Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Jacket (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
The human mind is a deep and complex organ that to this day is not fully understood by the best scientific minds on the planet. It is known that only a small percentage of the mind is actually used, with the vast majority of the unused portion presenting a mystery. There are those who have suggested that those individuals who show paranormal abilities are simply individuals who have learned to use areas of the brain that are normally dormant.
In the new psychological thriller The Jacket, Adrian Brody plays Jack Starks, a Gulf war soldier who is shot in the head in 1991 during combat operations.
Jack survives this ordeal as he awakens during medical triage despite being classified as dead by the attending medics. Flash forward to late 1992, and Jack is on his way to Canada through a cold and remote section of Vermont It is learned that Jack has some mental blocks in his head via a series of flashbacks, but when he comes to the aid of a stranded motorist and her young daughter, Jack soon finds his life taking an unexpected turn.
Despite being a good Samaritan, Jack is forced to accept a ride from a passing drifter miles later, when the mother refuses to assist him. Flash forward again and Jack is being charged with the murder of a police officer who Jack insists was killed by the man who picked them up. Since Jack has a mental condition, his claims of the driver who picked him up are dismissed as mental delusions.
Jack is committed to a mental institution where under the treatment of Dr. Becker (Kris Kristofferson), Jack is bound in a straight jacket and locked in a storage shelf in the basement morgue. While in the box, Jack travels 17 years into the future where he is reunited with Jackie (Kiera Knightley), the little girl he helped years earlier. Jackie has fallen upon hard times and refuses to believe that the person before her is the same Jack Starks who helped her years ago, as she claims that Jack Starks died years ago in the asylum.
As Jack comes in and out of treatment his perception of the events in the box comes into question due to his condition, and only the supportive Dr. Lorenson (Jennifer Jason Leigh), seems sympathetic to his concerns that he is going to die in the next few days.
The film jumps between the past, present, future where Jack attempts to uncover what happened to him with the help of Jackie so that he can try to prevent it from happening or at the very least, make the future a better place for those in the past who can avoid their fates.
The strength of the film is the solid work by the two leads as Brody and Knightley work well with one another and infuses their characters with compassion and humanity while showing their flaws as they attempt to deal with the hardships of their situations.
While some may take exception to the dark tone of the film, I preferred to look at the interesting twists to the story and how the film makes you think and interpret situations and outcomes rather than handing it to the audience in a tidy package.
In the new psychological thriller The Jacket, Adrian Brody plays Jack Starks, a Gulf war soldier who is shot in the head in 1991 during combat operations.
Jack survives this ordeal as he awakens during medical triage despite being classified as dead by the attending medics. Flash forward to late 1992, and Jack is on his way to Canada through a cold and remote section of Vermont It is learned that Jack has some mental blocks in his head via a series of flashbacks, but when he comes to the aid of a stranded motorist and her young daughter, Jack soon finds his life taking an unexpected turn.
Despite being a good Samaritan, Jack is forced to accept a ride from a passing drifter miles later, when the mother refuses to assist him. Flash forward again and Jack is being charged with the murder of a police officer who Jack insists was killed by the man who picked them up. Since Jack has a mental condition, his claims of the driver who picked him up are dismissed as mental delusions.
Jack is committed to a mental institution where under the treatment of Dr. Becker (Kris Kristofferson), Jack is bound in a straight jacket and locked in a storage shelf in the basement morgue. While in the box, Jack travels 17 years into the future where he is reunited with Jackie (Kiera Knightley), the little girl he helped years earlier. Jackie has fallen upon hard times and refuses to believe that the person before her is the same Jack Starks who helped her years ago, as she claims that Jack Starks died years ago in the asylum.
As Jack comes in and out of treatment his perception of the events in the box comes into question due to his condition, and only the supportive Dr. Lorenson (Jennifer Jason Leigh), seems sympathetic to his concerns that he is going to die in the next few days.
The film jumps between the past, present, future where Jack attempts to uncover what happened to him with the help of Jackie so that he can try to prevent it from happening or at the very least, make the future a better place for those in the past who can avoid their fates.
The strength of the film is the solid work by the two leads as Brody and Knightley work well with one another and infuses their characters with compassion and humanity while showing their flaws as they attempt to deal with the hardships of their situations.
While some may take exception to the dark tone of the film, I preferred to look at the interesting twists to the story and how the film makes you think and interpret situations and outcomes rather than handing it to the audience in a tidy package.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Doctor Sleep (2019) in Movies
Nov 5, 2019 (Updated Nov 24, 2019)
Contains spoilers, click to show
Doctor Sleep certainly has some big footprints to follow. Nearly 40 years after the release of the hugely beloved The Shining, Director Mike Flanagan has the rather complicated task of adapting Stephen King's follow up sequel novel, whilst also attempting to deliver a solid follow up to Stanley Kubrick's original film. And he pulls it off pretty damn well.
The narrative follows a now adult Danny Torrance (Ewan McGregor), as he struggles with alcoholism. As he begins to put his life back together, he is thrown into a friendship with Abra Stone (Kyliegh Curran), a young girl who has similar powers to Danny, and who is being pursued by a cult who feed on the life force of those who possess 'The Shining'.
This new story is a really tight and fantastic thriller story in its own right. Flanagan takes a leaf from Kubrick's book and provides us with and unsettling atmosphere, complete with a Shining-esque creepy string music score, instead of relying on jump scares and other horror tropes.
It's effective, and engaging. A big part of this is down to the cast. Danny and Abra are both very likable protagonists.
The cult is lead by Rose the Hat, played by Rebecca Ferguson, who is both charming and sinister, and a big highlight of Doctor Sleep. Her and her followers fight for survival shows they will not even stop short of child sacrifice to get what they need, and it makes for a band of genuinely scary villains
The scenery is beautiful throughout, the the effects work on some of the more trippy scenes are decent, and the film toes the line in regards to relying on The Shining nostalgia too much, that is until the final act.
HUGE SPOILERS FOR DOCTOR SLEEP INCOMING
The last 30 minutes are undeniably fun, and a genuinely great climax, to a genuinely great film, but it does just about go overboard with it's 'look at this, remember this?' style of nostalgia. The sad thing is, it probably amounts to about 10 seconds of screentime that slightly sours the experience.
When Danny is at the bar, it's clear that he is talking to Jack before we even see the side of his face. His side profile is fine - absolutely no need to show his full face. Similarly a bit later, a recreated shot of Jack Torrance walking up the stairs towards his wife, didn't need to be there, nor did the shot of Rose the Hat seeing blood pouring from the elevator doors.
The film stops just short of having Ewan McGregor axe his way through a door panel thankfully, and it's only a small criticism of an otherwise nicely executed sequence.
Elsewhere tells a different story - The opening scene of The Shining is recreated, complete with the same iconic score, as overhead shots show us Danny driving up the mountain, towards the Overlook Hotel. It gave me goosebumps and the
scenes near the start of the film which follow directly on from The Shining are great, especially Carl Lumbly, who plays a spot on Mr. Hallorann.
END OF SPOILERS
All in all though, I thoroughly enjoyed Doctor Sleep. The Shining is not an easy shadow to step out from, but Mike Flanagan has created something here which stands on its own two feet.
It's dark, it's fun, it's unnerving, everything you could want from a horror in this day and age, and I genuinely can't wait to watch it again soon.
The narrative follows a now adult Danny Torrance (Ewan McGregor), as he struggles with alcoholism. As he begins to put his life back together, he is thrown into a friendship with Abra Stone (Kyliegh Curran), a young girl who has similar powers to Danny, and who is being pursued by a cult who feed on the life force of those who possess 'The Shining'.
This new story is a really tight and fantastic thriller story in its own right. Flanagan takes a leaf from Kubrick's book and provides us with and unsettling atmosphere, complete with a Shining-esque creepy string music score, instead of relying on jump scares and other horror tropes.
It's effective, and engaging. A big part of this is down to the cast. Danny and Abra are both very likable protagonists.
The cult is lead by Rose the Hat, played by Rebecca Ferguson, who is both charming and sinister, and a big highlight of Doctor Sleep. Her and her followers fight for survival shows they will not even stop short of child sacrifice to get what they need, and it makes for a band of genuinely scary villains
The scenery is beautiful throughout, the the effects work on some of the more trippy scenes are decent, and the film toes the line in regards to relying on The Shining nostalgia too much, that is until the final act.
HUGE SPOILERS FOR DOCTOR SLEEP INCOMING
The last 30 minutes are undeniably fun, and a genuinely great climax, to a genuinely great film, but it does just about go overboard with it's 'look at this, remember this?' style of nostalgia. The sad thing is, it probably amounts to about 10 seconds of screentime that slightly sours the experience.
When Danny is at the bar, it's clear that he is talking to Jack before we even see the side of his face. His side profile is fine - absolutely no need to show his full face. Similarly a bit later, a recreated shot of Jack Torrance walking up the stairs towards his wife, didn't need to be there, nor did the shot of Rose the Hat seeing blood pouring from the elevator doors.
The film stops just short of having Ewan McGregor axe his way through a door panel thankfully, and it's only a small criticism of an otherwise nicely executed sequence.
Elsewhere tells a different story - The opening scene of The Shining is recreated, complete with the same iconic score, as overhead shots show us Danny driving up the mountain, towards the Overlook Hotel. It gave me goosebumps and the
scenes near the start of the film which follow directly on from The Shining are great, especially Carl Lumbly, who plays a spot on Mr. Hallorann.
END OF SPOILERS
All in all though, I thoroughly enjoyed Doctor Sleep. The Shining is not an easy shadow to step out from, but Mike Flanagan has created something here which stands on its own two feet.
It's dark, it's fun, it's unnerving, everything you could want from a horror in this day and age, and I genuinely can't wait to watch it again soon.
JT (287 KP) rated Mama (2013) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
When a film is presented by a well-known director it initially has a certain weight to it that will place it above the shoulders of others. In the case of horror/thriller Mama it has the backing of Spanish director Guillermo del Toro which is a certain plus point for any one who is a fan.
However, any big name attachment is probably there to push the marketing of the film, sadly this one doesn’t quite do itself much justice and falls some way short of achieving any greatness.
It’s a film of two halves, which as the second and third acts take shape becomes more and more ridiculous.
The film is brought to the big screen by director by Andrés Muschietti who also helmed the short three minute piece. It follows the story of two girls Lily and Victoria who are taken away by their father Jeffrey after he goes a bit doolally and offs his co-workers and wife.
When the car they are travelling in crashes they take shelter in a house deep in the forest, riddled with guilt Jeffrey then decides to enter into murder suicide, but something supernatural stops him and the girls are left to fend for themselves.
Move ahead five years and Jeffrey’s brother Lucas continues his search for the girls hiring a couple of hicks to trail the forest looking for the derelict cabin. When they are finally found the girls are practically feral and need psychiatric supervision as they are welcomed back into society.
Lucas and his grunge girlfriend Annabel are given custody as well as a nice new house for them to live in, all under the watchful eye of Dr. Dreyfuss. Once inside the house its clear to see that the girls have brought something back with them, something that doesn’t want to let them go.
Mama starts well enough, with a frenetic opening that glimpses the supernatural entity through blurred vision it moves from eerie strength to strength building tension and then unleashing it in small doses not giving the audience long enough to draw breath.
Of course it sticks quite closely to now tried and tested horror clichés, with things lurking in the shadows, children talking to imaginary nothingness and the so old “what’s in the closet” routine?
Then the director, whether bored with just giving us tit bits of the mother like antagonist, decides to reveal ‘it’ in all its glory. It then moves from scare mongering horror to poorly constructed ghost story in the space of a few minutes.
The acting is nothing to write home about, Jessica Chastain while so dominant in Zero Dark Thirty is flat and a little off the mark here, why the need for the grunge look is beyond me. Maybe it was in keeping with the Gothic back story?
The young girls do well, sweet and innocent yet dependable when needed, the rest of the cast pretty much fall by the wayside. The ending was for me beyond ridiculous and undid most if not all of the good work the start gave us, although saying that it was pretty much on the decline when Mama herself becomes much more of a central character.
It’s not as main stream a horror as you would expect, but the protagonist shadows the central figure that graced the god awful Darkness Falls and that is one supernatural entity well worth staying away from.
However, any big name attachment is probably there to push the marketing of the film, sadly this one doesn’t quite do itself much justice and falls some way short of achieving any greatness.
It’s a film of two halves, which as the second and third acts take shape becomes more and more ridiculous.
The film is brought to the big screen by director by Andrés Muschietti who also helmed the short three minute piece. It follows the story of two girls Lily and Victoria who are taken away by their father Jeffrey after he goes a bit doolally and offs his co-workers and wife.
When the car they are travelling in crashes they take shelter in a house deep in the forest, riddled with guilt Jeffrey then decides to enter into murder suicide, but something supernatural stops him and the girls are left to fend for themselves.
Move ahead five years and Jeffrey’s brother Lucas continues his search for the girls hiring a couple of hicks to trail the forest looking for the derelict cabin. When they are finally found the girls are practically feral and need psychiatric supervision as they are welcomed back into society.
Lucas and his grunge girlfriend Annabel are given custody as well as a nice new house for them to live in, all under the watchful eye of Dr. Dreyfuss. Once inside the house its clear to see that the girls have brought something back with them, something that doesn’t want to let them go.
Mama starts well enough, with a frenetic opening that glimpses the supernatural entity through blurred vision it moves from eerie strength to strength building tension and then unleashing it in small doses not giving the audience long enough to draw breath.
Of course it sticks quite closely to now tried and tested horror clichés, with things lurking in the shadows, children talking to imaginary nothingness and the so old “what’s in the closet” routine?
Then the director, whether bored with just giving us tit bits of the mother like antagonist, decides to reveal ‘it’ in all its glory. It then moves from scare mongering horror to poorly constructed ghost story in the space of a few minutes.
The acting is nothing to write home about, Jessica Chastain while so dominant in Zero Dark Thirty is flat and a little off the mark here, why the need for the grunge look is beyond me. Maybe it was in keeping with the Gothic back story?
The young girls do well, sweet and innocent yet dependable when needed, the rest of the cast pretty much fall by the wayside. The ending was for me beyond ridiculous and undid most if not all of the good work the start gave us, although saying that it was pretty much on the decline when Mama herself becomes much more of a central character.
It’s not as main stream a horror as you would expect, but the protagonist shadows the central figure that graced the god awful Darkness Falls and that is one supernatural entity well worth staying away from.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Nerve (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
I walked into Nerve expecting it to be a teenage version of the morose 2014 horror/thriller 13 Sins. While similar in premise, 13 Sins is dark and sinister, while Nerve is something different all together. Based on the 2012 young adult novel by the same name, Nerve is a story about an unassuming high school senior who decides to challenge her own comfort zone by playing an online reality game of where “watchers” (Like Facebook Followers) offer up various “Dare’s” for players to complete which nets them money. The more “watchers” players gain, the bigger the possible rewards, but at what cost?
Nerve feels like its two movies in one. For the first two acts, Nerve is a young adult/teen film where we follow Vee (Emma Roberts) as she breaks free from her unassertive personality that has her in the background among her friends and afraid to tell her family where she wants to go to college. She is a good kid, but too timid to go after anything she really wants. Instead through the challenges of the game Nerve, she gains confidence in herself as she becomes involved with another Nerve player Ian (Dave Franco). Together, along with a fast paced uplifting soundtrack, we are taken on a fun and entertaining ride where you cannot help but care about these two and wonder what you would do in their situation.
Roberts and Franco are likable in their roles and they lead a stellar young cast who are all realistic in their youthful portrayal. Not too surprising because they are actually young actors, but it is important to note that the cast feels “real,” which helps sell the believability that a game like “Nerve” could actually exist in our world. Especially in a world where we are glued to our phones, tablets and computers in order to be the “star of our own lives” through the instant gratification of social media. Along with the recent emergence of the popularity of augmented reality games like Pokémon Go, it is conceivable that a game like Nerve could exist in our near future.
But this is where the film starts to fall apart. In the third act, the film hastily transitions into a social commentary of the anonymity of the internet, mob think and what we are willing to share online. While I understand this is a message that seem appropriate a story like this, that message would have been better served in a sinister film like the aforementioned, 13 Sins, and not in a movie which up to that point, felt that it was headed towards being an inspiring and uplifting film. It doesn’t help that the resolution of that social commentary was comical in its execution that completely pulls you out of the film. It was an unnecessary turn that wanted us to focus on the game Nerve rather than the characters the story made us care about. It’s a shame really because up until that point, the film Nerve was fun, enjoyable and inspiring, only to fall apart for no real reason other than to make a weak attempt at being something more than a teen movie.
I am sure the young adult/teenage audience this film is marketed towards will enjoy Nerve, but this film is really more of a rental or at most, a matinee.
Nerve feels like its two movies in one. For the first two acts, Nerve is a young adult/teen film where we follow Vee (Emma Roberts) as she breaks free from her unassertive personality that has her in the background among her friends and afraid to tell her family where she wants to go to college. She is a good kid, but too timid to go after anything she really wants. Instead through the challenges of the game Nerve, she gains confidence in herself as she becomes involved with another Nerve player Ian (Dave Franco). Together, along with a fast paced uplifting soundtrack, we are taken on a fun and entertaining ride where you cannot help but care about these two and wonder what you would do in their situation.
Roberts and Franco are likable in their roles and they lead a stellar young cast who are all realistic in their youthful portrayal. Not too surprising because they are actually young actors, but it is important to note that the cast feels “real,” which helps sell the believability that a game like “Nerve” could actually exist in our world. Especially in a world where we are glued to our phones, tablets and computers in order to be the “star of our own lives” through the instant gratification of social media. Along with the recent emergence of the popularity of augmented reality games like Pokémon Go, it is conceivable that a game like Nerve could exist in our near future.
But this is where the film starts to fall apart. In the third act, the film hastily transitions into a social commentary of the anonymity of the internet, mob think and what we are willing to share online. While I understand this is a message that seem appropriate a story like this, that message would have been better served in a sinister film like the aforementioned, 13 Sins, and not in a movie which up to that point, felt that it was headed towards being an inspiring and uplifting film. It doesn’t help that the resolution of that social commentary was comical in its execution that completely pulls you out of the film. It was an unnecessary turn that wanted us to focus on the game Nerve rather than the characters the story made us care about. It’s a shame really because up until that point, the film Nerve was fun, enjoyable and inspiring, only to fall apart for no real reason other than to make a weak attempt at being something more than a teen movie.
I am sure the young adult/teenage audience this film is marketed towards will enjoy Nerve, but this film is really more of a rental or at most, a matinee.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Nightcrawler (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The concept of the American dream is generally thought of as ascending to great heights of success. For some, that means creating something out of nothing. They can do this either through lots of hard work, or by having a stroke of good luck.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
“Nightcrawler” centers around Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal), a young man who is attempting to do just that – create something out of nothing and ascend to great heights of success.
Truly a schmuck by every definition of the word, Louis is a contemptible character. He lies, steals, and bends every rule in pursuit of the almighty dollar. This makes for a character that people will love to hate.
Louis discovers a grand opportunity to make money by essentially playing paparazzi to the world of crime. A skill in high demand in a news industry which sensationalizes violence and crime in order to gain ratings.
The film portrays the workings of the news media as somewhat twisted. The industry plays off of the naivety of the American public.
This theme builds throughout the movie, becoming more and more apparent. It hints at an uncertainty of the ethics of crime news coverage. This message is perhaps intended to extend beyond the silver screen and into the real world.
A thriller with depth, “Nightcrawler” is one hell of a debut for director Dan Gilroy. In addition to the unique and complex plot line, the cast is expertly selected.
Each character achieves a raw realness that turns the audience into witnesses rather than movie goers.
Gyllenhaal, who lost 20 pounds for the role, has mastered the art of portraying madness. His eyes communicate a certain detached sadness, yet at the same time he appears egotistical. His expression exudes an inner dialogue which is fleeting and somewhat absent from reality. He is the main character in the movie, as well as in his own mind.
The evolution which his character, Louis, exhibits is electrifying. He is a man in constant motion – doing whatever it takes to succeed, and sinking deeper into the dark side of a news media that lives off of ratings.
The film starts to resemble a gory train wreck which one cannot resist but to stare at as it follows Louis. In order to get the perfect shot, he pushes the line of morality further and further. His morally questionable character begins to blur into the realm of psychotic.
Human lives begin to be something of a commodity when on the other side of a lens. Nina (Rene Russo), a news director desperate to stay in demand is determined to stay focused on theme of urban crime creeping into suburban neighborhoods. She knows this is what grabs attention, and despite reality, she intends to deliver a particular story to viewers.
Russo’s tired eyes add to the realness of the dramatic story. She is just one of the characters which may confuse the audience in regards to who is “good” and who is “bad.” The interplay between characters who cannot be defined as good or bad creates a massively entertaining drama.
The deeper message of the film is left up for interpretation. Perhaps many people are just “not so good,” then there’s Louis who most people won’t be able to help but loath.
A true statement piece, “Nightcrawler” delivers a nauseating cinematic rush.
I give “Nightcrawler” 5 out of 5 stars.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Limitless (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
After years of hearing women saying this I can now agree that Bradley Cooper does indeed have beautiful eyes. If you don’t believe me go see his new movie Limitless based on the 2001 novel The Dark Fields by Alan Glynn. The movie has so many close-ups of Bradley’s face that you find yourself staring into these blue orbs of beauty, approximately 6 feet across, that utterly mesmerize you and take you to a peaceful place where mice, cats and dogs get along.
But enough about his incredibly enchanting eyes let’s talk about the movie.
The thriller Limitless is about an unemployed struggling writer Eddie Morra (Bradley Cooper) who, after being dumped by his girlfriend Lindy (Abbie Cornish), bumps into his ex-brother-in-law Vernon (Johnny Whitworth). After talking over a few beers, Vernon realizes that Eddie needs help and gives him one pill of a supposedly FDA-approved, soon-to-be-released brain boosting drug called NZT. Eddie is skeptical but upon returning to his apartment building he tries the pill. And. It. Is. Awesome!
The drug allows a person to access every bit of information locked away in their brain. It gets all the neurons in their brain kicked into high gear, allows them to learn anything very quickly, makes a person more focused, perceptive, confident, driven and gives them a boost of energy. So when Eddie takes the NZT pill (close up) he helps his landlord’s attractive wife write her term paper, sleeps with her, cleans his apartment (close up) and writes a good chunk of his book for his publisher (close up). The next morning he is back to his normal self, so he goes to Vernon for more pills, events happen and Eddie ends up with a lot more pills plus a large sum of money.
With the help of NZT he begins to turn his life around. He finishes his book, gets in shape, gets a haircut, still not clean-shaven though (don’t look at the stubble, look at his eyes), learns new things, makes new friends, has lots of nooky (because women dig smart guys), travels and multiple close ups. But soon he realizes that he wants to do something meaningful with his life. As he works to achieve his dream and also get back with his ex-girlfriend, he crosses paths with a mysterious man, Russian mobster Gennady (Andrew Howard), shifty lawyers, police, corporate fat cats like Carl Van Loon (Robert De Niro), gets more random close ups and soon starts running out of pills. Will he do something meaningful with his life? Will he jump off of a building? Can his dreamy eyes get any bluer?
Right from the start the movie grabs your attention by throwing you into the action (and blue eyes) and it gently holds it in a soft blue embrace until the end. The movie has an intelligent and, at the appropriate times, humorous dialogue that flowed very smoothly and naturally. Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper definitely brought their A game (Bradley’s eyes A+) and their on-screen chemistry is one of the best I have seen. Both Abbie Cornish and Andrew Howard were great throughout the film but each of them had their own individual scenes where they really shined. There are some plot holes but they do not detract from this very enjoyable film.
But enough about his incredibly enchanting eyes let’s talk about the movie.
The thriller Limitless is about an unemployed struggling writer Eddie Morra (Bradley Cooper) who, after being dumped by his girlfriend Lindy (Abbie Cornish), bumps into his ex-brother-in-law Vernon (Johnny Whitworth). After talking over a few beers, Vernon realizes that Eddie needs help and gives him one pill of a supposedly FDA-approved, soon-to-be-released brain boosting drug called NZT. Eddie is skeptical but upon returning to his apartment building he tries the pill. And. It. Is. Awesome!
The drug allows a person to access every bit of information locked away in their brain. It gets all the neurons in their brain kicked into high gear, allows them to learn anything very quickly, makes a person more focused, perceptive, confident, driven and gives them a boost of energy. So when Eddie takes the NZT pill (close up) he helps his landlord’s attractive wife write her term paper, sleeps with her, cleans his apartment (close up) and writes a good chunk of his book for his publisher (close up). The next morning he is back to his normal self, so he goes to Vernon for more pills, events happen and Eddie ends up with a lot more pills plus a large sum of money.
With the help of NZT he begins to turn his life around. He finishes his book, gets in shape, gets a haircut, still not clean-shaven though (don’t look at the stubble, look at his eyes), learns new things, makes new friends, has lots of nooky (because women dig smart guys), travels and multiple close ups. But soon he realizes that he wants to do something meaningful with his life. As he works to achieve his dream and also get back with his ex-girlfriend, he crosses paths with a mysterious man, Russian mobster Gennady (Andrew Howard), shifty lawyers, police, corporate fat cats like Carl Van Loon (Robert De Niro), gets more random close ups and soon starts running out of pills. Will he do something meaningful with his life? Will he jump off of a building? Can his dreamy eyes get any bluer?
Right from the start the movie grabs your attention by throwing you into the action (and blue eyes) and it gently holds it in a soft blue embrace until the end. The movie has an intelligent and, at the appropriate times, humorous dialogue that flowed very smoothly and naturally. Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper definitely brought their A game (Bradley’s eyes A+) and their on-screen chemistry is one of the best I have seen. Both Abbie Cornish and Andrew Howard were great throughout the film but each of them had their own individual scenes where they really shined. There are some plot holes but they do not detract from this very enjoyable film.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Nov 29, 2020
One of my favourite films
Film #5 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Memento
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Suicide Squad (2016) in Movies
May 9, 2019 (Updated May 26, 2019)
"Oh, I'm not gonna kill you... I'm just gonna hurt you really, really bad."
Suicide Squad, aka Suicide Squandered, was one of my most anticipated movies of 2016. It would bring back to the big screen one of the most iconic comic book characters, Mr. J, and Harley Quinn would make her long awaited movie debut. It also promised to offer a different approach on the superhero genre, as it would star the villains instead of the good guys.
However, the movie delivers much less than what it teases. It begins on a high note, by introducing some characters in a fun, energetic and fast-paced way, in spite of the messy editing that makes these segments look like mini trailers. It goes downhill from there, showing only a couple of scenes more that could justify all the love these superhero movies get. Ultimately, what distinguishes these sequences from the mediocre ones are the characters in them and whether the audience cares for them or not.
Displaying some information on the screen about certain characters or telling their backstory doesn't necessarily contribute to their development, nor to the knowledge the viewer has about them. Therefore, it's impossible to care about all the characters and only those who are played by the (more) famous actors have any meaning to the audience.
Will Smith's Deadshot is the best of the bunch. Smith has this unique ability to deliver comedic lines that many comedians wish they had. His charisma drives most of the movie and so does his character's motivation. Right now, he could be the only character capable of leading a franchise of his own. Deadshot ended up establishing a mildly interesting dynamic with Joel Kinnaman's forgettable Rick Flag.
Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn is the other character we end up caring about. Robbie provides a fantastic performance and hits all the right notes. Her amazing backstory is only slightly explored and it has potential for a future psychological thriller movie. With the right script and direction, it could be an incredible film. People have already talked about her body and I can only add that she could possibly be right below Kate Hudson's Penny Lane on the sexiest female movie characters. She could.
I love all sorts of crazy and psychotic performances on screen. In fact, one of my favourites is Gary Oldman's in Leon. Jared Leto delivers another one of those performances. It's truly stellar, I loved his interpretation of the Joker and I believe Leto can still receive high praise for his extraordinary efforts. It could happen in the form of that Batman movie, by Matt Reeves.
Just to conclude my thought on the performances, I would like to add that Viola Davis is an excellent Amanda Waller, even more menacing that Cara Delevingne's witch, more on that later. Jai Courtney was great , he got all the best jokes. Jay Hernandez sounds a lot like Jon Bernthal's Frank Castle, doesn't he? His Diablo is the best character, out of the less interesting ones. I love Katana from CW's Arrow and it was disappointing to see that the screenwriters didn't care about her, even more so because Karen Fukuhara seems perfect for the role. Killer Croc has the best entrance on water ever.
A movie is as good as its villain, right? Indeed. Cara Delevingne's Enchantress could very well be the worst movie villain ever. Malekith is relegated to second place. Honestly, I don't know who's to blame. Sure, Delevingne's acting isn't top-notch, but the screenwriters made her dance (?) in a weird way and her voice is laughable. The final result is ridiculous and by far the worst aspect of the movie.
While Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was a dark film and proud to 'own that shit', Suicide Squad is ashamed to exhibit that dark side, which results in confusing tone shifts. One moment, it's clearly a DC movie, and another, it is a Marvel family friendly one. Therefore, the comedy sometimes doesn't land, at all. Besides, I also didn't find anything special about the way the action was shot. It was generic stuff, mostly.
Suicide Squad is a huge waste of potential, that could have benefited from some character development and sharp editing. Its greatest strenght is undoubtedly the work done by the talented cast. Could a different cut fix some of these issues? Probably, yes. I was going to attribute 6 stars to this, but a second watch didn't help, either. By the way, what was your favourite sequence? Spoiler alert: mine was the one in which Joker jumps into the acid to Harley.
However, the movie delivers much less than what it teases. It begins on a high note, by introducing some characters in a fun, energetic and fast-paced way, in spite of the messy editing that makes these segments look like mini trailers. It goes downhill from there, showing only a couple of scenes more that could justify all the love these superhero movies get. Ultimately, what distinguishes these sequences from the mediocre ones are the characters in them and whether the audience cares for them or not.
Displaying some information on the screen about certain characters or telling their backstory doesn't necessarily contribute to their development, nor to the knowledge the viewer has about them. Therefore, it's impossible to care about all the characters and only those who are played by the (more) famous actors have any meaning to the audience.
Will Smith's Deadshot is the best of the bunch. Smith has this unique ability to deliver comedic lines that many comedians wish they had. His charisma drives most of the movie and so does his character's motivation. Right now, he could be the only character capable of leading a franchise of his own. Deadshot ended up establishing a mildly interesting dynamic with Joel Kinnaman's forgettable Rick Flag.
Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn is the other character we end up caring about. Robbie provides a fantastic performance and hits all the right notes. Her amazing backstory is only slightly explored and it has potential for a future psychological thriller movie. With the right script and direction, it could be an incredible film. People have already talked about her body and I can only add that she could possibly be right below Kate Hudson's Penny Lane on the sexiest female movie characters. She could.
I love all sorts of crazy and psychotic performances on screen. In fact, one of my favourites is Gary Oldman's in Leon. Jared Leto delivers another one of those performances. It's truly stellar, I loved his interpretation of the Joker and I believe Leto can still receive high praise for his extraordinary efforts. It could happen in the form of that Batman movie, by Matt Reeves.
Just to conclude my thought on the performances, I would like to add that Viola Davis is an excellent Amanda Waller, even more menacing that Cara Delevingne's witch, more on that later. Jai Courtney was great , he got all the best jokes. Jay Hernandez sounds a lot like Jon Bernthal's Frank Castle, doesn't he? His Diablo is the best character, out of the less interesting ones. I love Katana from CW's Arrow and it was disappointing to see that the screenwriters didn't care about her, even more so because Karen Fukuhara seems perfect for the role. Killer Croc has the best entrance on water ever.
A movie is as good as its villain, right? Indeed. Cara Delevingne's Enchantress could very well be the worst movie villain ever. Malekith is relegated to second place. Honestly, I don't know who's to blame. Sure, Delevingne's acting isn't top-notch, but the screenwriters made her dance (?) in a weird way and her voice is laughable. The final result is ridiculous and by far the worst aspect of the movie.
While Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was a dark film and proud to 'own that shit', Suicide Squad is ashamed to exhibit that dark side, which results in confusing tone shifts. One moment, it's clearly a DC movie, and another, it is a Marvel family friendly one. Therefore, the comedy sometimes doesn't land, at all. Besides, I also didn't find anything special about the way the action was shot. It was generic stuff, mostly.
Suicide Squad is a huge waste of potential, that could have benefited from some character development and sharp editing. Its greatest strenght is undoubtedly the work done by the talented cast. Could a different cut fix some of these issues? Probably, yes. I was going to attribute 6 stars to this, but a second watch didn't help, either. By the way, what was your favourite sequence? Spoiler alert: mine was the one in which Joker jumps into the acid to Harley.
Donner Party tale (1 more)
Lots of mystery
Inconsistencies (1 more)
Changes characters referred name too much
Authors Preston and Child did such a great job on 'Old Bones' that once you start reading, you won't be able to put it down.
'Old Bones' follows two women, Nora Kelly and Corrie Swanson, with a small segment following a man named Clive Benton, all of who end up being intertwined within this one novel. The entire story revolves around the dark history of the cannibalistic Donner Party, while bringing in fictitious elements to give the readers a well-rounded adventure.
The story gets rolling after Benton visits Kelly with a historical diary that belonged to a member of the Donner Party- - - Kelly is a well-known archaeologist, while Benton is an accredited historian - - - Benton tells Kelly that the journal revealed a lost camp which had never been discovered by anyone, and that this camp could be one of the biggest archaeological finds of the century. While Kelly has to convince the director of the Archaeology Institute to fund the expedition, Benton springs on her and the director that there is a possibility of twenty million dollars worth of gold coins that belonged to a member of the Donner Party could still be located at this lost camp, and, of course, the director quickly agrees to fund the expedition.
Before this, I have never read a book by Preston and Child, but after reading 'Old Bones,' I am anxious to read their other works. The writing is fluid, and keeps the pace going quite well, and the transition between the two main characters is done flawlessly without any confusion as to whose view point you are viewing. The fictitious take on the historical Donner Party is done masterfully enough that even I had to go back to actual historic documents to see what was true and what was not. In one book, readers get dark history, paranormal elements, archaeology, thriller moments, mystery and suspense.
Although the story is a well-written one, there is one scene that could have had great potential, but nothing ever came of it: "Taking a few more steps, she passed through a particularly dense stand of trees and suddenly emerged into a roughly circular clearing. Odd: there was no reason for a break like this in such thick forest. She shone her light around, but there was nothing: just a soft bed of green moss, undisturbed by tracks, and a few scattered boulders." The way this scene is written leaves readers to believe that this may be important later on, but the area is unfortunately never mentioned again.
The story brings FBI agent Swanson into the lives of Benton and Kelly after a string of grave robberies and one presumed murder takes place; the former and latter have one thing in common: they are descendants of a member belonging to the Donner Party.
" 'So where do we fit into this?' asked Nora.
'The commonality I referred to. All four individuals were descended from a single person: a man named Parkin.'
Nora saw Clive start in surprise. 'Albert Parkin?' he asked. 'Of the Donner Party?'
'Exactly. And I've been led to understand he's one of the individuals in the camp you're excavating.' " Agent Swanson isn't exactly welcomed with open arms at the expedition.
The amount of archaeological understanding that was put into this novel is astounding. Preston and Child relay a lot of terms and devices used in the career field such as when Benton uses a bamboo pick to loosen the surface of a quad area and a whisk to gently work dirt away from findings. But this story isn't all archaeological terms, there's also a lot of great development among the characters.
These characters are written differently just enough that the reader should be able to tell them apart easily. Kelly is a leading archaeologist, who has led many different expeditions, but she is also still dealing with the grief of losing her husband years before. Benton is a historian that is a descendant of a member belonging to the Donner Party,and Swanson is a junior FBI agent that is eager to work on her first active case. Even minor characters are distinct among themselves.
Yet, the story is not flawless, there are quite a few inconsistencies, but the major problem I have found with the novel is the changing of characters' names in which they are addressed by. One scene, Nora would be referred to as Kelly - her last name - then more than usually the next paragraph, she would be called Nora. This happens with the main characters too often than it should, that it can confuse the reader and upset the flow of the story itself.
And unfortunately, the paranormal and horror elements are few and far between. We get an amazing retelling of the Donner Party tragedy not once, but throughout the story, reliving the cannibalism that took place, as well as the fictional element of gold leading to murder:
" 'Then you'll recall that when Wolfinger's wagon became stuck while crossing the Great Salt Lake Desert, two men - - - Reinhardt and Spitzer- - - volunteered to go back and help dig it out. Those two men returned, claiming Indians had killed Wolfinger.'
' Yes, yes, ' Dr. Fugit said, concealing a growing impatience.
'Well, that was a lie. Even at the time the members of the party were suspicious that something untoward had happened to Wolfinger. Reinhardt and Spitzer were viewed with a great deal if suspicion, and the two men afterwards kept to themselves and were somewhat ostracized by the rest. When Reinhardt was dying of starvation in the Lost Camp, he made a deathbed confession: Wolfinger had not been killed by Indians. Reinhardt and Spitzer had gone back, murdered Wolfinger, and taken his gold.' He paused. ' This information has been known to historians for over a century, but nobody, incredibly enough, thought to ask the next question: what happened to the gold? ' "
I highly recommend this book to fans of Thomas Harris; the writing is very similar and the character Swanson reminds me a lot of Harris' character Clarice Starling (refer to 'Silence of the Lambs' and 'Hannibal'). I also recommend this book to anyone who enjoys history, especially that of dark history, such as the Donner Party tale.
'Old Bones' follows two women, Nora Kelly and Corrie Swanson, with a small segment following a man named Clive Benton, all of who end up being intertwined within this one novel. The entire story revolves around the dark history of the cannibalistic Donner Party, while bringing in fictitious elements to give the readers a well-rounded adventure.
The story gets rolling after Benton visits Kelly with a historical diary that belonged to a member of the Donner Party- - - Kelly is a well-known archaeologist, while Benton is an accredited historian - - - Benton tells Kelly that the journal revealed a lost camp which had never been discovered by anyone, and that this camp could be one of the biggest archaeological finds of the century. While Kelly has to convince the director of the Archaeology Institute to fund the expedition, Benton springs on her and the director that there is a possibility of twenty million dollars worth of gold coins that belonged to a member of the Donner Party could still be located at this lost camp, and, of course, the director quickly agrees to fund the expedition.
Before this, I have never read a book by Preston and Child, but after reading 'Old Bones,' I am anxious to read their other works. The writing is fluid, and keeps the pace going quite well, and the transition between the two main characters is done flawlessly without any confusion as to whose view point you are viewing. The fictitious take on the historical Donner Party is done masterfully enough that even I had to go back to actual historic documents to see what was true and what was not. In one book, readers get dark history, paranormal elements, archaeology, thriller moments, mystery and suspense.
Although the story is a well-written one, there is one scene that could have had great potential, but nothing ever came of it: "Taking a few more steps, she passed through a particularly dense stand of trees and suddenly emerged into a roughly circular clearing. Odd: there was no reason for a break like this in such thick forest. She shone her light around, but there was nothing: just a soft bed of green moss, undisturbed by tracks, and a few scattered boulders." The way this scene is written leaves readers to believe that this may be important later on, but the area is unfortunately never mentioned again.
The story brings FBI agent Swanson into the lives of Benton and Kelly after a string of grave robberies and one presumed murder takes place; the former and latter have one thing in common: they are descendants of a member belonging to the Donner Party.
" 'So where do we fit into this?' asked Nora.
'The commonality I referred to. All four individuals were descended from a single person: a man named Parkin.'
Nora saw Clive start in surprise. 'Albert Parkin?' he asked. 'Of the Donner Party?'
'Exactly. And I've been led to understand he's one of the individuals in the camp you're excavating.' " Agent Swanson isn't exactly welcomed with open arms at the expedition.
The amount of archaeological understanding that was put into this novel is astounding. Preston and Child relay a lot of terms and devices used in the career field such as when Benton uses a bamboo pick to loosen the surface of a quad area and a whisk to gently work dirt away from findings. But this story isn't all archaeological terms, there's also a lot of great development among the characters.
These characters are written differently just enough that the reader should be able to tell them apart easily. Kelly is a leading archaeologist, who has led many different expeditions, but she is also still dealing with the grief of losing her husband years before. Benton is a historian that is a descendant of a member belonging to the Donner Party,and Swanson is a junior FBI agent that is eager to work on her first active case. Even minor characters are distinct among themselves.
Yet, the story is not flawless, there are quite a few inconsistencies, but the major problem I have found with the novel is the changing of characters' names in which they are addressed by. One scene, Nora would be referred to as Kelly - her last name - then more than usually the next paragraph, she would be called Nora. This happens with the main characters too often than it should, that it can confuse the reader and upset the flow of the story itself.
And unfortunately, the paranormal and horror elements are few and far between. We get an amazing retelling of the Donner Party tragedy not once, but throughout the story, reliving the cannibalism that took place, as well as the fictional element of gold leading to murder:
" 'Then you'll recall that when Wolfinger's wagon became stuck while crossing the Great Salt Lake Desert, two men - - - Reinhardt and Spitzer- - - volunteered to go back and help dig it out. Those two men returned, claiming Indians had killed Wolfinger.'
' Yes, yes, ' Dr. Fugit said, concealing a growing impatience.
'Well, that was a lie. Even at the time the members of the party were suspicious that something untoward had happened to Wolfinger. Reinhardt and Spitzer were viewed with a great deal if suspicion, and the two men afterwards kept to themselves and were somewhat ostracized by the rest. When Reinhardt was dying of starvation in the Lost Camp, he made a deathbed confession: Wolfinger had not been killed by Indians. Reinhardt and Spitzer had gone back, murdered Wolfinger, and taken his gold.' He paused. ' This information has been known to historians for over a century, but nobody, incredibly enough, thought to ask the next question: what happened to the gold? ' "
I highly recommend this book to fans of Thomas Harris; the writing is very similar and the character Swanson reminds me a lot of Harris' character Clarice Starling (refer to 'Silence of the Lambs' and 'Hannibal'). I also recommend this book to anyone who enjoys history, especially that of dark history, such as the Donner Party tale.
Dana (24 KP) rated Blood and Salt (Blood and Salt, #1) in Books
Mar 23, 2018
Once again, I am giving the old spoiler alert right at the beginning, so you have been warned.
I am actually giving this book a 3.5 stars instead of a three star review.
Okay, so now onto the actual review. I found this book very interesting. Though I was expecting something more like a thriller and/or horror novel, this was more like a non-scary cult novel. But it was not as creepy as I had hoped. I wanted to be terrified, but instead I was left without much of an emotional response at all.
This book reminded me, in a lot of ways, of that movie Children of the Corn. I don't really know why because the plot is not the same, but I think because it was set in the middle of a corn field that ate people with a cult in the middle of it. (Side note: I am not a fan of that movie, but my friends made me watch it with them. I found the movie quite boring, to be honest.)
Ash was an okay main character. I mean, she was strong, in a way, but she wasn't particularly striking in many ways. She, like many other young adult heroines, falls in love with the wrong guy, then gets betrayed by him, but unlike some of those other heroines, she doesn't really do much about it. Yes, she gets angry, but it almost feels like she is about to forgive him immediately. That didn't particularly make sense to me because if she was really pissed at him, I doubt she would forgive him that quickly.
Rhys was kinda annoying, to me. Yes, he is the twin brother so he is going to feel protective of his sister, but he refused to listen to anyone but himself. There is also the fact that, even though he sees all this magic stuff around him, he doesn't believe in it. Plus, to top it all off, he thinks his sister and his mother are crazy just because he thinks differently. I was not a fan of any of this. He is discounting the women in his family because he does not know how to deal with what he cannot see.
I wasn't a fan of Dane either, to be honest. He didn't help Ash as much as he said he was and when she would come to him for help, he would brush it off as if it didn't matter. He was kind of an ass.
The whole Katia plot was a bit weak. I saw it coming from a mile away, but I did enjoy the bits with Marie (her daughter). Whenever Marie was in a scene, even though she hardly talked, the scene, to me, got a whole lot more interesting. I loved seeing Ash try to figure out what the hell was going on with her.
I am not sure where I stand with the whole "light and dark" blood with Ash and Rhys. It seems a bit strange, but I think I can be okay with it if it is explained more in the next book.
Also, the magic as a whole has not been fully fleshed out and I hope to see more of it in the next book. I feel like there was a lot briefly touched on, but not fully explained.
All in all, I am looking forward to the next book, if only to see what the hell is going to happen next. The characters, while not my favorite, have the potential to grow into who they are and be developed more. I did not hate this book, but going with that, it wasn't my favorite book either. I am giving it the extra half-star because it has the potential to become something really cool in the next book.
Speaking of: The Last Harvest comes out 7 February 2017.
I am actually giving this book a 3.5 stars instead of a three star review.
Okay, so now onto the actual review. I found this book very interesting. Though I was expecting something more like a thriller and/or horror novel, this was more like a non-scary cult novel. But it was not as creepy as I had hoped. I wanted to be terrified, but instead I was left without much of an emotional response at all.
This book reminded me, in a lot of ways, of that movie Children of the Corn. I don't really know why because the plot is not the same, but I think because it was set in the middle of a corn field that ate people with a cult in the middle of it. (Side note: I am not a fan of that movie, but my friends made me watch it with them. I found the movie quite boring, to be honest.)
Ash was an okay main character. I mean, she was strong, in a way, but she wasn't particularly striking in many ways. She, like many other young adult heroines, falls in love with the wrong guy, then gets betrayed by him, but unlike some of those other heroines, she doesn't really do much about it. Yes, she gets angry, but it almost feels like she is about to forgive him immediately. That didn't particularly make sense to me because if she was really pissed at him, I doubt she would forgive him that quickly.
Rhys was kinda annoying, to me. Yes, he is the twin brother so he is going to feel protective of his sister, but he refused to listen to anyone but himself. There is also the fact that, even though he sees all this magic stuff around him, he doesn't believe in it. Plus, to top it all off, he thinks his sister and his mother are crazy just because he thinks differently. I was not a fan of any of this. He is discounting the women in his family because he does not know how to deal with what he cannot see.
I wasn't a fan of Dane either, to be honest. He didn't help Ash as much as he said he was and when she would come to him for help, he would brush it off as if it didn't matter. He was kind of an ass.
The whole Katia plot was a bit weak. I saw it coming from a mile away, but I did enjoy the bits with Marie (her daughter). Whenever Marie was in a scene, even though she hardly talked, the scene, to me, got a whole lot more interesting. I loved seeing Ash try to figure out what the hell was going on with her.
I am not sure where I stand with the whole "light and dark" blood with Ash and Rhys. It seems a bit strange, but I think I can be okay with it if it is explained more in the next book.
Also, the magic as a whole has not been fully fleshed out and I hope to see more of it in the next book. I feel like there was a lot briefly touched on, but not fully explained.
All in all, I am looking forward to the next book, if only to see what the hell is going to happen next. The characters, while not my favorite, have the potential to grow into who they are and be developed more. I did not hate this book, but going with that, it wasn't my favorite book either. I am giving it the extra half-star because it has the potential to become something really cool in the next book.
Speaking of: The Last Harvest comes out 7 February 2017.