Search
Search results
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Vanished in Books
Mar 18, 2020
Honest Review for Free Copy of Book
In Vanished by Gillian Alice Lock time travel is not a scientific discovery but a natural phenomenon. This book also falls in a gray area between science fiction, historical fiction, and romance.
Andrea lives with her little dog, Muff, out in the country. She tries to live a structured life but since she works from home she finds herself giving in to cravings more often. Luckily Muff is extremely high energy for a little dog and requires Andrea to take her for long walks. One day Andrea makes plans with the neighbor guy for a date after Muff’s walk. The neighbor waits for her but she doesn't show up, for years.
During their walk Andrea and Muff finds themselves pulled into a dense yellow mist and when it dissipates things have changed. The area they are in looks familiar yet it is not the home they are used to, but instead, it looks more like pictures from a history book. Andrea draws a lot of attention to herself from the way she talks and dresses and soon finds herself with Father Jones. Through the Father, Andrea learns of Robert who also seems to have come from the future. Andrea manages to secure work along with room and board for herself and Robert at the home of William Farthing, a Lord. Sadly Andrea knows of the fate that is going to befall William and wars with herself about intervening. She also must come up with a decision if she wishes to return to her old life in the 21st century or try to keep her new one int the 17th.
I enjoyed how both positive and negative aspects of the 17th century are addressed. The dirty and poor living conditions are clearly depicted, as are the differences in food compared to what we are used to today. The lifestyle of those in the 17th century is very different from modern times but slower and calmer as well. There was inconsistency with the names of the characters in a few places. At times it was as if the reader is expected to recognize the name of a character that is only mentioned once. I can only guess that this is in error. The back of the book also says that it takes place in 2015 but in the actual story it is (to start out with) 2019. Without going into a lot of details as to why the wedding is also in the wrong year.
There is nothing in this book the I noticed that would make it inappropriate in any way. The topic and writing style might make it quite a bit boring for even middle school-aged readers. Those who like historical fiction and romance will probably enjoy this book. I rate this book 2 out of 4. Besides the inconsistencies and other issues, I mentioned earlier the book also had multiple typos and grammar errors. While I myself am not good in that area of writing the errors in this book were glaringly obvious even to me. The book needs to be closely edited and this seriously lowered the score.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews/
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com/
Andrea lives with her little dog, Muff, out in the country. She tries to live a structured life but since she works from home she finds herself giving in to cravings more often. Luckily Muff is extremely high energy for a little dog and requires Andrea to take her for long walks. One day Andrea makes plans with the neighbor guy for a date after Muff’s walk. The neighbor waits for her but she doesn't show up, for years.
During their walk Andrea and Muff finds themselves pulled into a dense yellow mist and when it dissipates things have changed. The area they are in looks familiar yet it is not the home they are used to, but instead, it looks more like pictures from a history book. Andrea draws a lot of attention to herself from the way she talks and dresses and soon finds herself with Father Jones. Through the Father, Andrea learns of Robert who also seems to have come from the future. Andrea manages to secure work along with room and board for herself and Robert at the home of William Farthing, a Lord. Sadly Andrea knows of the fate that is going to befall William and wars with herself about intervening. She also must come up with a decision if she wishes to return to her old life in the 21st century or try to keep her new one int the 17th.
I enjoyed how both positive and negative aspects of the 17th century are addressed. The dirty and poor living conditions are clearly depicted, as are the differences in food compared to what we are used to today. The lifestyle of those in the 17th century is very different from modern times but slower and calmer as well. There was inconsistency with the names of the characters in a few places. At times it was as if the reader is expected to recognize the name of a character that is only mentioned once. I can only guess that this is in error. The back of the book also says that it takes place in 2015 but in the actual story it is (to start out with) 2019. Without going into a lot of details as to why the wedding is also in the wrong year.
There is nothing in this book the I noticed that would make it inappropriate in any way. The topic and writing style might make it quite a bit boring for even middle school-aged readers. Those who like historical fiction and romance will probably enjoy this book. I rate this book 2 out of 4. Besides the inconsistencies and other issues, I mentioned earlier the book also had multiple typos and grammar errors. While I myself am not good in that area of writing the errors in this book were glaringly obvious even to me. The book needs to be closely edited and this seriously lowered the score.
https://www.facebook.com/nightreaderreviews/
https://smashbomb.com/nightreader
https://nightreaderreviews.blogspot.com/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Zulu (2013) in Movies
Aug 5, 2019
Story: Zulu starts when a young woman is murdered, police officer Ali Sokhela (Forest) and his team that includes the washed up Brian Epkeen (Bloom) and rookie Dan Fletcher (Kemp) must start to investigate the case.
As the investigation deepens Brian must hold himself together while Ali must face his demons from his past which becomes deadly as they fall into an illegal drug dealing ring with a new devasting drug on the market.
Thoughts on Zulu
Characters – Brian Epkeen is a washed-up police officer, he is great at solving crimes, he tends to have a different woman every night, which has made him distant from his son. He never looks professional but will always do the right thing for his team. Ali Sokhela is scared by his childhood in the racial torn country, now he is a captain in the police force which sees him needing to forgive the men his father fought against to work in the same team, he does have connections which helps him through the city, with his own demons he must locate the killer. Dan is a rookie officer that is part of the team, his innocence isn’t ready to be in the field with the seasoned vets. Ruby is Brian’s ex-wife that hates him and that Brian hassle when he feels like it.
Performances – Orlando Bloom does show us that he can still be a leading man, an edgy side to his character is a big plus too, we could happily watch more of his work here. Forest Whitaker is great too, he has the darker backstory which pushes him into his decisions and hits the accent. The rest of the cast don’t get as much screen time as he does, but you do feel like they hired a lot of local talent which helps make the film feel authentic.
Story – The story follows two cops, one with a dark past because of his skin colour as a child, the other lives in darkness because of his addiction that must use their skills to solve a crime which starts simple enough until things get out of hand to a much bigger problem running through the city. This does feel gritty with how we investigate things, it doesn’t hold back with what happens to the characters and shows us just how far the criminal underworld will go to keep a secret. While this doesn’t rely on twists to get the final outcome, it does show us just how far these two would go to solve a crime and bring the criminals to justice.
Crime – The crime world we enter here shows us just how both sides in a drug war are waging against each other, we get bodies piling up that will only increase the battle with a racial tension that just increases the tension between the twos.
Settings – The film is set in South Africa, we get to see how difficult the drug war is with the racial tension still between the people in the city.
Scene of the Movie – Brian’s escape plan.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The scene where the head turns up, there is such a pointless line here.
Final Thoughts – This is a gritty crime drama that shows us the harsh reality of the drug world, the two cops must overcome demons that will put them through a major test to get to the bottom of a crime.
Overall: Crime fans surprise.
As the investigation deepens Brian must hold himself together while Ali must face his demons from his past which becomes deadly as they fall into an illegal drug dealing ring with a new devasting drug on the market.
Thoughts on Zulu
Characters – Brian Epkeen is a washed-up police officer, he is great at solving crimes, he tends to have a different woman every night, which has made him distant from his son. He never looks professional but will always do the right thing for his team. Ali Sokhela is scared by his childhood in the racial torn country, now he is a captain in the police force which sees him needing to forgive the men his father fought against to work in the same team, he does have connections which helps him through the city, with his own demons he must locate the killer. Dan is a rookie officer that is part of the team, his innocence isn’t ready to be in the field with the seasoned vets. Ruby is Brian’s ex-wife that hates him and that Brian hassle when he feels like it.
Performances – Orlando Bloom does show us that he can still be a leading man, an edgy side to his character is a big plus too, we could happily watch more of his work here. Forest Whitaker is great too, he has the darker backstory which pushes him into his decisions and hits the accent. The rest of the cast don’t get as much screen time as he does, but you do feel like they hired a lot of local talent which helps make the film feel authentic.
Story – The story follows two cops, one with a dark past because of his skin colour as a child, the other lives in darkness because of his addiction that must use their skills to solve a crime which starts simple enough until things get out of hand to a much bigger problem running through the city. This does feel gritty with how we investigate things, it doesn’t hold back with what happens to the characters and shows us just how far the criminal underworld will go to keep a secret. While this doesn’t rely on twists to get the final outcome, it does show us just how far these two would go to solve a crime and bring the criminals to justice.
Crime – The crime world we enter here shows us just how both sides in a drug war are waging against each other, we get bodies piling up that will only increase the battle with a racial tension that just increases the tension between the twos.
Settings – The film is set in South Africa, we get to see how difficult the drug war is with the racial tension still between the people in the city.
Scene of the Movie – Brian’s escape plan.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The scene where the head turns up, there is such a pointless line here.
Final Thoughts – This is a gritty crime drama that shows us the harsh reality of the drug world, the two cops must overcome demons that will put them through a major test to get to the bottom of a crime.
Overall: Crime fans surprise.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Interview (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Thanks to the negative attention that “The Interview” received, it will be viewed by many more people than it would have without the controversy. The film, which was almost never released due to a cyberattack on Sony, is now the most widely accessible of this season.
The comedy follows two average journalists, Aaron Rapoport (Seth Rogan) and David Skylark (James Franco), who become pawns in a CIA plot to assassinate the leader of North Korea.
Skylark is an overzealous news anchor who seems to have no shame in what he reports on. He hosts a celebrity talk show, where he discusses the latest gossip. Fitting perfectly into this scenario are hilarious cameo appearances by Eminem and Rob Lowe.
When Skylark discovers his show is one of Kim Jong-un’s (Randall Park) favorites, he is struck with the genius idea to ask for an interview. Amazingly that request is granted, but attracts the attention of the CIA. Once the two guys are plunged into the outrageous mission, the film carries a fast pace through to the end.
Rogan, who codirected the film with Evan Goldberg, obviously did some real research. Some details are actually based on real world observations.
North Korea is a place shrouded in mystery and little information about the odd dictatorship has surfaced in the outside world. However, there are multiple documentaries by Vice which detail very regimented and monitored trips journalist have taken inside the isolated country.
Elements appearing in the film which are similar to actual documented information about North Korea include: the placement of fake stores with fake food, the discussion of famine and labor camps, and the only pictures allowed on any wall being that of the “supreme leader” or those leaders before him.
Regardless of its very serious political undertones, the film can hardly be taken seriously.
Little touches keep the movie silly and lighthearted. There are quite a few inside jokes that develop throughout the story, cleverly pulling the audience in and making them laugh.
The use of the song “Firework” by Katy Perry is one example. It is established as Kim Jong-un’s favorite song, comedically revealing his “softer” side. It also happens to be Skylark’s favorite song, which creates a common ground between the two characters as they begin to form their own bromance. The song works its way into the plot and reappears at the most mismatched moments, making them that much more absurd.
In general, the execution of the plot and mannerisms of the characters stand out as even cheesier than the past work of Rogan and Franco. The extremely animated facial expressions of Franco in his role as the cocky and lovably stupid reporter, look almost cartoon like. Sex jokes and awkward moments abound. People who do not enjoy that type of comedy will not find much value in this film.
Despite the heavy political attention surrounding “The Interview,” it is one of the most ridiculous comedies to hit theaters. The film has all of the typical features of a Rogan – Franco comedy. It’s filled with over the top raunchy humor, graphic violence, and of course plenty of “bromance.” However this time, it is also a highly entertaining political satire.
I give “The Interview” 3.5 out of 5 stars for quality, and 5 out of 5 stars for becoming an outrageous international controversy.
The comedy follows two average journalists, Aaron Rapoport (Seth Rogan) and David Skylark (James Franco), who become pawns in a CIA plot to assassinate the leader of North Korea.
Skylark is an overzealous news anchor who seems to have no shame in what he reports on. He hosts a celebrity talk show, where he discusses the latest gossip. Fitting perfectly into this scenario are hilarious cameo appearances by Eminem and Rob Lowe.
When Skylark discovers his show is one of Kim Jong-un’s (Randall Park) favorites, he is struck with the genius idea to ask for an interview. Amazingly that request is granted, but attracts the attention of the CIA. Once the two guys are plunged into the outrageous mission, the film carries a fast pace through to the end.
Rogan, who codirected the film with Evan Goldberg, obviously did some real research. Some details are actually based on real world observations.
North Korea is a place shrouded in mystery and little information about the odd dictatorship has surfaced in the outside world. However, there are multiple documentaries by Vice which detail very regimented and monitored trips journalist have taken inside the isolated country.
Elements appearing in the film which are similar to actual documented information about North Korea include: the placement of fake stores with fake food, the discussion of famine and labor camps, and the only pictures allowed on any wall being that of the “supreme leader” or those leaders before him.
Regardless of its very serious political undertones, the film can hardly be taken seriously.
Little touches keep the movie silly and lighthearted. There are quite a few inside jokes that develop throughout the story, cleverly pulling the audience in and making them laugh.
The use of the song “Firework” by Katy Perry is one example. It is established as Kim Jong-un’s favorite song, comedically revealing his “softer” side. It also happens to be Skylark’s favorite song, which creates a common ground between the two characters as they begin to form their own bromance. The song works its way into the plot and reappears at the most mismatched moments, making them that much more absurd.
In general, the execution of the plot and mannerisms of the characters stand out as even cheesier than the past work of Rogan and Franco. The extremely animated facial expressions of Franco in his role as the cocky and lovably stupid reporter, look almost cartoon like. Sex jokes and awkward moments abound. People who do not enjoy that type of comedy will not find much value in this film.
Despite the heavy political attention surrounding “The Interview,” it is one of the most ridiculous comedies to hit theaters. The film has all of the typical features of a Rogan – Franco comedy. It’s filled with over the top raunchy humor, graphic violence, and of course plenty of “bromance.” However this time, it is also a highly entertaining political satire.
I give “The Interview” 3.5 out of 5 stars for quality, and 5 out of 5 stars for becoming an outrageous international controversy.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Snitch (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
I’m a huge fan of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. His wrestling persona is
extremely entertaining and he’s a pretty decent actor. He did good with this movie but it wasn’t enough.
The premise of the movie is based on ‘true events’ (whatever that
means), it’s more about a law that’s real in our country right now, I’ll get in to that later.
There are a lot of characters so stick with me. The Rock plays John
Matthews, he owns his own construction business. He has an ex-wife, Sylvie Collins played by Melina Kanakaredes, and a current wife, Analisa played by Nadine Velazquez.
Johnand Analisa
have a daughter Isabella and he has a son with Sylvie, Jason Collins played by Rafi Gavron. The other major players are Barry Pepper who plays undercover DEA agent Cooper; Susan Sarandon who plays Joanne Keeghan a US Attorney; Jon Bernthal
who plays Daniel James an ex-con trying to get his life back together; Michael Kenneth Williams who plays Malik, a drug dealer; and Benjamin Bratt who plays Cartel leader Juan Carlos. Out of all of these, I liked Daniel, Agent Cooper, John Matthews, Malik and
Joanne Keeghan, in that order.
The law the movie is based on is about mandatory minimums. If you are
holding and it’s enough to distribute then you go to jail. The length of your jail time is based on how
much you are holding when you’re caught. In this case, Jason, who is 18 and still in high
school, is set up by his ‘best friend’. This friend sends him a huge bag of ecstasy against Jason’s wishes.
When the package arrives Jason gets caught because it’s a
sting. His jail time based on the amount of ecstasy is ten years in a prison that holds murderers, rapist and violent criminals.
The movie starts excruciatingly slow, the real action doesn’t start until
almost halfway through, or at least it felt like it. It’s good once you get there but I wasn’t really into
the people in it/living it. I kept thinking of the actors as themselves not the characters
they were playing, even the ones I liked. There were too many close ups and‘in action’ scenes that involved someone with a camera running or walking next to the actor.
I getthat it was to try and build apprehension and anxiety but it was more annoying and kept pulling me out of the story so I couldn’t connect emotionally with the characters.
I didn’t believe the union between John and Analisa or that there had been one with Sylvie, there was no familiarity and I didn’t believe the love or tension between them.
John was a business man who’s never seen action so he’s kind of a wuss, but it’s the Rock, a huge tall muscle-y intense looking guy. Whenever he flinched I kept waiting for him to kick ass but he never does.
Then in another scene he’s magically badass, shooting
a shotgun one handed out of the window of a semi-truck he’s driving.
The movie was more about showing people this heinous law then entertainingus. I don’t like that, it’s not why I go to movies. The only saving grace would have been if it had been really entertaining but it was only mildly entertaining at best.
I’d say rent it if you like the Rock or if you’re curious, it wouldn’t be too much of a waste of your time but
definitely don’t waste your money in a theatre.
extremely entertaining and he’s a pretty decent actor. He did good with this movie but it wasn’t enough.
The premise of the movie is based on ‘true events’ (whatever that
means), it’s more about a law that’s real in our country right now, I’ll get in to that later.
There are a lot of characters so stick with me. The Rock plays John
Matthews, he owns his own construction business. He has an ex-wife, Sylvie Collins played by Melina Kanakaredes, and a current wife, Analisa played by Nadine Velazquez.
Johnand Analisa
have a daughter Isabella and he has a son with Sylvie, Jason Collins played by Rafi Gavron. The other major players are Barry Pepper who plays undercover DEA agent Cooper; Susan Sarandon who plays Joanne Keeghan a US Attorney; Jon Bernthal
who plays Daniel James an ex-con trying to get his life back together; Michael Kenneth Williams who plays Malik, a drug dealer; and Benjamin Bratt who plays Cartel leader Juan Carlos. Out of all of these, I liked Daniel, Agent Cooper, John Matthews, Malik and
Joanne Keeghan, in that order.
The law the movie is based on is about mandatory minimums. If you are
holding and it’s enough to distribute then you go to jail. The length of your jail time is based on how
much you are holding when you’re caught. In this case, Jason, who is 18 and still in high
school, is set up by his ‘best friend’. This friend sends him a huge bag of ecstasy against Jason’s wishes.
When the package arrives Jason gets caught because it’s a
sting. His jail time based on the amount of ecstasy is ten years in a prison that holds murderers, rapist and violent criminals.
The movie starts excruciatingly slow, the real action doesn’t start until
almost halfway through, or at least it felt like it. It’s good once you get there but I wasn’t really into
the people in it/living it. I kept thinking of the actors as themselves not the characters
they were playing, even the ones I liked. There were too many close ups and‘in action’ scenes that involved someone with a camera running or walking next to the actor.
I getthat it was to try and build apprehension and anxiety but it was more annoying and kept pulling me out of the story so I couldn’t connect emotionally with the characters.
I didn’t believe the union between John and Analisa or that there had been one with Sylvie, there was no familiarity and I didn’t believe the love or tension between them.
John was a business man who’s never seen action so he’s kind of a wuss, but it’s the Rock, a huge tall muscle-y intense looking guy. Whenever he flinched I kept waiting for him to kick ass but he never does.
Then in another scene he’s magically badass, shooting
a shotgun one handed out of the window of a semi-truck he’s driving.
The movie was more about showing people this heinous law then entertainingus. I don’t like that, it’s not why I go to movies. The only saving grace would have been if it had been really entertaining but it was only mildly entertaining at best.
I’d say rent it if you like the Rock or if you’re curious, it wouldn’t be too much of a waste of your time but
definitely don’t waste your money in a theatre.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Dictator (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Sacha Baron Cohen is undoubtedly one of the most daring names in comedy recently. A Cambridge graduate, the comedian-actor who has starred in fairly controversial films “Bruno” and “Borat” returns with director Larry Charles in 2012’s “The Dictator”. What can be said about Cohen, over other contemporary comedians, is his absolutely excellent ability to inhabit a character role – both in and out of the film he is portrayed in. “The Dictator” is no exception to this, yet it might be the controversy regarding the Academy Awards snub that is remembered more than this film.
Cohen plays the hilariously named Admiral General Aladeen, a megalomaniacal dictator of a fictional oil-rich North African country named Waadeya. While on his trip to the UN to deliver a speech, he is thrown from his oppressive dictatorial role into that of a lost New Yorker, desperate to get back to his position as dictator. He meets others along the way to help him, namely Aasif Mandvi and Anna Farris.
The film’s plot is about as formulaic and basic as a comedy can get, simply serving as a vehicle to push from one joke to the next. If you were expecting any sort of compelling narrative, with jokes sprinkled throughout, then this movie will not be enjoyable. It completely rides upon its humor, which is both beneficial and detrimental. If the film at least attached you to particular characters other than Admiral General Aladeen then it might benefit more from its gags featuring multiple characters.
The real highlight of the film is Cohen’s consistent portrayal of this outrageous ruler. He is funny throughout; and even though he might be a horrible person with villainous qualities, he has a childish heart underneath. It is that mixture of qualities that makes for some very hilarious moments.
The actual jokes and gags themselves hold their own throughout. As mentioned, the film plods forward from one gag or joke to the next, with story simply setting up the scenes. Most of the jokes were grin worthy, and a handful of them were laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yet, overall I would not call it the funniest movie of the year. There’s a bit of everything in the movie. Sacha Baron Cohen’s trademark shocking and offensive humor will please the college moviegoers and his more clever witty humor will amuse older watchers. Yet, even the offensive humor appears to be more tame than his other movies’ most memorable moments. The whole film also deals heavily with contemporary political issues – specifically the power-obsessed dictators which have filled the news as of late. Cohen’s character pokes fun at both the absurdity of people like Colonel Ghadafi as well as the hangers-on who surround such people.
Overall, the movie maintains a consistent level of humor throughout. While that level of humor may remain at simply grin-level comedy, it still has a handful of laugh-out-loud moments. It might not be the funniest movie of the year, but it is by no means bad at what it does. A less formulaic plot would have benefited the movie’s gags by allowing other comedians in the movie to shine more. As it stands, it is a movie centered completely on Cohen’s comedy and held up by it as well. Not completely unlike the self-centered nature of his character, Admiral General Aladeen.
Cohen plays the hilariously named Admiral General Aladeen, a megalomaniacal dictator of a fictional oil-rich North African country named Waadeya. While on his trip to the UN to deliver a speech, he is thrown from his oppressive dictatorial role into that of a lost New Yorker, desperate to get back to his position as dictator. He meets others along the way to help him, namely Aasif Mandvi and Anna Farris.
The film’s plot is about as formulaic and basic as a comedy can get, simply serving as a vehicle to push from one joke to the next. If you were expecting any sort of compelling narrative, with jokes sprinkled throughout, then this movie will not be enjoyable. It completely rides upon its humor, which is both beneficial and detrimental. If the film at least attached you to particular characters other than Admiral General Aladeen then it might benefit more from its gags featuring multiple characters.
The real highlight of the film is Cohen’s consistent portrayal of this outrageous ruler. He is funny throughout; and even though he might be a horrible person with villainous qualities, he has a childish heart underneath. It is that mixture of qualities that makes for some very hilarious moments.
The actual jokes and gags themselves hold their own throughout. As mentioned, the film plods forward from one gag or joke to the next, with story simply setting up the scenes. Most of the jokes were grin worthy, and a handful of them were laugh-out-loud hilarious. Yet, overall I would not call it the funniest movie of the year. There’s a bit of everything in the movie. Sacha Baron Cohen’s trademark shocking and offensive humor will please the college moviegoers and his more clever witty humor will amuse older watchers. Yet, even the offensive humor appears to be more tame than his other movies’ most memorable moments. The whole film also deals heavily with contemporary political issues – specifically the power-obsessed dictators which have filled the news as of late. Cohen’s character pokes fun at both the absurdity of people like Colonel Ghadafi as well as the hangers-on who surround such people.
Overall, the movie maintains a consistent level of humor throughout. While that level of humor may remain at simply grin-level comedy, it still has a handful of laugh-out-loud moments. It might not be the funniest movie of the year, but it is by no means bad at what it does. A less formulaic plot would have benefited the movie’s gags by allowing other comedians in the movie to shine more. As it stands, it is a movie centered completely on Cohen’s comedy and held up by it as well. Not completely unlike the self-centered nature of his character, Admiral General Aladeen.
I usually don't judge a book by its cover, but I'm not going to lie. When I saw the gorgeous cover for Nancy Churnin's children's book For Spacious Skies, I fell in love with the cover and knew I had to read the book. I'm really glad I did because everything about it was fantastic, and I even learned a few things I had never known about the song America the Beautiful and its creator, Katharine Lee Bates.
For Spacious Skies tells the condensed biography of Katharine Lee Bates, the creator of the song America the Beautiful although when it was written, it was originally a poem. Katharine Lee Bates comes across as a fantastic person. She lived in a time when men were seen as being far superior than women, but she didn't let that stop her from getting an education and being a voice for those that felt they had no voice.
I admit that I didn't know the history behind America the Beautiful, so this book was the perfect starting point. I think my favorite fact in the book was that Katharine Lee Bates never wanted or accepted any payment for penning America the Beautiful. She just wanted to give something back to the country she loved so much.
This is a biography picture book for older children, and I believe that it's written in a way that speaks to children and will draw in their attention quite easily. The length is perfect, and the wording is fantastic. Everything flows perfectly. I also liked the fact that Nancy Churnin includes an author's note as well as a timeline of Katharine's life and accomplishments at the end. The author's note goes into a little more detail about Katharine's life which is great for adults, children who want to learn a bit more, or for a discussion. The timeline makes it easy to picture events as they happened.
The illustrations in For Spacious Skies are absolutely breathtaking! Olga Baumert is the illustrator, and her talent shines through in every page. Each illustration is full of detail and really helps to drive the story. Although my 5 year old was a little young for this book, he did love the illustrations in it and even asked if we could just look at the pictures as they are quite colorful and really draw you in. Seriously, I could go on and on about amazing the illustrations are, but it's better if you just pick up a copy of the book yourself to see what I'm talking about.
Overall, I feel that For Spacious Skies is the ultimate girl power book. Katharine Lee Bates was obviously a force to be reckoned with according to this book. If you're looking for a book with a strong female and beautiful illustrations, pick up a copy of For Spacious Skies. I would definitely recommend For Spacious Skies by Nancy Churnin to adults and children aged 8 and older. I feel as if this book needs to be required reading in all elementary schools and should be in every school library. That's how good and informative it is. Grab a copy, and see for yourself!
--
(A special thank you to Edelweiss for an eBook copy of For Spacious Skies and to Nancy Churnin and Lone Star Literary Life for a hardback copy in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
For Spacious Skies tells the condensed biography of Katharine Lee Bates, the creator of the song America the Beautiful although when it was written, it was originally a poem. Katharine Lee Bates comes across as a fantastic person. She lived in a time when men were seen as being far superior than women, but she didn't let that stop her from getting an education and being a voice for those that felt they had no voice.
I admit that I didn't know the history behind America the Beautiful, so this book was the perfect starting point. I think my favorite fact in the book was that Katharine Lee Bates never wanted or accepted any payment for penning America the Beautiful. She just wanted to give something back to the country she loved so much.
This is a biography picture book for older children, and I believe that it's written in a way that speaks to children and will draw in their attention quite easily. The length is perfect, and the wording is fantastic. Everything flows perfectly. I also liked the fact that Nancy Churnin includes an author's note as well as a timeline of Katharine's life and accomplishments at the end. The author's note goes into a little more detail about Katharine's life which is great for adults, children who want to learn a bit more, or for a discussion. The timeline makes it easy to picture events as they happened.
The illustrations in For Spacious Skies are absolutely breathtaking! Olga Baumert is the illustrator, and her talent shines through in every page. Each illustration is full of detail and really helps to drive the story. Although my 5 year old was a little young for this book, he did love the illustrations in it and even asked if we could just look at the pictures as they are quite colorful and really draw you in. Seriously, I could go on and on about amazing the illustrations are, but it's better if you just pick up a copy of the book yourself to see what I'm talking about.
Overall, I feel that For Spacious Skies is the ultimate girl power book. Katharine Lee Bates was obviously a force to be reckoned with according to this book. If you're looking for a book with a strong female and beautiful illustrations, pick up a copy of For Spacious Skies. I would definitely recommend For Spacious Skies by Nancy Churnin to adults and children aged 8 and older. I feel as if this book needs to be required reading in all elementary schools and should be in every school library. That's how good and informative it is. Grab a copy, and see for yourself!
--
(A special thank you to Edelweiss for an eBook copy of For Spacious Skies and to Nancy Churnin and Lone Star Literary Life for a hardback copy in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated All About Steve (2009) in Movies
Jun 15, 2020
A Movie About a Crossword Puzzle Designer? Ummm...
With a mindblowing 6% Rating on Rotten Tomatoes (mindblowing because it’s too high), All About Steve is the story of a crossword puzzle designer who travels across the country with the hopes of convincing a CNN newsreporter that they belong together. I can feel your excitement. It’s palpable.
Acting: 3
Have you ever seen a mouse try and get off of a glue trap? That’s the equivalent of the acting work in this movie. Let’s start with the woman of the hour, Sandra Bullock playing the leading role of Mary Horowitz. I couldn’t help but think as she runs through her lines, “Do you even want to be on set right now?” She reads the lines of her character like a robocaller at times. I can actually say that for quite a few of the actors that bought into this dud.
Beginning: 6
I’ve seen worse starts to movies, I’ll be honest. The career fair scene is actually pretty hilarious which is probably about the only nice thing I have to say about this movie. If the entire movie had been like this, the overall score would have been double. Unfortunately the movie still would have been shit.
Characters: 5
I’ve always said, if you hate the main character of a movie, there’s a good chance you’re going to hate the movie. That theory definitely holds true here as Mary pains me with every single scene I watch her in. And the way they paint Bradley Cooper’s character Steve out to be such a jerk is just wrong. I mean this a reverse Pepe Le Peu situation we got going on here but he is the one we’re supposed to be mad at? Nightmare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 1
Yeah, there’s nothing I care about that’s happening throughout the duration of this movie. I could care less about Mary’s quest to win Steve because it’s just wrong. She’s a psycopath! When I say, “Nothing to see here!” I mean it.
Entertainment Value: 2
Ok, so here’s why I gave it a 2 despite how dreadful the entire movie was: I kept waiting to see how much worse things would get. The further I went down the rabbit hole, things just got more and more painful. Ever watch elementary school kids play basketball? Pretty much the same kind of train wreck here.
Memorability: 0
Pace: 0
Considering this is one of the worst movies imaginable, it’s no secret that “snail’s pace” doesn’t do it justice. Getting through All About Steve almost requires much drinking. Sure, you can survive it sober. Not advisable.
Plot: 1
It’s a story that makes no sense revolving around characters that don’t have a single solid motivation to their name. Even when you think for a moment that things might redeem themselves, the movie manages to set itself on fire again. Lost count of the number of times I asked myself, “Where the hell is this going?”
Resolution: 3
Overall: 26
Maybe it was because I was tired. Maybe it’s because I think Sandra Bullock is beautiful and who the hell would be stupid enough to run from that? Maybe it was because I had just watched A Quiet Place right before and was blown away by how incredible it was. Or maybe…All About Steve is just a terrible terrible movie. Yeah, I think I’ll go with the latter.
Acting: 3
Have you ever seen a mouse try and get off of a glue trap? That’s the equivalent of the acting work in this movie. Let’s start with the woman of the hour, Sandra Bullock playing the leading role of Mary Horowitz. I couldn’t help but think as she runs through her lines, “Do you even want to be on set right now?” She reads the lines of her character like a robocaller at times. I can actually say that for quite a few of the actors that bought into this dud.
Beginning: 6
I’ve seen worse starts to movies, I’ll be honest. The career fair scene is actually pretty hilarious which is probably about the only nice thing I have to say about this movie. If the entire movie had been like this, the overall score would have been double. Unfortunately the movie still would have been shit.
Characters: 5
I’ve always said, if you hate the main character of a movie, there’s a good chance you’re going to hate the movie. That theory definitely holds true here as Mary pains me with every single scene I watch her in. And the way they paint Bradley Cooper’s character Steve out to be such a jerk is just wrong. I mean this a reverse Pepe Le Peu situation we got going on here but he is the one we’re supposed to be mad at? Nightmare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 5
Conflict: 1
Yeah, there’s nothing I care about that’s happening throughout the duration of this movie. I could care less about Mary’s quest to win Steve because it’s just wrong. She’s a psycopath! When I say, “Nothing to see here!” I mean it.
Entertainment Value: 2
Ok, so here’s why I gave it a 2 despite how dreadful the entire movie was: I kept waiting to see how much worse things would get. The further I went down the rabbit hole, things just got more and more painful. Ever watch elementary school kids play basketball? Pretty much the same kind of train wreck here.
Memorability: 0
Pace: 0
Considering this is one of the worst movies imaginable, it’s no secret that “snail’s pace” doesn’t do it justice. Getting through All About Steve almost requires much drinking. Sure, you can survive it sober. Not advisable.
Plot: 1
It’s a story that makes no sense revolving around characters that don’t have a single solid motivation to their name. Even when you think for a moment that things might redeem themselves, the movie manages to set itself on fire again. Lost count of the number of times I asked myself, “Where the hell is this going?”
Resolution: 3
Overall: 26
Maybe it was because I was tired. Maybe it’s because I think Sandra Bullock is beautiful and who the hell would be stupid enough to run from that? Maybe it was because I had just watched A Quiet Place right before and was blown away by how incredible it was. Or maybe…All About Steve is just a terrible terrible movie. Yeah, I think I’ll go with the latter.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Ghosts of War (2020) in Movies
Nov 9, 2020
The ending is worth it
Ghosts of War follows a group of American soldiers as they make their way to take up post at a French chateau towards the end of the Second World War, and encounter much more than they bargained for in this slightly above average B movie.
Right from the start, this opens with your usual cliched group of soldiers that you’d find in any war film. Brenton Thwaites is Chris, the boss and leader, you have Skylar Astin as Eugene, the brains/intellectual, Kyle Gallner as the odd and trouble sniper Tappert, Alan Ritchson as a typical macho man and finally Theo Rossi as the filler. So far, so generic, and other than Tappert who gets a decent bit of creepy character development later on, the rest of the main group are virtually one dimensional. Which is a shame as the cast are a decent group of actors that have been let down by the poor writing. Although I did enjoy Billy Zane popping up with a intentionally cheesy blink and you’ll miss it cameo as a Nazi with horrific German accent.
The film begins like your typical war movie; a group of soldiers working their way across country to reach their destination. It’s nothing we haven’t seen before. However what helps lift this is a rather moving and poignant opening quote, and a score that accompanies this very well. The score in this would be at home on any dramatic war film, and almost seems out of place in a horror film. It gives this a feeling that it’s a lot more epic and grand than it actually turns out to be.
What really drags this film down is when the group arrive at the aforementioned chateau and begin to experience all of the supernatural going’s on. Aside from a a couple of potentially creepy scenes, the jump scares are tired and predictable and the ghosts look like every other spook that’s been in a modern day horror film recently. It reeks of a below average, typical ghost film with some hit and miss special effects (albeit with an respectable amount of blood and gore) and had it continued on like this, it would’ve been completely forgettable. However throughout the scenes in the chateau there are hints that there is something deeper and more sinister going on, and it starts to pick up again when the group encounter a party of Nazi soldiers trying to enter the building. Things start to get a little weird and confusing and then a big reveal in the last 20 minutes completely shifts this film into something you never expected. I didn’t see this particular twist coming and for me, this made this movie more than just a sub par horror film. The reveal has been met with mixed reviews from critics and reviews alike, but I think it injects some much needed enjoyment and intrigue – it’s just a shame we have to wait over an hour to get there. The entire twist and ending is rather disturbing and also quite moving and emotional, and the final scene, whilst one we’ve seen done many times before, did make this a satisfying and darkly entertaining end.
Ghosts of War starts off as a below average clichéd war horror film, however it you can get through the first hour, the ending packs a decent, enjoyable and rather surprising punch. It’s just a shame the first two acts don’t match up to the ending.
Right from the start, this opens with your usual cliched group of soldiers that you’d find in any war film. Brenton Thwaites is Chris, the boss and leader, you have Skylar Astin as Eugene, the brains/intellectual, Kyle Gallner as the odd and trouble sniper Tappert, Alan Ritchson as a typical macho man and finally Theo Rossi as the filler. So far, so generic, and other than Tappert who gets a decent bit of creepy character development later on, the rest of the main group are virtually one dimensional. Which is a shame as the cast are a decent group of actors that have been let down by the poor writing. Although I did enjoy Billy Zane popping up with a intentionally cheesy blink and you’ll miss it cameo as a Nazi with horrific German accent.
The film begins like your typical war movie; a group of soldiers working their way across country to reach their destination. It’s nothing we haven’t seen before. However what helps lift this is a rather moving and poignant opening quote, and a score that accompanies this very well. The score in this would be at home on any dramatic war film, and almost seems out of place in a horror film. It gives this a feeling that it’s a lot more epic and grand than it actually turns out to be.
What really drags this film down is when the group arrive at the aforementioned chateau and begin to experience all of the supernatural going’s on. Aside from a a couple of potentially creepy scenes, the jump scares are tired and predictable and the ghosts look like every other spook that’s been in a modern day horror film recently. It reeks of a below average, typical ghost film with some hit and miss special effects (albeit with an respectable amount of blood and gore) and had it continued on like this, it would’ve been completely forgettable. However throughout the scenes in the chateau there are hints that there is something deeper and more sinister going on, and it starts to pick up again when the group encounter a party of Nazi soldiers trying to enter the building. Things start to get a little weird and confusing and then a big reveal in the last 20 minutes completely shifts this film into something you never expected. I didn’t see this particular twist coming and for me, this made this movie more than just a sub par horror film. The reveal has been met with mixed reviews from critics and reviews alike, but I think it injects some much needed enjoyment and intrigue – it’s just a shame we have to wait over an hour to get there. The entire twist and ending is rather disturbing and also quite moving and emotional, and the final scene, whilst one we’ve seen done many times before, did make this a satisfying and darkly entertaining end.
Ghosts of War starts off as a below average clichéd war horror film, however it you can get through the first hour, the ending packs a decent, enjoyable and rather surprising punch. It’s just a shame the first two acts don’t match up to the ending.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Little Miss Sunshine (2006) in Movies
Mar 24, 2021
Adorably heartwarming
Film #17 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Little Miss Sunshine
Little Miss Sunshine is a quirky gem of an indie film from 2006 that whilst a favourite of mine and Oscar nominated, has likely flown below the radar for many mainstream viewers. Which is a huge shame as this is such a fun, heartwarming and enjoyable film
Directed by husband and wife team Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, Little Miss Sunshine follows the life of the dysfunctional Hoover family from New Mexico. The Hoovers are a family of unfortunates, misfits and losers, and probably one of the most realistic family depictions you’ll ever seen on screen outside of reality TV. There’s Sheryl (Toni Collette), the harassed mum who keeps her family fed on fast food. Dad Richard (Greg Kinnear) who’s trying to peddle a failing business that focuses on teaching others the secrets to success. Grandpa Edwin (Alan Arkin), an ageing hippie with a drug habit that has been kicked out of his retirement home. Sheryl’s brother Frank (Steve Carell), a gay man currently recovering from a suicide attempt after his partner left him. Son Duane (Paul Dano) who’s goal to get into flight school has led him to take a vow of silence. And finally there’s young daughter Olive (Abigail Breslin), who’s obsession with beauty pageants leads the family to take a cross country trip in an ageing VW van to help her compete in the Little Miss Sunshine pageant. Along the way, the family encounter a variety of mishaps and events that can potentially change their lives.
The Hoover family for the most part are ridiculously lovable and this is entirely down to their flaws that they are so likeable. Aside from Dad Richard who has a number of questionable ethics and morals that demean others, the family and their unique quirky personalities are the main reason why this film is so enjoyable. And the fact that the entire family are all brought together by young Olive across the span of the film makes this incredibly heartwarming. Olive is an underdog and being realistic, not the type of girl who you’d see in your typical American beauty pageant, but you still find yourself rooting for her all the same.
The cast are fantastic and while you can always rely on Toni Collette, Alan Arkin and Greg Kinnear, it’s Steve Carell and Abigail Breslin that shine brightest. Until this, I didn’t think Steve Carell could do serious and especially not a role that like. But he excels, bringing a sad, intelligent air to Frank and personally I think this is his best role to date. And then there’s Abigail Breslin, a 9 year old who steals the show and pulls the entire cast and film together. Together with a clever, well written script, the cast pull together a heartwarming and surprisingly funny film where emotions and family are key to an eventful road trip.
What I enjoyed the most about Little Miss Sunshine is that while the journey the family take is obviously most important, we do at least get the joy of seeing Olive enter the beauty pageant and this is such a fitting end to the story. There may be some slightly unbelievable or predictable events that occur across the journey (the police traffic stop being one), but ultimately you come out of this feeling incredibly satisfied and rather warm and fuzzy inside. One of the most enjoyable family road trip movies I’ve ever seen.
Little Miss Sunshine is a quirky gem of an indie film from 2006 that whilst a favourite of mine and Oscar nominated, has likely flown below the radar for many mainstream viewers. Which is a huge shame as this is such a fun, heartwarming and enjoyable film
Directed by husband and wife team Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris, Little Miss Sunshine follows the life of the dysfunctional Hoover family from New Mexico. The Hoovers are a family of unfortunates, misfits and losers, and probably one of the most realistic family depictions you’ll ever seen on screen outside of reality TV. There’s Sheryl (Toni Collette), the harassed mum who keeps her family fed on fast food. Dad Richard (Greg Kinnear) who’s trying to peddle a failing business that focuses on teaching others the secrets to success. Grandpa Edwin (Alan Arkin), an ageing hippie with a drug habit that has been kicked out of his retirement home. Sheryl’s brother Frank (Steve Carell), a gay man currently recovering from a suicide attempt after his partner left him. Son Duane (Paul Dano) who’s goal to get into flight school has led him to take a vow of silence. And finally there’s young daughter Olive (Abigail Breslin), who’s obsession with beauty pageants leads the family to take a cross country trip in an ageing VW van to help her compete in the Little Miss Sunshine pageant. Along the way, the family encounter a variety of mishaps and events that can potentially change their lives.
The Hoover family for the most part are ridiculously lovable and this is entirely down to their flaws that they are so likeable. Aside from Dad Richard who has a number of questionable ethics and morals that demean others, the family and their unique quirky personalities are the main reason why this film is so enjoyable. And the fact that the entire family are all brought together by young Olive across the span of the film makes this incredibly heartwarming. Olive is an underdog and being realistic, not the type of girl who you’d see in your typical American beauty pageant, but you still find yourself rooting for her all the same.
The cast are fantastic and while you can always rely on Toni Collette, Alan Arkin and Greg Kinnear, it’s Steve Carell and Abigail Breslin that shine brightest. Until this, I didn’t think Steve Carell could do serious and especially not a role that like. But he excels, bringing a sad, intelligent air to Frank and personally I think this is his best role to date. And then there’s Abigail Breslin, a 9 year old who steals the show and pulls the entire cast and film together. Together with a clever, well written script, the cast pull together a heartwarming and surprisingly funny film where emotions and family are key to an eventful road trip.
What I enjoyed the most about Little Miss Sunshine is that while the journey the family take is obviously most important, we do at least get the joy of seeing Olive enter the beauty pageant and this is such a fitting end to the story. There may be some slightly unbelievable or predictable events that occur across the journey (the police traffic stop being one), but ultimately you come out of this feeling incredibly satisfied and rather warm and fuzzy inside. One of the most enjoyable family road trip movies I’ve ever seen.
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Chestnut Man in Books
Sep 24, 2020
I can’t decide one thing with this book, to put it in the “One of the best thrillers of 2018” because I read it this year, or to say that is “One of the best thrillers of 2019” because it is published next year. One thing for sure, it is an absolute treat!
The first thing that I really loved, was the cover. It looks quite simple, but the way that the chestnut man is portrayed gave me the feeling that it is going to be a great thriller, and it definitely didn’t disappoint me. I think, that in this book there are multiple protagonists- Thulin and Hess. They both play quite equal roles during the investigation, even though it might not feel so. There is a wide variety of characters in this novel, and all of them are very well nurtured and thought through. Their qualities are delivered slowly, and I loved how they opened up throughout the book. I really liked Thulin and Hess, they both are very complex individuals. They are quite different people, and when they work together, all the process feels messy, chaotic, but in the end, it provides results.
I don’t even know from where to begin with the praise for the plot. The whole narrative has multiple layers, and there are several cases combined in this book. We have the disappearance of a Minister’s daughter, which happened a while ago and shook the whole country, and at present, we have these new murders with the chestnut dolls at the crime scenes. These two things entwined with each other created more richness and action for the whole story. I loved that it was told from multiple perspectives, it not only allowed to get to know the characters better but also gave an insight into different minds. The author chose very intriguing topics for this novel, such as foster care; child abuse; social services and their work; politicians and their lives; different family relationships; discrimination at work and many more.
The writing style of this book is impeccable! Sveistrup is a very talented storyteller with a great eye for detail, and after reading this book, I am definitely his fan. I really loved the setting of this novel, it is set mainly in Copenhagen, during the autumn/winter season, which created a very gloomy and mysterious atmosphere to the whole novel. The author is not afraid to show disturbing (to some) killings with amputations or disgusting acts of humankind, so this book is not suitable for sensitive people. It might feel like a big book, but the chapters are really short and the whole plot and characters really absorbed me so, I just couldn’t put it down. I really liked the ending of this thriller, it is unexpected, unusual, but rounded this novel very beautifully!
So, to conclude, this book has everything what a great thriller needs. The characters are complex and intriguing, the mood, suspense and twists are very well developed, it is dark and can be disgusting at times, but overall it is a gripping novel and I can’t wait to read more from this author! I do strongly recommend it, and I hope you will enjoy it as much as I did.
The first thing that I really loved, was the cover. It looks quite simple, but the way that the chestnut man is portrayed gave me the feeling that it is going to be a great thriller, and it definitely didn’t disappoint me. I think, that in this book there are multiple protagonists- Thulin and Hess. They both play quite equal roles during the investigation, even though it might not feel so. There is a wide variety of characters in this novel, and all of them are very well nurtured and thought through. Their qualities are delivered slowly, and I loved how they opened up throughout the book. I really liked Thulin and Hess, they both are very complex individuals. They are quite different people, and when they work together, all the process feels messy, chaotic, but in the end, it provides results.
I don’t even know from where to begin with the praise for the plot. The whole narrative has multiple layers, and there are several cases combined in this book. We have the disappearance of a Minister’s daughter, which happened a while ago and shook the whole country, and at present, we have these new murders with the chestnut dolls at the crime scenes. These two things entwined with each other created more richness and action for the whole story. I loved that it was told from multiple perspectives, it not only allowed to get to know the characters better but also gave an insight into different minds. The author chose very intriguing topics for this novel, such as foster care; child abuse; social services and their work; politicians and their lives; different family relationships; discrimination at work and many more.
The writing style of this book is impeccable! Sveistrup is a very talented storyteller with a great eye for detail, and after reading this book, I am definitely his fan. I really loved the setting of this novel, it is set mainly in Copenhagen, during the autumn/winter season, which created a very gloomy and mysterious atmosphere to the whole novel. The author is not afraid to show disturbing (to some) killings with amputations or disgusting acts of humankind, so this book is not suitable for sensitive people. It might feel like a big book, but the chapters are really short and the whole plot and characters really absorbed me so, I just couldn’t put it down. I really liked the ending of this thriller, it is unexpected, unusual, but rounded this novel very beautifully!
So, to conclude, this book has everything what a great thriller needs. The characters are complex and intriguing, the mood, suspense and twists are very well developed, it is dark and can be disgusting at times, but overall it is a gripping novel and I can’t wait to read more from this author! I do strongly recommend it, and I hope you will enjoy it as much as I did.