Search
Search results
Fred (860 KP) rated The Haunting of Bly Manor in TV
Oct 11, 2020
Yet another re-telling of The Turn of the Screw
This is a re-telling of The Turn of the Screw by Henry James, written in 1898. The last re-telling was 2020s The Turning, which was terrible. So how is this version?
In the last episode of this series, a character says, "This wasn't a ghost story, it was a love story." which is true. Sort of. It's a ghost story in the fact that it has ghosts in it. It's a love story in that two people fall in love. But it's really all about the characters. They are very good characters & acted out very well. I'll even give Henry Thomas credit for trying a British accent, even if his face contorted like someone was running a current through his face every time he talked. Entire episodes are sometimes devoted to a character. And this is the main problem. It's fine to give some character development, but this series is so stretched out. It's 9 episodes that could have been 3 or 4 episodes and worked out much better. Each person's story also jumps back in time, then forward, then back, then back again, then forward, then back. It's pacing can be real bad & quite frankly can be real boring at times.
Sometimes I think how can this story be remade 35 times now & still there's no great film version. It's a good story. It's an interesting idea. But, it's also weird & sometimes confusing & sometimes all over the place. It's got to be tight, but it's also got to be fleshed out enough that we care about the characters. Which as I said, is what it's all about.
Now, is it a ghost story? I already said yes. Is it a horror series? Well, I would say no. It's not scary. It's not creepy. It doesn't even have jump scares, which is normally good, but I would have enjoyed one or two to be honest. What it does have, as I've stated, is characters. But it also has atmosphere & great settings. The manor itself is almost it's own character. But as much as it is dark & there are things hiding in the corners or even in plain sight, it's just doesn't have that creep factor. Even the little girl shushes a ghost when it won't shut up. There's no sense of real evil or malevolence going on.
Now it sounds like I hated this series, but I didn't. I liked it. It was not what I expected, being the second season of the anthology "The Haunting" series, which started with the phenomenal "The Haunting of Hill House". But, if it had been just like Hill House, I probably would have been bored & just re-watched the first season again. So, I'm glad it was different. But like I said, it was stretched out far longer than it should have been.
Now, after we watched the entire series, my wife said that she liked it & would re-watch it maybe in 5 years. and gives it a 6 out of 10 as well. I'm sure a re-watch would be good for seeing things you did not catch the first time, but feel it'd be better to move on to something different. If you're looking for something scary to watch this Halloween series, then you can skip this. Unless you're in the mood to watch some good actors, playing good characters, with an interesting movie & have lots of free time. However, if you didn't see the first season "Hill House", then watch that instead.
In the last episode of this series, a character says, "This wasn't a ghost story, it was a love story." which is true. Sort of. It's a ghost story in the fact that it has ghosts in it. It's a love story in that two people fall in love. But it's really all about the characters. They are very good characters & acted out very well. I'll even give Henry Thomas credit for trying a British accent, even if his face contorted like someone was running a current through his face every time he talked. Entire episodes are sometimes devoted to a character. And this is the main problem. It's fine to give some character development, but this series is so stretched out. It's 9 episodes that could have been 3 or 4 episodes and worked out much better. Each person's story also jumps back in time, then forward, then back, then back again, then forward, then back. It's pacing can be real bad & quite frankly can be real boring at times.
Sometimes I think how can this story be remade 35 times now & still there's no great film version. It's a good story. It's an interesting idea. But, it's also weird & sometimes confusing & sometimes all over the place. It's got to be tight, but it's also got to be fleshed out enough that we care about the characters. Which as I said, is what it's all about.
Now, is it a ghost story? I already said yes. Is it a horror series? Well, I would say no. It's not scary. It's not creepy. It doesn't even have jump scares, which is normally good, but I would have enjoyed one or two to be honest. What it does have, as I've stated, is characters. But it also has atmosphere & great settings. The manor itself is almost it's own character. But as much as it is dark & there are things hiding in the corners or even in plain sight, it's just doesn't have that creep factor. Even the little girl shushes a ghost when it won't shut up. There's no sense of real evil or malevolence going on.
Now it sounds like I hated this series, but I didn't. I liked it. It was not what I expected, being the second season of the anthology "The Haunting" series, which started with the phenomenal "The Haunting of Hill House". But, if it had been just like Hill House, I probably would have been bored & just re-watched the first season again. So, I'm glad it was different. But like I said, it was stretched out far longer than it should have been.
Now, after we watched the entire series, my wife said that she liked it & would re-watch it maybe in 5 years. and gives it a 6 out of 10 as well. I'm sure a re-watch would be good for seeing things you did not catch the first time, but feel it'd be better to move on to something different. If you're looking for something scary to watch this Halloween series, then you can skip this. Unless you're in the mood to watch some good actors, playing good characters, with an interesting movie & have lots of free time. However, if you didn't see the first season "Hill House", then watch that instead.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Plain Bad Heroines in Books
Dec 17, 2020
Plain Bad Heroines was one of my most anticipated reads of the year. I am a sucker for a lesbian tale. Add in a Gothic New England boarding school for girls? Sold.
The story centers around two time periods. The first, 1902, at the Brookhants School for Girls, run by Libbie Brookhants. A book by a young writer, Mary MacLane has come out--one that's incredibly scandalous for the times. Two Brookhants girls, Flo and Clara, are obsessed with it and establish The Plain Bad Heroine Society. The two are in love, meeting in secret--until they are attacked by yellow jackets at their hiding spot, a copy of the book found with them. A few years later the school closes, but not until after more scandal and death. Now, our second period, over a hundred years later, where Merritt Emmons, a young writer, publishes a book about Flo and Clara's story. It inspires a horror film starring Harper Harper, a famous lesbian actress. Harper will be playing Flo and B-list actress Audrey Wells, Clara. Filming on-site at the abandoned Brookhants site, the three women converge. But soon, weird things start happening, and the curse of Brookhants seems back to haunt the set--and our three modern-day heroines.
This book is absolutely enthralling at times. I flew through these 619 pages, that's for sure. My notes state "very lesbian," which is, of course, a major plus for me. Believe me, we don't get a lot of books starring ourselves. And you know, where we are killed off by swarms of yellow jackets. I honestly found both storylines compelling. It's hard not to fall a bit in love with Harper Harper, the charismatic celebrity (out!) lesbian. And 1902 isn't just about Clara and Flo, but Libbie Brookhants and her life trying to run a cursed school in the early 1900s. Honestly, the pages really flew by most of the time. Though, there are certainly moments where I felt some of the story could have been cut.
And yes, the narrative style is different, though it really adds to the uniqueness of the book. It's basically told by an omnipresent narrator, talking directly to the reader. There are footnotes, often humorous ones, and the end result is something you don't often find. For the most part, I felt like Danforth pulled it off, too. I do think Libbie was a little more fully developed than Merritt, Harper, and Audrey, but that also may have been because that trio could come across as a bit spoiled at times.
Probably my two biggest issues with this book (regretfully): for a Gothic horror novel, it's not really that scary. There are a few creepy and eerie moments, especially in the beginning, but it never really builds up to that terrifying moment that you're expecting. And, somewhat related, the ending. We read and stick with our various tales for the entire time and then... poof! Everything just fizzles out. I was so bummed. The ending was such a disappointment after all I'd read and kept this from being a full-fledged 4 or 4.5-star read. I couldn't believe it after what we'd been through. It was like even the author was tired.
So, overall, this is an original and fascinating read. I'm certainly still advising you to read it (especially if you're queer or enjoy reading queer fiction). Just be prepared that the ending may not have that big scary moment you're expecting. 3.5 stars.
The story centers around two time periods. The first, 1902, at the Brookhants School for Girls, run by Libbie Brookhants. A book by a young writer, Mary MacLane has come out--one that's incredibly scandalous for the times. Two Brookhants girls, Flo and Clara, are obsessed with it and establish The Plain Bad Heroine Society. The two are in love, meeting in secret--until they are attacked by yellow jackets at their hiding spot, a copy of the book found with them. A few years later the school closes, but not until after more scandal and death. Now, our second period, over a hundred years later, where Merritt Emmons, a young writer, publishes a book about Flo and Clara's story. It inspires a horror film starring Harper Harper, a famous lesbian actress. Harper will be playing Flo and B-list actress Audrey Wells, Clara. Filming on-site at the abandoned Brookhants site, the three women converge. But soon, weird things start happening, and the curse of Brookhants seems back to haunt the set--and our three modern-day heroines.
This book is absolutely enthralling at times. I flew through these 619 pages, that's for sure. My notes state "very lesbian," which is, of course, a major plus for me. Believe me, we don't get a lot of books starring ourselves. And you know, where we are killed off by swarms of yellow jackets. I honestly found both storylines compelling. It's hard not to fall a bit in love with Harper Harper, the charismatic celebrity (out!) lesbian. And 1902 isn't just about Clara and Flo, but Libbie Brookhants and her life trying to run a cursed school in the early 1900s. Honestly, the pages really flew by most of the time. Though, there are certainly moments where I felt some of the story could have been cut.
And yes, the narrative style is different, though it really adds to the uniqueness of the book. It's basically told by an omnipresent narrator, talking directly to the reader. There are footnotes, often humorous ones, and the end result is something you don't often find. For the most part, I felt like Danforth pulled it off, too. I do think Libbie was a little more fully developed than Merritt, Harper, and Audrey, but that also may have been because that trio could come across as a bit spoiled at times.
Probably my two biggest issues with this book (regretfully): for a Gothic horror novel, it's not really that scary. There are a few creepy and eerie moments, especially in the beginning, but it never really builds up to that terrifying moment that you're expecting. And, somewhat related, the ending. We read and stick with our various tales for the entire time and then... poof! Everything just fizzles out. I was so bummed. The ending was such a disappointment after all I'd read and kept this from being a full-fledged 4 or 4.5-star read. I couldn't believe it after what we'd been through. It was like even the author was tired.
So, overall, this is an original and fascinating read. I'm certainly still advising you to read it (especially if you're queer or enjoy reading queer fiction). Just be prepared that the ending may not have that big scary moment you're expecting. 3.5 stars.
Build With Grandpa
Education and Games
App
Demolish an old building with a wrecking ball, clear the lot with a bulldozer - then design, build,...
Grandpa's Toy Shop
Education and Games
App
Design, build, and decorate ten different kinds of toys to sell in Grandpa's Toy Shop! After you use...
Keep Her Safe
8.0
Rate It
Book
In the blink of an eye, she's gone. Maggie’s daughter Penny is her whole world… and she’d do...
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Circle (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Social Media involvement in political manipulation? Don’t be ridiculous!
Set in the near future “The Circle” tells a horror story of the social media age involving an omnipotent American corporate, pitched somewhere between being Facebook-like and Google-like (note, lawyers, I just said “like”!) Emma Watson (“Beauty and the Beast“) plays young intern Mae who, partly through the aid of family friend Annie (Karen Gillan, “Guardians of the Galaxy“, “Doctor Who”) but mostly through her own aptitude, lands a foothold job in customer services for the company. With the lush corporate campus fast becoming home, Mae is quickly singled out as having “executive potential” by the charismatic CEO Bailey (Tom Hanks, “Bridge of Spies“) and his more taciturn sidekick Stenton (US comedian Patton Oswalt).
Progressively brainwashed into believing the company’s intrusive snooping (a favourite motto is “Secrets are Lies”) is all for ‘the greater good’, Mae champions the cause until a tragedy rocks her world and her company beliefs to the core.
Whenever I watch a film I tend to form my own opinion first before checking out what the ‘general public’ on IMDB think. In this case, I must confess to being a bit surprised at our divergence of views: a lot of people clearly hated this movie whereas I confess that I found it very entertaining. Certainly with the alleged role of Russia in influencing elections around the world via social media, the film is most certainly topical! Many reviewers seemed quite upset that Watson’s character is such a ‘doormat’, in that her views are so easily manipulated by the corporate machine. But not every woman – as indeed every man – can or should be a Joan of Arc style role model in every film: why should they be?
I actually found her indoctrination into “the Circle way” as quite convincing, especially a creepy scene where two corporate lackies (Cho Smith and Amir Talai) say that they’re not checking up on Mae’s social life, but…. Watson enjoys extending her post-Potter repertoire well, but the talented John Boyega (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“) is completely wasted in his role as Ty; the Wozniak-like genious behind The Circle’s technology. The script gives him very little to do other than stand around and look grumpy.
A wasted John Boyega with Emma Watson.
The film is sad in being the last movie appearance of the great Bill Paxton (“Apollo 13”) who plays Mae’s sick father and who died of complications following heart surgery two months before the film’s release (the film is dedicated “For Bill”). Tragically, Mae’s mother in the film, actress Glenn Headly (“Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”) also died suddenly at the age of 62, also due to heart problems, a couple of months after the film’s release. It’s surprising the film doesn’t have a “curse of The Circle” tag on it.
The film was directed by James Ponsoldt, who also wrote the screenplay with novel-writer Dave Eggers (“Away We Go”). I particularly liked the on-screen use of captioning (posts) which was reminiscent to me of last year’s “Nerve“, a B-movie film I rated highly that also had a string social media theme.
While the ending of the film is a bit twee – a movie definition of “being hoisted by your own petard” – it’s overall a thought provoking piece sufficiently close to the truth as to where society is going to raise the hairs on your neck.
Progressively brainwashed into believing the company’s intrusive snooping (a favourite motto is “Secrets are Lies”) is all for ‘the greater good’, Mae champions the cause until a tragedy rocks her world and her company beliefs to the core.
Whenever I watch a film I tend to form my own opinion first before checking out what the ‘general public’ on IMDB think. In this case, I must confess to being a bit surprised at our divergence of views: a lot of people clearly hated this movie whereas I confess that I found it very entertaining. Certainly with the alleged role of Russia in influencing elections around the world via social media, the film is most certainly topical! Many reviewers seemed quite upset that Watson’s character is such a ‘doormat’, in that her views are so easily manipulated by the corporate machine. But not every woman – as indeed every man – can or should be a Joan of Arc style role model in every film: why should they be?
I actually found her indoctrination into “the Circle way” as quite convincing, especially a creepy scene where two corporate lackies (Cho Smith and Amir Talai) say that they’re not checking up on Mae’s social life, but…. Watson enjoys extending her post-Potter repertoire well, but the talented John Boyega (“Star Wars: The Force Awakens“) is completely wasted in his role as Ty; the Wozniak-like genious behind The Circle’s technology. The script gives him very little to do other than stand around and look grumpy.
A wasted John Boyega with Emma Watson.
The film is sad in being the last movie appearance of the great Bill Paxton (“Apollo 13”) who plays Mae’s sick father and who died of complications following heart surgery two months before the film’s release (the film is dedicated “For Bill”). Tragically, Mae’s mother in the film, actress Glenn Headly (“Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”) also died suddenly at the age of 62, also due to heart problems, a couple of months after the film’s release. It’s surprising the film doesn’t have a “curse of The Circle” tag on it.
The film was directed by James Ponsoldt, who also wrote the screenplay with novel-writer Dave Eggers (“Away We Go”). I particularly liked the on-screen use of captioning (posts) which was reminiscent to me of last year’s “Nerve“, a B-movie film I rated highly that also had a string social media theme.
While the ending of the film is a bit twee – a movie definition of “being hoisted by your own petard” – it’s overall a thought provoking piece sufficiently close to the truth as to where society is going to raise the hairs on your neck.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated 1922 (2017) in Movies
Oct 24, 2017 (Updated Oct 24, 2017)
Solid Performances (1 more)
Believable Set Design
Sometimes Your Own Demons Are The Hardest To Escape
1922 is the second Stephen King story adapted for Netflix in the last two months and it is very different to the adaption of Gerald's Game we saw back in September. The movie is set up nicely, showing an older, shaken man writing out his confession in hopes of appeasing the guilt that has plagued him since he murdered his wife Arlette. We then see a younger version of the man, Wilfred and we learn that he is very protective of the three things that he feels, 'belong,' to him; his son, his wife and his land.
Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that he outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette's father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wlifred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land off of her in installments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder.
From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who haven’t yet seen the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss.
The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths, in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well.
My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalizes on it. A Stephen King ghost story released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into and instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed, which is an interesting idea, it’s just not what I wanted out of this movie.
Overall this is a well made movie and for what it is it’s great, it just didn’t meet the expectations that I had for it and maybe that’s my own fault more than the movie’s. As with any Stephen King story, it makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do; I just wish that it had scared me a bit more.
Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that he outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette's father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wlifred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land off of her in installments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder.
From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who haven’t yet seen the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss.
The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths, in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well.
My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalizes on it. A Stephen King ghost story released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into and instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed, which is an interesting idea, it’s just not what I wanted out of this movie.
Overall this is a well made movie and for what it is it’s great, it just didn’t meet the expectations that I had for it and maybe that’s my own fault more than the movie’s. As with any Stephen King story, it makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do; I just wish that it had scared me a bit more.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band by The Beatles in Music
Nov 2, 2017
One Of The Most Influential Albums Of All Time
The reason that this album is so influential and important to everything that came after it is simple, it was the first true example of what we think of as a concept album today. The album opens with an introduction to what you are about to witness, which is something that had never even been considered before in music. Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Heart’s Club Band was also very meta for its time considering that the first song informs you of the members that this band is made up from and gives you a reason as to why they are performing these songs to you. Equally, ending the album with the Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Heart’s Club Band reprise brings the whole thing full circle, and this formula became what was adopted by concept all albums going forward, The Who followed the same structure, as did Pink Floyd and Green Day. Musically, the record continued where Revolver, (the previous album,) left off, engraining the Beatles as pioneers in psychedelic music. Songs such as, ‘Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds,’ and ‘Within You, Without You,’ where more far out than any other psychedelic musical piece had been before. Then you have tracks such as ‘When I’m Sixty Four,’ and ‘Getting Better,’ which utilize classical instruments normally found in orchestral music. This totally rewrote the rules on what a pop song could do. Every song on Sgt. Pepper is a masterpiece and each earns that title both on an individual basis and as part of a whole and all for their own unique reasons. There is also the fact that the album contains what I consider to be the band’s greatest song, ‘A Day In The Life.’ It is the final track on the album, often considered an epilogue, as the album officially ends with the reprise of Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Heart’s Club Band and forty years later, it still sends tingles down the spine of anyone that has the honor to listen to it. Lennon’s parts bookend the track while the middle section belongs to McCartney. As is the case with the rest of the album, the song points out the juxtaposition of Lennon’s narcissistic realist view on the world versus McCartney’s brighter more optimistic outlook on life. Then the song ends with a beautifully chaotic climax of instruments all playing together, building from their respective lowest notes to their highest. It so clearly ends the album, there is no fade out, its everything coming together and playing simultaneously and then stopping all in unison, a very purposeful and definite way to end an album.
Even when the album is over the Beatles are still innovating by including a creepy loop within the groove of the album, implemented to give listeners a fright as they only expect to hear silence after the climax of ‘A Day In The Life.’ After a few moments of peace, a high pitched frequency is heard followed by a peculiar mix of abstract sounds all at once. Even after all this time, after the ridiculously high number of times that I’ve listened to the record and although I know to expect the sound before it happens, it’s still chilling to this day. This was the first time that a band intentionally included hidden sounds on an album, making listeners sit through a few seconds of silence to hear it. People claim that this album is overrated, but there is a reason that it is held in such high regard and whether you think this album deserves its legendary status or not, it is impossible to debate the fact that it is probably the most important album ever recorded. Everything from the album artwork to the music and the lyrics is still extremely relevant and important, even in this current digital age of music.
Even when the album is over the Beatles are still innovating by including a creepy loop within the groove of the album, implemented to give listeners a fright as they only expect to hear silence after the climax of ‘A Day In The Life.’ After a few moments of peace, a high pitched frequency is heard followed by a peculiar mix of abstract sounds all at once. Even after all this time, after the ridiculously high number of times that I’ve listened to the record and although I know to expect the sound before it happens, it’s still chilling to this day. This was the first time that a band intentionally included hidden sounds on an album, making listeners sit through a few seconds of silence to hear it. People claim that this album is overrated, but there is a reason that it is held in such high regard and whether you think this album deserves its legendary status or not, it is impossible to debate the fact that it is probably the most important album ever recorded. Everything from the album artwork to the music and the lyrics is still extremely relevant and important, even in this current digital age of music.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Roanoke Girls in Books
Dec 24, 2017
alluring (2 more)
twisted
well-written
Lane Roanoke is just a teenager when her mother commits suicide, and Lane is sent to live with her grandparents in Kansas. While Lane lived a sad life with her depressed, volatile mother, her wealthy grandparents represent a chance for a new start - and Lane can meet her cousin, Allegra, who is close to her age. When Lane arrives in Kansas, she quickly befriends Allegra and is amazed by the kindness of her grandfather, but she also realizes not everything is as it seems.
Eleven years later, after Lane has fled the farm (and left her family there behind), Lane receives a call from her grandfather: Allegra is missing. Can she please come home? Reluctantly Lane returns to a place she vowed she'd never see again to search for her cousin, whom she has always felt bad about leaving behind. But returning only brings up bad memories, and Lane quickly worries that something terrible has happened to Allegra. Can Lane face her fears and figure out what happened to her cousin?
This book, oh this book. Wow. This is quite the novel! The story alternates between the present-day and that fateful summer (from Lane's point of view), with a few snippets from earlier generations of the other Roanoke girls thrown in. It's slightly confusing at first (you'll need easy access to the family tree at the beginning of the book), but quickly pulls you in and never lets you go. I was immediately captivated by this novel and read it in less than 24 hours. It's not some "feel good" novel, but it's amazingly well-written and just spellbinding. It starts off with a bombshell and then hooks you from there with the dark story of the twisted Roanoke family.
There is something completely alluring about how messed up and sick the Roanokes are. I couldn't turn away from them. The book is great because you become quickly intrigued and invested in the story of what happened to Allegra, but there's also a bit of suspense to the "then" storyline as Lane finds out something terrible about her family. Engel is remarkably talented because we know the secret already, and Lane knows it in the present-day portion of the book, but it's still enthralling watching it unravel as she's a teen. There's also just a pure fascination and horror at this family. There are also periodic shockers throughout the entire novel and several "wow" and "didn't see that coming" moments for me. The whole thing is extremely well-done.
I was extremely impressed by Engel's characters. For instance, Lane is a broken and damaged person who cannot trust or love. As such, she is frustrating with her guarded heart but still sympathetic. She drove me crazy, but I loved her. Engel did an excellent job with all of these characters. Even those that seemed (or were) absolutely awful; they all seemed so real. She also did a great job at portraying small towns and their tangled web of secrets. The broken Kansas town where the Roanokes lived was expertly done, with all of its bit characters and the descriptions of its streets and happenings.
Overall, I was incredibly impressed with this book. Its entire plot was creepy and twisted, and it was compulsively readable, with plenty of shocking moments. Yet it also had empathetic, well-written characters. It was an amazing dark look at the power of childhood, your parents, and your past. It's a mean and twisted novel and impeccably written, because you feel such a range of emotions for its characters. Definitely recommend.
Eleven years later, after Lane has fled the farm (and left her family there behind), Lane receives a call from her grandfather: Allegra is missing. Can she please come home? Reluctantly Lane returns to a place she vowed she'd never see again to search for her cousin, whom she has always felt bad about leaving behind. But returning only brings up bad memories, and Lane quickly worries that something terrible has happened to Allegra. Can Lane face her fears and figure out what happened to her cousin?
This book, oh this book. Wow. This is quite the novel! The story alternates between the present-day and that fateful summer (from Lane's point of view), with a few snippets from earlier generations of the other Roanoke girls thrown in. It's slightly confusing at first (you'll need easy access to the family tree at the beginning of the book), but quickly pulls you in and never lets you go. I was immediately captivated by this novel and read it in less than 24 hours. It's not some "feel good" novel, but it's amazingly well-written and just spellbinding. It starts off with a bombshell and then hooks you from there with the dark story of the twisted Roanoke family.
There is something completely alluring about how messed up and sick the Roanokes are. I couldn't turn away from them. The book is great because you become quickly intrigued and invested in the story of what happened to Allegra, but there's also a bit of suspense to the "then" storyline as Lane finds out something terrible about her family. Engel is remarkably talented because we know the secret already, and Lane knows it in the present-day portion of the book, but it's still enthralling watching it unravel as she's a teen. There's also just a pure fascination and horror at this family. There are also periodic shockers throughout the entire novel and several "wow" and "didn't see that coming" moments for me. The whole thing is extremely well-done.
I was extremely impressed by Engel's characters. For instance, Lane is a broken and damaged person who cannot trust or love. As such, she is frustrating with her guarded heart but still sympathetic. She drove me crazy, but I loved her. Engel did an excellent job with all of these characters. Even those that seemed (or were) absolutely awful; they all seemed so real. She also did a great job at portraying small towns and their tangled web of secrets. The broken Kansas town where the Roanokes lived was expertly done, with all of its bit characters and the descriptions of its streets and happenings.
Overall, I was incredibly impressed with this book. Its entire plot was creepy and twisted, and it was compulsively readable, with plenty of shocking moments. Yet it also had empathetic, well-written characters. It was an amazing dark look at the power of childhood, your parents, and your past. It's a mean and twisted novel and impeccably written, because you feel such a range of emotions for its characters. Definitely recommend.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated Ashton's Bride in Books
Feb 15, 2019
I have mixed feelings about this book. It was well-written, Margaret and Ashton were sympathetic, but I hated the way she time-traveled. It started off well enough until that point and I had a hard time getting past it. (I'll talk more about that in a hidden spoiler) Other than the time-travel, which is a big part of the book obviously, I enjoyed it. The relationship between Margaret and Ashton was pretty realistic and loving. So as far as time-travel romances, it's not one of my favorites, but it is still a good love story. In some ways, I think it might have been better strictly as historical romance.
Be warned! Massive ranting ahead!
<spoiler>
1. Like I said before, I hated her time-travel method. I don't quite get even how she time-traveled and the part I hate the absolute most is that she's in someone else's body. I just recently read a short story that had the same time-travel method, except that it was explained. I just find it disturbing and creepy, not to mention the amount of times it is said in the book how beautiful and perfect her looks are. Pretty nauseating. I just don't know how you could get used to looking in the mirror and not seeing yourself. That'd just be weird to me, even if I did happen to enter into a drop-dead gorgeous body. And Margaret acted like she was some freak of nature when she was in 1993. Boo hoo. Be happy with yourself for goodness sake! It seemed somewhat like the author was saying that you're not good enough if you're not beautiful. At least, that's the impression it gave to me.
2. It seemed to me that Ashton was infatuated with Mag. He couldn't have possibly actually loved her the way she was before Margaret entered her body, but he said he had. He really had to have fallen in love with Margaret, not Mag, and the blurriness there bothered me.
3. They're cousins. Okay so Margaret actually isn't, but the body she's in is. So what about children? Not a major point since cousins marrying isn't all that odd back then, but because of my other problems, it creeped me out more here.
4. Margaret's whole "revelation." She says now her parents and siblings never went to Cape Cod and are alive after all since they only went because of her and now she's back in time, and her parents only had two kids and not three. Umm no. If her parents never had her, then it would be impossible (yes, so is time-travel, but that's beside the point) for her to have gone back in time at all! She would have disappeared; she couldn't just be there now! Am I the only one who can see that?! Remember the photo featuring disappearing McFly's in Back to the Future? What comes around goes around. There's a few instances of that, but this is the one that bothers me most.
5. How did the papers show up? Seemed really unnecessary just to have Ashton believe her.
Had the back cover described how exactly Margaret time-traveled (like a mention of waking up in a strange body, perhaps?), maybe I wouldn't have had such a hard time with the concept and the other stuff wouldn't have bothered me as much. Who's to know?</spoiler> I promise, I'm really not crazy, even if my rants point to the contrary. I really think it could have been a great story, and I'm sure others will enjoy it, I just was left very disappointed.
Be warned! Massive ranting ahead!
<spoiler>
1. Like I said before, I hated her time-travel method. I don't quite get even how she time-traveled and the part I hate the absolute most is that she's in someone else's body. I just recently read a short story that had the same time-travel method, except that it was explained. I just find it disturbing and creepy, not to mention the amount of times it is said in the book how beautiful and perfect her looks are. Pretty nauseating. I just don't know how you could get used to looking in the mirror and not seeing yourself. That'd just be weird to me, even if I did happen to enter into a drop-dead gorgeous body. And Margaret acted like she was some freak of nature when she was in 1993. Boo hoo. Be happy with yourself for goodness sake! It seemed somewhat like the author was saying that you're not good enough if you're not beautiful. At least, that's the impression it gave to me.
2. It seemed to me that Ashton was infatuated with Mag. He couldn't have possibly actually loved her the way she was before Margaret entered her body, but he said he had. He really had to have fallen in love with Margaret, not Mag, and the blurriness there bothered me.
3. They're cousins. Okay so Margaret actually isn't, but the body she's in is. So what about children? Not a major point since cousins marrying isn't all that odd back then, but because of my other problems, it creeped me out more here.
4. Margaret's whole "revelation." She says now her parents and siblings never went to Cape Cod and are alive after all since they only went because of her and now she's back in time, and her parents only had two kids and not three. Umm no. If her parents never had her, then it would be impossible (yes, so is time-travel, but that's beside the point) for her to have gone back in time at all! She would have disappeared; she couldn't just be there now! Am I the only one who can see that?! Remember the photo featuring disappearing McFly's in Back to the Future? What comes around goes around. There's a few instances of that, but this is the one that bothers me most.
5. How did the papers show up? Seemed really unnecessary just to have Ashton believe her.
Had the back cover described how exactly Margaret time-traveled (like a mention of waking up in a strange body, perhaps?), maybe I wouldn't have had such a hard time with the concept and the other stuff wouldn't have bothered me as much. Who's to know?</spoiler> I promise, I'm really not crazy, even if my rants point to the contrary. I really think it could have been a great story, and I'm sure others will enjoy it, I just was left very disappointed.