding everything possible making it to an airport and fly away to safety for now.
After flying to the Yellowstone abandoned army base to refuel Jackson goes in search of Charlie. After finding him on top of a mountain over looking Yellowstone he learns of the crafts for safety or future of mankind, now for the next chase against nature this time in a camper van with a volcanic cloud after them,
Flying of to the next airport Jackson meets his employer who needs an extra pilot for the trip to China where the vessels are kept, after yet another over the top action sequence they are left to fend for themselves in the middle of the mountains of China, meeting a family who has worked on vessels and created a plan to sneak on a vessel.
Roland Emmerich follows up action blockbuster like Independence day, Godzilla and Day after tomorrow with another action blockbuster and he sure dose like destroying America in his movies.
This is a truly epic survival adventure if not very hard to believe it is full of cliche and cheesy one liners and overall just a good fun movie to watch, he throws up the question ‘what would we do in this situation?’ and puts out how money can buy you safety.
Overall i would give it an 82% as it keeps you holing onto what will happen next.
https://moviesreview101.com/2011/04/29/2012-2009/
First off Dr Adrien Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and one of his associates discover the world is overheating from the inside due to solar flares. so he gets a solution to the end of the world started up with governments all around the world. Now in 2012 things start to accelerate and time is running out.
Meanwhile a struggling divorced writer Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) gets a weekend camping with his two children. He takes them down to Yellowstone only to find out the Lake has nearly all gone and after approaching the army take them back to a base. Here he meets Dr Helmsley a fan and sounding like his only fan of his book. After the chatty chatty big fan speech the family get escorted of the land back tot he camp area. After arriving conspiracy nut Charlie Frost (Woody Harrleson) asks what is there and tells Jackson what he believes to be happening, Jackson just assumes he is crazy and ignores his warnings.
After dropping his kids back home he goes to his day job as a limo driver only to discover that Charlie might be making some sense, he rushes back to the house and get his kids ex wife and boyfriend. now we have one of the most amazing over the top car chase action sequences ever with a limo driving through town avoiding everything possible making it to an airport and fly away to safety for now.
After flying to the Yellowstone abandoned army base to refuel Jackson goes in search of Charlie. After finding him on top of a mountain over looking Yellowstone he learns of the crafts for safety or future of mankind, now for the next chase against nature this time in a camper van with a volcanic cloud after them,
Flying of to the next airport Jackson meets his employer who needs an extra pilot for the trip to China where the vessels are kept, after yet another over the top action sequence they are left to fend for themselves in the middle of the mountains of China, meeting a family who has worked on vessels and created a plan to sneak on a vessel.
Roland Emmerich follows up action blockbuster like Independence day, Godzilla and Day after tomorrow with another action blockbuster and he sure dose like destroying America in his movies.
This is a truly epic survival adventure if not very hard to believe it is full of cliche and cheesy one liners and overall just a good fun movie to watch, he throws up the question ‘what would we do in this situation?’ and puts out how money can buy you safety.
Overall i would give it an 82% as it keeps you holing onto what will happen next.
https://moviesreview101.com/2011/04/29/2012-2009/
Macroeconomics at the Service of Public Policy
Thomas J. Sargent and Jouko Vilmunen
Book
This volume uses state of the art models from the frontier of macroeconomics to answer key questions...
LD
Liu Dan: New Landscapes and Old Masters
Book
Liu Dan is one of twenty-first-century China's leading artists. Born in 1953 in one of China's...
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated Unsheltered in Books
Jun 22, 2018
Not a favorite
I am typically a big fan of Barbara Kingsolver's books. Her writing is exquisite and reads like a dream. She is usually one of the few writers of historical novels I read as it's not really my most favorite genre, but unfortunately this one was a total snooze-fest. I almost quit several times, I was just SO bored! Honestly, nothing really happens in this book, there are a few deaths, a shooting, and drama of beliefs with the push and pull of science vs. God, but it was just so uneventful and without buildup - I found myself really struggling to get through it.
The book is set in two different eras, in the same town, on the same street, in Vineland, NJ. Willa Knox, present day, is fictional. AS is her family. Mary Treat in 1871, is apparently a real person, a lover of science, plants and creatures. The connection between the two stories is a bit weak I felt. Not sure if it was intentional, but it just didn't really capture my attention in the way I believe it was supposed to. In 1871, Thatcher Greenwood (fictional as well I believe?) meets Mary, and they get along because their beliefs mesh well - they believe in science, and follow Darwin's teachings, and Thatcher finds himself in a bit of jam as the town is "ruled" by Landis, a strict believer that God has created everything, and science is witchcraft.
Willa, is struggling when we meet her - in fact, her entire family - every single one of them seems to have some serious issues! I found it depressing and really didn't find myself liking any of the family very much. We see some similar struggles to Thatcher (their houses are both falling down around them) but not much else mirrors the past.
I do know based on initial talk of this novel, and the title of course, that the joining of the past vs present is in the "Unsheltered" aspect of both of these stories, the way Landis mirrors Trump, the ways a world can come unraveled by rules and rulers, as well as the courage to stand for what you believe in. But it just wasn't there for me - it was so subtle, uninspiring, slow and boring.
I did LOVE the plants and stuff - it's the main reason I wanted to read this book, but sadly they just weren't too heavily featured. The little tidbits of random facts about Pitcher Plants and Venus Fly Traps, and some other plants and bugs was pretty fun and fascinating and I wish there was more of it.
In the end - this just fell really flat for me. I know some of the people and events are real, but some are not (which was hard for me to follow) and Barbara's research and writing is top-notch. I just really wanted an engaging story, with a bit more interest, and a lot less heavy eyelid.
The book is set in two different eras, in the same town, on the same street, in Vineland, NJ. Willa Knox, present day, is fictional. AS is her family. Mary Treat in 1871, is apparently a real person, a lover of science, plants and creatures. The connection between the two stories is a bit weak I felt. Not sure if it was intentional, but it just didn't really capture my attention in the way I believe it was supposed to. In 1871, Thatcher Greenwood (fictional as well I believe?) meets Mary, and they get along because their beliefs mesh well - they believe in science, and follow Darwin's teachings, and Thatcher finds himself in a bit of jam as the town is "ruled" by Landis, a strict believer that God has created everything, and science is witchcraft.
Willa, is struggling when we meet her - in fact, her entire family - every single one of them seems to have some serious issues! I found it depressing and really didn't find myself liking any of the family very much. We see some similar struggles to Thatcher (their houses are both falling down around them) but not much else mirrors the past.
I do know based on initial talk of this novel, and the title of course, that the joining of the past vs present is in the "Unsheltered" aspect of both of these stories, the way Landis mirrors Trump, the ways a world can come unraveled by rules and rulers, as well as the courage to stand for what you believe in. But it just wasn't there for me - it was so subtle, uninspiring, slow and boring.
I did LOVE the plants and stuff - it's the main reason I wanted to read this book, but sadly they just weren't too heavily featured. The little tidbits of random facts about Pitcher Plants and Venus Fly Traps, and some other plants and bugs was pretty fun and fascinating and I wish there was more of it.
In the end - this just fell really flat for me. I know some of the people and events are real, but some are not (which was hard for me to follow) and Barbara's research and writing is top-notch. I just really wanted an engaging story, with a bit more interest, and a lot less heavy eyelid.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Breakthrough (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
The fact that this film is based on a true story is incredible to think about. I haven't read the book that was written by the boy's mother or read about the actual incident and events online, I'm not sure I want to. I usually like finding out the differences to the actual stories but I wonder if in this instance it might make me change the way I feel about the film.
John is off with his friends having fun, and what's more fun than playing out on a frozen lake? By the time they hear the crack it's too late, the three boys go under. With the emergency services on their way it's a countdown to rescuing them. Two of them have their head above water, but John, knocked unconscious while trying to help his friend out of the water, is sinking. When water rescue appears it may already be too late. They take the search slowly, but John could be anywhere, it's almost certainly too late. Tommy is about to call an end to the search when he hears someone telling him to go back, and there he is.
Rushed to the hospital, the doctors and staff work on trying to bring him back, but as the time elapses there is nothing to do but continue until his family arrive. Joyce, his mother, is devastated and not willing to accept that it's the end... and she prays, asking god to save her son... the monitor beeps to life.
Everywhere I see descriptions of this it says "christian drama". I honestly don't see that the word "christian" needs to be in there. Sure, Joyce prays a fair bit, and their pastor is in it a lot too, but it's still just a drama about something miraculous happening.
By far the best performance for me was Chrissy Metz. Joyce comes across as a very determined woman in everything that she does, and Metz really makes that stand out. From the happiness to the heartbreak, it's all believeable, which sometimes doesn't happen with films that are based on true stories.
I enjoyed Mike Colter as Tommy too. As a non-religious man trying to deal with what happened to him, and what he sees happening to John, the thought process was clear on his face and I liked how he visually interacted with those around him in those moments.
By far the strongest scene for me was the one I mentioned above in the hospital. I think it's always quite challenging to create something that has an impact on the viewer when they already know what the outcome is going to be. In this instance we already know that John doesn't die, we just don't know how the situation is remedied. The hospital staff have left the room and Joyce is with her son, she doesn't want to accept what's before her eyes. We cut between her and the staff outside in the hall in what builds up to an incredible moment. The staff reacting to Joyce as she wails in pain is something that was just stuck in my chest, I could really feel it.
While some are saying that Breakthrough is a christian film, but personally it feels more like a film about community. It's about family, about friends, about everyone around us. It also captures some of the things you have to deal with in these situations. Although fleeting at the end of the film, we see John coming to terms with the fact he survived, his miracle is hard to take for other people and they feel like they need answers, but from where? Him?
Everything about the film felt thoughtful and real, even though some bits felt a little cramped at times. By that I mean they clearly wanted to show the "negativity" and realistic thinking of those around John, he didn't have good odds and everyone would be talking about that. But getting that in felt a little cluttered with everything else going on.
I enjoyed this "christian" film, or as I like to call it "film". I spent a significant amount of time with my sleeves pressed up under my eyes, and when the doctors on screen were telling people to breathe I was doing it to recover. It's not a pushy film, I didn't feel the urge to go and join a congregation after watching it, it's just a wonderful reminder that miracles can happen, and while you wait for them there will be people all around you for support even when you don't expect it.
What you should do
It may not be a film to watch for some, I imagine the content may bring back memories that are difficult, but if you're up to it then it's well worth a watch.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Just a smidge of Joyce's determination would be good.
John is off with his friends having fun, and what's more fun than playing out on a frozen lake? By the time they hear the crack it's too late, the three boys go under. With the emergency services on their way it's a countdown to rescuing them. Two of them have their head above water, but John, knocked unconscious while trying to help his friend out of the water, is sinking. When water rescue appears it may already be too late. They take the search slowly, but John could be anywhere, it's almost certainly too late. Tommy is about to call an end to the search when he hears someone telling him to go back, and there he is.
Rushed to the hospital, the doctors and staff work on trying to bring him back, but as the time elapses there is nothing to do but continue until his family arrive. Joyce, his mother, is devastated and not willing to accept that it's the end... and she prays, asking god to save her son... the monitor beeps to life.
Everywhere I see descriptions of this it says "christian drama". I honestly don't see that the word "christian" needs to be in there. Sure, Joyce prays a fair bit, and their pastor is in it a lot too, but it's still just a drama about something miraculous happening.
By far the best performance for me was Chrissy Metz. Joyce comes across as a very determined woman in everything that she does, and Metz really makes that stand out. From the happiness to the heartbreak, it's all believeable, which sometimes doesn't happen with films that are based on true stories.
I enjoyed Mike Colter as Tommy too. As a non-religious man trying to deal with what happened to him, and what he sees happening to John, the thought process was clear on his face and I liked how he visually interacted with those around him in those moments.
By far the strongest scene for me was the one I mentioned above in the hospital. I think it's always quite challenging to create something that has an impact on the viewer when they already know what the outcome is going to be. In this instance we already know that John doesn't die, we just don't know how the situation is remedied. The hospital staff have left the room and Joyce is with her son, she doesn't want to accept what's before her eyes. We cut between her and the staff outside in the hall in what builds up to an incredible moment. The staff reacting to Joyce as she wails in pain is something that was just stuck in my chest, I could really feel it.
While some are saying that Breakthrough is a christian film, but personally it feels more like a film about community. It's about family, about friends, about everyone around us. It also captures some of the things you have to deal with in these situations. Although fleeting at the end of the film, we see John coming to terms with the fact he survived, his miracle is hard to take for other people and they feel like they need answers, but from where? Him?
Everything about the film felt thoughtful and real, even though some bits felt a little cramped at times. By that I mean they clearly wanted to show the "negativity" and realistic thinking of those around John, he didn't have good odds and everyone would be talking about that. But getting that in felt a little cluttered with everything else going on.
I enjoyed this "christian" film, or as I like to call it "film". I spent a significant amount of time with my sleeves pressed up under my eyes, and when the doctors on screen were telling people to breathe I was doing it to recover. It's not a pushy film, I didn't feel the urge to go and join a congregation after watching it, it's just a wonderful reminder that miracles can happen, and while you wait for them there will be people all around you for support even when you don't expect it.
What you should do
It may not be a film to watch for some, I imagine the content may bring back memories that are difficult, but if you're up to it then it's well worth a watch.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Just a smidge of Joyce's determination would be good.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Snow Child in Books
May 30, 2017
A Fairytale
“Terrific”, “Spellbinding” and “Enchanting” are just three of the many words that critics have used to describe this book; they are also a slight exaggeration. Obviously it is a matter of personal opinion but this novel, whilst having an interesting storyline, was a little too drawn out and, at times… not exactly boring but not all that gripping.
Set in Alaska during the 1920s this is the story of a couple, Jack and Mabel, who, aside from a stillbirth, have not had any children despite their desperate longing. Now that they are both approaching fifty years of age they know that they will never be able to have a son or daughter of their own. One winter, during the first snowfall, the two of them on an uncharacteristic, spur of the moment impulse build a snowman next to their cabin. Rather than building a large snowman they make a smaller one in the shape of a girl, decorating her with scarves and mittens – they have made a snow girl.
Eowyn Ivey has based her novel on a Russian fairy tale, Snegurochka, which in English translates to The Snow Maiden. It was Arthur Ransome’s retelling, Little Daughter of the Snow, which inspired Ivey, but the general storyline is essentially the same, although some versions have alternative endings. For those who are familiar with Snegurochka and its variants will know that it does not end happily therefore it seems inevitable that The Snow Child will head in the same direction. However which ending will it most resemble?
Throughout the novel it is impossible to be absolutely sure that the little girl who turns up outside the cabin the day after the snowman has been built (and destroyed) is in fact the snow girl magically transformed into flesh and bone; or whether it is a lost child and the circumstance are purely coincidental. There is a third option: Jack and Mabel could be imagining things through their desperate longing, but this is easy to rule out.
The snow is understandably a key theme throughout the story. At the beginning the anticipated Alaskan winter is imagined as a “cold on the valley like a coming death”. Not only will it be unbearably freezing, Jack and Mabel will struggle to make do with their limited amount of food and supplies. After the arrival of the child the winter becomes a happy occasion. Jack and Mabel’s relationship improves and they become less isolated after befriending some neighbours. The only heartbreak is when the girl, Faina, disappears in the spring; but as she comes back as soon as it snows, winter becomes something to look forward to. Another snowy link in the story is Faina’s name, which she claims means “the colour on snow when the sun turns” in Russian. This also makes the idea of her truly being the snow girl more convincing.
The novel does predictably have an unhappy ending but the epilogue makes up for this by revealing the contentment of the remaining characters a few years into the future.
As already mentioned, The Snow Child was not a very gripping read, but it was a beautiful tale in the way that fairy tales, even those with unhappy endings, often can be.
Set in Alaska during the 1920s this is the story of a couple, Jack and Mabel, who, aside from a stillbirth, have not had any children despite their desperate longing. Now that they are both approaching fifty years of age they know that they will never be able to have a son or daughter of their own. One winter, during the first snowfall, the two of them on an uncharacteristic, spur of the moment impulse build a snowman next to their cabin. Rather than building a large snowman they make a smaller one in the shape of a girl, decorating her with scarves and mittens – they have made a snow girl.
Eowyn Ivey has based her novel on a Russian fairy tale, Snegurochka, which in English translates to The Snow Maiden. It was Arthur Ransome’s retelling, Little Daughter of the Snow, which inspired Ivey, but the general storyline is essentially the same, although some versions have alternative endings. For those who are familiar with Snegurochka and its variants will know that it does not end happily therefore it seems inevitable that The Snow Child will head in the same direction. However which ending will it most resemble?
Throughout the novel it is impossible to be absolutely sure that the little girl who turns up outside the cabin the day after the snowman has been built (and destroyed) is in fact the snow girl magically transformed into flesh and bone; or whether it is a lost child and the circumstance are purely coincidental. There is a third option: Jack and Mabel could be imagining things through their desperate longing, but this is easy to rule out.
The snow is understandably a key theme throughout the story. At the beginning the anticipated Alaskan winter is imagined as a “cold on the valley like a coming death”. Not only will it be unbearably freezing, Jack and Mabel will struggle to make do with their limited amount of food and supplies. After the arrival of the child the winter becomes a happy occasion. Jack and Mabel’s relationship improves and they become less isolated after befriending some neighbours. The only heartbreak is when the girl, Faina, disappears in the spring; but as she comes back as soon as it snows, winter becomes something to look forward to. Another snowy link in the story is Faina’s name, which she claims means “the colour on snow when the sun turns” in Russian. This also makes the idea of her truly being the snow girl more convincing.
The novel does predictably have an unhappy ending but the epilogue makes up for this by revealing the contentment of the remaining characters a few years into the future.
As already mentioned, The Snow Child was not a very gripping read, but it was a beautiful tale in the way that fairy tales, even those with unhappy endings, often can be.