Search
Search results
Lone Star Nation: How a Ragged Army of Volunteers Won the Battle for Texas Independence - And Changed America
10.0
Rate It
Book
From bestselling historian and long-time Texan H. W. Brands, a richly textured history of one of the...
Something Nasty in the Slushpile
Book
Most publishers keep a "slushpile" - the stack of unsolicited manuscripts which contains a large...
The Insider's Guide to Independent Film Distribution
Book
Innovation in technology means that almost anyone can make an independent film these days. Although...
21 Days to Resilience: How to Transcend the Daily Grind, Deal with the Tough Stuff, and Discover Your Strongest Self
Book
Happiness is not about wishful thinking, good luck, or avoiding negative thoughts. In fact, the only...
The Gift of Life: Behind the Scenes of Donor Organ Retrieval
Book
'Organ transplants are a very controversial and unique area of medicine. Those of us who work as...
Fighting for General Lee: Confederate General Rufus Barringer and the North Carolina Cavalry Brigade
Book
Rufus Barringer fought on horseback during the Civil War with General Lee's Army of Northern...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Love and Monsters (2021) in Movies
Apr 18, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Love and monsters is quite a slow paced film about a journey and a character. Joel starts the film as a bit of a looser, he feels out of place and unneeded so he sets out to find the one person he thinks will appreciate him and, as he movers through the world he begins to find himself, a purpose and the meaning of family.
In some ways, Love and Monsters reminded me of 'Zombie land', we have some one who is just trying to find his place and his way in world that changed, he has to rely on the help of others whilst finding the right rules to help him survive. Of course the biggest difference is that there are monsters instead of Zombies.
Talking of the monsters, the effects are pretty good, the monsters are not all horrific and are pretty realistic. They help set the tone and pace in the film, providing threat, humour and atmosphere and it's nice to see that some of them just want to get on with their own lives.
Another thing that was nice to see was that (most of) the humans were also just trying to live, there weren't any 'Neagan's' or camps of overly aggressive thugs as you get used to seeing in a lot of post apocalyptic movies, which came as a bit as a surprise, I was expecting there to be something odd about the meeting between Joel and Aimee but, even though it doesn't necessarily go according to plan it still works out in a nice way.
And that's the thing, Love and Monsters is quite a nice film. The characters want to survive and even in a world populated by monsters that eat people the survivors find love and purpose, yes there are people who are just out for themselves, who are willing to steal and feed others to the monsters but they are in the minority.
The only really odd thing in this film are the Mav1s', there is not really anything to explain them.
Love and Monsters is no 'Godzilla', there are no monster v monster fights. and it's no 'A Quite Place' the monsters aren't necessarily hunting the survivors for anything other than food and this isn't a horror movie, it's a film about growth, love and family and man eating bugs.
In some ways, Love and Monsters reminded me of 'Zombie land', we have some one who is just trying to find his place and his way in world that changed, he has to rely on the help of others whilst finding the right rules to help him survive. Of course the biggest difference is that there are monsters instead of Zombies.
Talking of the monsters, the effects are pretty good, the monsters are not all horrific and are pretty realistic. They help set the tone and pace in the film, providing threat, humour and atmosphere and it's nice to see that some of them just want to get on with their own lives.
Another thing that was nice to see was that (most of) the humans were also just trying to live, there weren't any 'Neagan's' or camps of overly aggressive thugs as you get used to seeing in a lot of post apocalyptic movies, which came as a bit as a surprise, I was expecting there to be something odd about the meeting between Joel and Aimee but, even though it doesn't necessarily go according to plan it still works out in a nice way.
And that's the thing, Love and Monsters is quite a nice film. The characters want to survive and even in a world populated by monsters that eat people the survivors find love and purpose, yes there are people who are just out for themselves, who are willing to steal and feed others to the monsters but they are in the minority.
The only really odd thing in this film are the Mav1s', there is not really anything to explain them.
Love and Monsters is no 'Godzilla', there are no monster v monster fights. and it's no 'A Quite Place' the monsters aren't necessarily hunting the survivors for anything other than food and this isn't a horror movie, it's a film about growth, love and family and man eating bugs.
Debbiereadsbook (1487 KP) rated B is for Beg (The Alphabet of Desire #2) in Books
Jul 28, 2021
best of the three, loved this one!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 2 in the Alphabet of Desire series. Its not necessary to read book 1, A is for Aftercare, before this one. All three books run concurrently. I didn't know this going in! I'm also writing my review for this book after I've read C is for Comfort.
I think this is my favourite of the three!
Why?? Mostly, not because of Blake, but because of Gabe and Calvin and how THEIR relationship develops! Because until Blake, they did not think that way about each other. I mean, why would they? 2 Doms could never have any sort of meaningful relationship, could they? What surprised them both, and me, I think, was how quickly they settled into their new roles. Gabe as Blake's Daddy, and Calvin as his Dom.
Because Gabe and Calvin are SO different, they offer Blake a different touch, a differnt type of care, and Blake needs that. When some things are revealed, the dynamic changes slightly, but for the better.
I LOVED that Gabe calls Blake baby boy and Calvin calls him princess. It shows the difference in the way their dominance displays itself. Loved that both Doms loved that Blake liked pretty things!
The books are billed as low angst, but I found, mostly due to Blake's parents, and how they treat him compared to his brothers, this was the most angsty of the three.
But oh so steamy! Obviously, the steamiest since there are 3 of them, but there are scenes with just 2 of the three, in all combinations, and I really liked that those scenes were there. They were NEEDED I think, to cement the relationship between the pairings as well as the trio.
One thing I will say. There are some repeated conversations across all three books. When I realised that first, I was worried that there would be a lot of them but there aren't. Maybe one or two for each main character in each book. But after reading them, it's important to get the other half/third of these conversations. VERY important. So don't pass these books over because of that!
As I said, my favourite of the three, so . . .
5 full and pretty stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is book 2 in the Alphabet of Desire series. Its not necessary to read book 1, A is for Aftercare, before this one. All three books run concurrently. I didn't know this going in! I'm also writing my review for this book after I've read C is for Comfort.
I think this is my favourite of the three!
Why?? Mostly, not because of Blake, but because of Gabe and Calvin and how THEIR relationship develops! Because until Blake, they did not think that way about each other. I mean, why would they? 2 Doms could never have any sort of meaningful relationship, could they? What surprised them both, and me, I think, was how quickly they settled into their new roles. Gabe as Blake's Daddy, and Calvin as his Dom.
Because Gabe and Calvin are SO different, they offer Blake a different touch, a differnt type of care, and Blake needs that. When some things are revealed, the dynamic changes slightly, but for the better.
I LOVED that Gabe calls Blake baby boy and Calvin calls him princess. It shows the difference in the way their dominance displays itself. Loved that both Doms loved that Blake liked pretty things!
The books are billed as low angst, but I found, mostly due to Blake's parents, and how they treat him compared to his brothers, this was the most angsty of the three.
But oh so steamy! Obviously, the steamiest since there are 3 of them, but there are scenes with just 2 of the three, in all combinations, and I really liked that those scenes were there. They were NEEDED I think, to cement the relationship between the pairings as well as the trio.
One thing I will say. There are some repeated conversations across all three books. When I realised that first, I was worried that there would be a lot of them but there aren't. Maybe one or two for each main character in each book. But after reading them, it's important to get the other half/third of these conversations. VERY important. So don't pass these books over because of that!
As I said, my favourite of the three, so . . .
5 full and pretty stars
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Tone-Deaf (2019) in Movies
Feb 11, 2021
As a proud owner of yet another subscription service, the first thing I did was scroll through every movie to create a watchlist. Killer Instinct popped up, and seeing Robert Patrick... *presses play*.
Olive's life has taken an unexpected turn and she decides that a trip out of the city is just what she needs. Peace and tranquillity awaits in the odd home she finds online, but the even odder owner and goings on aren't entirely what she'd hoped for.
I seem to be picking films recently that remind me of other films, and Killer Instinct (also known as Tone Deaf) reminds me heavily of The Intruder from 2019 starring Dennis Quaid... with the slight difference that The Intruder was kind of watchable.
For a film under 90 minutes it feels significantly longer with nothing much happening. The whole idea that Harvey (Robert Patrick) is hatching this plan is poorly set up and once underway I didn't fully understand what the motivation was behind his character. As well as Intruder vibes, I was getting heavy Home Alone vibes too... you'll see.
There felt like two distinct sides to the cast, "serious" and "comedy". But the serious weren't, and neither were the comedy. The way everything was laced together felt like a sloppy attempt to merge Happy Death Day with a serious thriller.
As a lead character, Olive (Amanda Crew), doesn't feel massively likeable, and there seemed like there wasn't really any way to bring that to life as she was. Unengaging characters are also something that's happening more to me in recent film choices, and here, as with others, I found myself getting pulled out of the events of the film because of it.
I had hoped that Robert Patrick would offer some respite, but Harvey is equally... blah. There's no real explanation about why he is the way he is and it's introduced in such a strange way that his motivations are almost entirely obscured by it.
Killer Instinct tries very hard to be relevant and be a commentary on generational divides, but it's done by breaking the fourth wall and talking to the camera in a way that wasn't at all palatable. Each time it happened I frowned and instantly felt disengaged from the film. Combine that with the oddly comedic mother storyline and you get a film with a constant identity crisis.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/killer-instinct-movie-review.html
Olive's life has taken an unexpected turn and she decides that a trip out of the city is just what she needs. Peace and tranquillity awaits in the odd home she finds online, but the even odder owner and goings on aren't entirely what she'd hoped for.
I seem to be picking films recently that remind me of other films, and Killer Instinct (also known as Tone Deaf) reminds me heavily of The Intruder from 2019 starring Dennis Quaid... with the slight difference that The Intruder was kind of watchable.
For a film under 90 minutes it feels significantly longer with nothing much happening. The whole idea that Harvey (Robert Patrick) is hatching this plan is poorly set up and once underway I didn't fully understand what the motivation was behind his character. As well as Intruder vibes, I was getting heavy Home Alone vibes too... you'll see.
There felt like two distinct sides to the cast, "serious" and "comedy". But the serious weren't, and neither were the comedy. The way everything was laced together felt like a sloppy attempt to merge Happy Death Day with a serious thriller.
As a lead character, Olive (Amanda Crew), doesn't feel massively likeable, and there seemed like there wasn't really any way to bring that to life as she was. Unengaging characters are also something that's happening more to me in recent film choices, and here, as with others, I found myself getting pulled out of the events of the film because of it.
I had hoped that Robert Patrick would offer some respite, but Harvey is equally... blah. There's no real explanation about why he is the way he is and it's introduced in such a strange way that his motivations are almost entirely obscured by it.
Killer Instinct tries very hard to be relevant and be a commentary on generational divides, but it's done by breaking the fourth wall and talking to the camera in a way that wasn't at all palatable. Each time it happened I frowned and instantly felt disengaged from the film. Combine that with the oddly comedic mother storyline and you get a film with a constant identity crisis.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/02/killer-instinct-movie-review.html
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Gentlemen (2020) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
It’s been a while since Guy Ritchie dealt with some proper geezers doing crime and talking bollocks. Maybe there were elements of it in The Man From U.N.C.L.E. but really it’s Rock ‘n Rolla from 2008 we are talking about. Personally I hadn’t missed it. I pretty much think he took it as far as it needed to be taken, and I much prefer the Sherlock Holmes stuff, anyway.
Judging from the inexplicably high rating (currently 7.8) for this on IMDb somehow someone had missed it big time though! Or is it just easy for those in search of a nutter with a gun and a swear word or six to click 9/10? I don’t want to speculate. Suffice to say The Gentlemen is not very good. Not awful. Colin Farrell wins by having a lot of fun hamming up a bonkers creation of a man (as he does so expertly and effortlessly), and Hugh Grant comes out of it with credit too, for at least looking engaged and having some of the best lines to deliver.
As for Matthew McConnaughey, who is surely to be considered top billing, I can’t honestly remember a thing about his role in this forgettable fable some 9 weeks after seeing it. Literally, can’t recall anything he does in it to mind. Bad sign. And Charlie Hunnam doesn’t fare much better, but that’s probably because he isn’t that good or memorable in anything in the first place. There are a couple of women in this as well, but they really don’t make a difference to anything, and no one cares (sadly).
We’ve seen the whole thing before, I’m afraid, and even first time the style wasn’t for everyone and felt a bit “wrong” to a 21st century sensibility. It really is just guns and violence and swearing in ever decreasing creativity. I liked some of the costumes though.
No one involved’s best work, by a long way. A distracting way to kill a few hours if you are completely stuck for ideas, but little more than that. In a year or two no one will remember or talk about it at all. May that be a lesson to you Mr Ritchie. Leave outdated indulgences, even with your pals, in the past where they belong.
Judging from the inexplicably high rating (currently 7.8) for this on IMDb somehow someone had missed it big time though! Or is it just easy for those in search of a nutter with a gun and a swear word or six to click 9/10? I don’t want to speculate. Suffice to say The Gentlemen is not very good. Not awful. Colin Farrell wins by having a lot of fun hamming up a bonkers creation of a man (as he does so expertly and effortlessly), and Hugh Grant comes out of it with credit too, for at least looking engaged and having some of the best lines to deliver.
As for Matthew McConnaughey, who is surely to be considered top billing, I can’t honestly remember a thing about his role in this forgettable fable some 9 weeks after seeing it. Literally, can’t recall anything he does in it to mind. Bad sign. And Charlie Hunnam doesn’t fare much better, but that’s probably because he isn’t that good or memorable in anything in the first place. There are a couple of women in this as well, but they really don’t make a difference to anything, and no one cares (sadly).
We’ve seen the whole thing before, I’m afraid, and even first time the style wasn’t for everyone and felt a bit “wrong” to a 21st century sensibility. It really is just guns and violence and swearing in ever decreasing creativity. I liked some of the costumes though.
No one involved’s best work, by a long way. A distracting way to kill a few hours if you are completely stuck for ideas, but little more than that. In a year or two no one will remember or talk about it at all. May that be a lesson to you Mr Ritchie. Leave outdated indulgences, even with your pals, in the past where they belong.