Search
Search results
To the farm!
Book and Education
App
* Nominated for the prestigious Cybils Awards 2012 in the Books category * Best10APPS said: "The...
Human Anatomy Atlas – 3D Anatomical Model of the Human Body
Medical and Education
App
Note: There is a more robust version of this product available: Human Anatomy Atlas 2017 Edition!...
Case Files Anesthesiology, 1st Edition
Medical and Education
App
“The book targets medical students, but even junior anesthesia trainees would find it very...
Infected by Scott Sigler
Podcast
Across America a mysterious disease is turning ordinary people into raving, paranoid murderers who...
A Chakra Meditation by Glenn Harrold
Lifestyle
App
A Chakra Meditation is a superb high quality hypnotherapy App by the multi-million selling...
Eye Exerciser Free - Eye Training
Health & Fitness and Medical
App
** The app is not working under iPad 4, iPhone 6 Eye Exerciser is an eye training program designed...
MyKeto - Low Carb Keto Tracker
Health & Fitness and Reference
App
What is the Ketogenic Diet? The Ketogenic diet is a fast-growing low carbohydrate, high fat (lchf)...
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Falling Short in Books
Oct 2, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
When I first found out about Falling Short, written by Lex Coulton, the blurb promised to be ''fresh, funny and life-affirming''. I am sorry, but no. That is not correct. This book was none of those things. It wasn’t bad at all, but I would prefer describing it as a slow-paced, and confusingly complex in an unsatisfying way.
About the book:
Frances Pilgrim’s father went missing when she was five, and ever since all sorts of things have been going astray: car keys, promotions, a series of underwhelming and unsuitable boyfriends . . . Now here she is, thirty-bloody-nine, teaching Shakespeare to rowdy sixth formers and still losing things.
But she has a much more pressing problem. Her mother, whose odd behaviour Frances has long put down to eccentricity, is slowly yielding to Alzheimer’s, leaving Frances with some disturbing questions about her father’s disappearance, and the family history she’s always believed in. Frances could really do with someone to talk to. Ideally Jackson: fellow teacher, dedicated hedonist, erstwhile best friend. Only they haven’t spoken since that night last summer when things got complicated . . .
As the new school year begins, and her mother’s behavior becomes more and more erratic, Frances realizes that she might just have a chance to find something for once. But will it be what she’s looking for?
My thoughts:
I am usually good at explaining why I don’t like a certain book, or why I feel the way I feel, and believe me, with this one, I have spent two days and 6 sittings in front of this draft (now published post) to try and write about it. So I am doing my best now…
First of all, there has to be something about a certain book to make me want to read it. With this one – there were two things:
I love romance and intrigue, and the blurb promised two people not really talking to each other, but sparks flying around… so yes, that got me.
The Alzheimer’s disease – as a person that has worked with people suffering from Dementia and Alzheimer’s, this subject is very close to my heart. I couldn’t miss this book for this reason.
Now – the romance part disappointed me, as there was no romance. No romance at all. Unless, of course, you count as a romance a person in their mid-forties sleeping around with drunk teens, and is then too complicated of a character to even realise who he loves, and why, and the moment he does, he still has no idea what to do with that information.
The other disappointment I had was that I expected to read about the Alzheimer’s, and not only that they weren’t there, but also some of the symptoms mentioned were not correct at all. There were only sex relationships and sex scenes, and that was supposed to define their relationship in the end. Not realistic at all.
Even though it seems that we follow Frances’s story throughout, we actually follow Jackson’s story as well. Their characters were too complicated and confusing for me, and it let me to now feel nor care about them at all. I honestly cared about Frances’s dog the most in this book.
The plot wasn’t perfect – there were times when the information given didn’t match.
[SPOILER ALERT]
The scene how Frances searches on Google to find the address of her dad. We are then told that she found out his address through Jean. Which one is it, then?
I am actually quite sad that I didn’t enjoy this book, but I will still be curious about new works from Lex Coulton, because, somehow, I really liked her writing style, despite all the flaws.
About the book:
Frances Pilgrim’s father went missing when she was five, and ever since all sorts of things have been going astray: car keys, promotions, a series of underwhelming and unsuitable boyfriends . . . Now here she is, thirty-bloody-nine, teaching Shakespeare to rowdy sixth formers and still losing things.
But she has a much more pressing problem. Her mother, whose odd behaviour Frances has long put down to eccentricity, is slowly yielding to Alzheimer’s, leaving Frances with some disturbing questions about her father’s disappearance, and the family history she’s always believed in. Frances could really do with someone to talk to. Ideally Jackson: fellow teacher, dedicated hedonist, erstwhile best friend. Only they haven’t spoken since that night last summer when things got complicated . . .
As the new school year begins, and her mother’s behavior becomes more and more erratic, Frances realizes that she might just have a chance to find something for once. But will it be what she’s looking for?
My thoughts:
I am usually good at explaining why I don’t like a certain book, or why I feel the way I feel, and believe me, with this one, I have spent two days and 6 sittings in front of this draft (now published post) to try and write about it. So I am doing my best now…
First of all, there has to be something about a certain book to make me want to read it. With this one – there were two things:
I love romance and intrigue, and the blurb promised two people not really talking to each other, but sparks flying around… so yes, that got me.
The Alzheimer’s disease – as a person that has worked with people suffering from Dementia and Alzheimer’s, this subject is very close to my heart. I couldn’t miss this book for this reason.
Now – the romance part disappointed me, as there was no romance. No romance at all. Unless, of course, you count as a romance a person in their mid-forties sleeping around with drunk teens, and is then too complicated of a character to even realise who he loves, and why, and the moment he does, he still has no idea what to do with that information.
The other disappointment I had was that I expected to read about the Alzheimer’s, and not only that they weren’t there, but also some of the symptoms mentioned were not correct at all. There were only sex relationships and sex scenes, and that was supposed to define their relationship in the end. Not realistic at all.
Even though it seems that we follow Frances’s story throughout, we actually follow Jackson’s story as well. Their characters were too complicated and confusing for me, and it let me to now feel nor care about them at all. I honestly cared about Frances’s dog the most in this book.
The plot wasn’t perfect – there were times when the information given didn’t match.
[SPOILER ALERT]
The scene how Frances searches on Google to find the address of her dad. We are then told that she found out his address through Jean. Which one is it, then?
I am actually quite sad that I didn’t enjoy this book, but I will still be curious about new works from Lex Coulton, because, somehow, I really liked her writing style, despite all the flaws.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Denial (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Jewry Trial.
It’s the mid-90’s and Deborah Lipstadt (Rachael Weisz, “The Lobster“), an American professor of Holocaust studies at a US university has written a book naming and shaming David Irving (Timothy Spall, “Mr Turner”) as a Nazi-apologist who denies that the Holocaust ever happened. Filing a law suit against Penguin Books and Lipstadt in the UK, Lipstadt chooses to fight rather than settle and takes the case to the High Courts in a much publicised trial.
Help is required and Lipstadt is assigned a hot-shot solicitor (if that’s not an oxymoron) in the form of Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott, “Sherlock”) and top barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson, “Selma“). The stage is set for an epic legal battle that will establish not just legal precedent but also historical precedent affecting the entire Jewish people.
This film’s trailer really appealed to me, and I was looking forward to this film. And that view clearly also got through to people of my age bracket (and older) since the cinema was pretty full. But ultimately I was disappointed by the film.
But first the good points.
The cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos (“Thor”, “Mamma Mia”) is memorable, particularly for the Auschwitz tour which is done in an impressively bleak way on an astoundingly bleak winter’s day.
Andrew Scott, so woefully miscast as “C” in “Spectre“, here is a nice shoo-in for the cocksure but aloof expert. And Tom Wilkinson, who can seldom put a movie foot wrong, is also perfectly cast as the claret-swigging defence-lead: passionless and analytical even when facing the horrors of a trip to Auschwitz.
Timothy Spall’s Irving is well portrayed as the intelligent and articulate – albeit deluded – eccentric he no doubt is.
There are also some nice cameo performances, including John Sessions (“Florence Foster Jenkins“) as an Oxbridge history boffin and Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”) as an Auschwitz expert.
However, these positives don’t outweigh the big negative that the broader ensemble cast never really gels together well. The first time this is evident is in an office meeting of the defence team where the interactions have a sheen of falseness about them that is barely hidden behind some weak script and forced nervous laughter. Tea can’t help.
In particular, attractive Kiwi actress Caren Pistorius (“The Light Between Oceans“) seems to have been given a poor hand to play with as the junior member of the team. A late night interaction with her boyfriend, who whinges at her for having to work late, seems to be taken from a more sexist age: “the 70’s called and they want their script back”.
None of this is helped by Rachel Weisz, who I’m normally a fan of, but here she is hindered by some rather dodgy lines by David Hare (“The Reader”) and an unconvincing (well, to me at least) New York accent. For me I’m afraid she just doesn’t seem to adequately convey her passion for the cause.
While the execution of the court scenes are well done, the film is hampered by its opening five words: “Based on a True Story”. This is something of a disease at the moment in the movies, and whilst in many films (the recent “Lion” for example) the story is in the journey rather than the result, with “Denial” the story is designed to build to a tense result that unfortunately lacks any sort of tension – since the result is pre-ordained.
This is all a great shame, since director Mick Jackson (“LA Story”, in his first feature for nearly 15 years) has the potential here for a great movie. Perhaps a more fictionalised version (“vaguely based on a true story”) might have provided more of a foundation for a better film?
Help is required and Lipstadt is assigned a hot-shot solicitor (if that’s not an oxymoron) in the form of Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott, “Sherlock”) and top barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson, “Selma“). The stage is set for an epic legal battle that will establish not just legal precedent but also historical precedent affecting the entire Jewish people.
This film’s trailer really appealed to me, and I was looking forward to this film. And that view clearly also got through to people of my age bracket (and older) since the cinema was pretty full. But ultimately I was disappointed by the film.
But first the good points.
The cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos (“Thor”, “Mamma Mia”) is memorable, particularly for the Auschwitz tour which is done in an impressively bleak way on an astoundingly bleak winter’s day.
Andrew Scott, so woefully miscast as “C” in “Spectre“, here is a nice shoo-in for the cocksure but aloof expert. And Tom Wilkinson, who can seldom put a movie foot wrong, is also perfectly cast as the claret-swigging defence-lead: passionless and analytical even when facing the horrors of a trip to Auschwitz.
Timothy Spall’s Irving is well portrayed as the intelligent and articulate – albeit deluded – eccentric he no doubt is.
There are also some nice cameo performances, including John Sessions (“Florence Foster Jenkins“) as an Oxbridge history boffin and Mark Gatiss (“Sherlock”) as an Auschwitz expert.
However, these positives don’t outweigh the big negative that the broader ensemble cast never really gels together well. The first time this is evident is in an office meeting of the defence team where the interactions have a sheen of falseness about them that is barely hidden behind some weak script and forced nervous laughter. Tea can’t help.
In particular, attractive Kiwi actress Caren Pistorius (“The Light Between Oceans“) seems to have been given a poor hand to play with as the junior member of the team. A late night interaction with her boyfriend, who whinges at her for having to work late, seems to be taken from a more sexist age: “the 70’s called and they want their script back”.
None of this is helped by Rachel Weisz, who I’m normally a fan of, but here she is hindered by some rather dodgy lines by David Hare (“The Reader”) and an unconvincing (well, to me at least) New York accent. For me I’m afraid she just doesn’t seem to adequately convey her passion for the cause.
While the execution of the court scenes are well done, the film is hampered by its opening five words: “Based on a True Story”. This is something of a disease at the moment in the movies, and whilst in many films (the recent “Lion” for example) the story is in the journey rather than the result, with “Denial” the story is designed to build to a tense result that unfortunately lacks any sort of tension – since the result is pre-ordained.
This is all a great shame, since director Mick Jackson (“LA Story”, in his first feature for nearly 15 years) has the potential here for a great movie. Perhaps a more fictionalised version (“vaguely based on a true story”) might have provided more of a foundation for a better film?
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Alien: Romulus (2024) in Movies
Sep 2, 2024
The latest film in the “Alien” franchise has arrived and “Alien: Romulus” is the most engaging and enjoyable entry in the series since “Aliens”.
The film is the first in the series since Disney purchased Twentieth Century Fox and they turned to Director and Co-writer Fede Alvarez to develop a story he had shared with Producer Ridley Scott years prior.
The movie was originally intended to debut on Hulu similar to how “Prey” was released but it was decided to go with a theatrical release early in production.
Cailee Spaeny stars as Rain; an orphan living on a dark planet with her Android “Brother” Andy (David Jonsson). The mining colony is filled with despair and disease from the mine and Rain is eager to immigrate to a colony that offers the sun and a better life having completed the terms of her service agreement with the Company.
Her request is denied and she is told that due to a labor shortage, she has to work five years in the mines before she is eligible to be considered again. Knowing the Mines are for many deaths waiting to happen, Rain is asked by a group of friends to join them for a mission.
Her friends pilot a hauler used to ferry cargo and say that they have found an object drifting through the system which will crash into their planetary rings in about 47 hours. They plot to go up and salvage some Cryopods which will enable them to head to the desired colony which is a nine-year journey.
Without options and knowing that Andy is the key to gaining access, the group enters the station and sets about their tasks.
Unfortunately, their actions rouse the dark and deadly secret of the station and they soon find themselves facing deadly Aliens in a tense and pitched fight for survival and escape.
The movie does a very good job at filling in areas of the overall mythos and delivering fan service which does not feel like pandering and also helps create a pathway for new stories that do not directly impact the film “Aliens” which is set 37 years after the events of this film.
The movie also connects to the Prequel films as well as the original “Alien” in some clever ways which helps the continuity but still leaves plenty of mystery and questions even when this one fills in a few of the gray areas slightly.
The movie takes its time to set up the premise and get to the action but it never drags and is engaging from start to finish. Alvarez has done a masterful job capturing not only the look of the earlier films but also creating an intense thriller that gives audiences what they want and more as use of physical effects was very effective.
The cast was strong and Spaeny and Jonsson have a great chemistry with one another which helps in the face of the growing danger and tensions in the film.
I found myself not only loving the nostalgic touches but also the way that elements of the Company are explained and how much they truly knew which adds new dimensions to the first two films in the series but raises all sorts of possibilities for future films in the series.
“Alien: Romulus” was a true joy from start to finish for me and as a fan who has enjoyed the franchise since I was a small child; it delivered what I wanted and for me was the most enjoyable and satisfying entry in the series since “Aliens” and Alvarez and the cast are to be commended for creating a film that invigorates the franchise and delivers.
The film is the first in the series since Disney purchased Twentieth Century Fox and they turned to Director and Co-writer Fede Alvarez to develop a story he had shared with Producer Ridley Scott years prior.
The movie was originally intended to debut on Hulu similar to how “Prey” was released but it was decided to go with a theatrical release early in production.
Cailee Spaeny stars as Rain; an orphan living on a dark planet with her Android “Brother” Andy (David Jonsson). The mining colony is filled with despair and disease from the mine and Rain is eager to immigrate to a colony that offers the sun and a better life having completed the terms of her service agreement with the Company.
Her request is denied and she is told that due to a labor shortage, she has to work five years in the mines before she is eligible to be considered again. Knowing the Mines are for many deaths waiting to happen, Rain is asked by a group of friends to join them for a mission.
Her friends pilot a hauler used to ferry cargo and say that they have found an object drifting through the system which will crash into their planetary rings in about 47 hours. They plot to go up and salvage some Cryopods which will enable them to head to the desired colony which is a nine-year journey.
Without options and knowing that Andy is the key to gaining access, the group enters the station and sets about their tasks.
Unfortunately, their actions rouse the dark and deadly secret of the station and they soon find themselves facing deadly Aliens in a tense and pitched fight for survival and escape.
The movie does a very good job at filling in areas of the overall mythos and delivering fan service which does not feel like pandering and also helps create a pathway for new stories that do not directly impact the film “Aliens” which is set 37 years after the events of this film.
The movie also connects to the Prequel films as well as the original “Alien” in some clever ways which helps the continuity but still leaves plenty of mystery and questions even when this one fills in a few of the gray areas slightly.
The movie takes its time to set up the premise and get to the action but it never drags and is engaging from start to finish. Alvarez has done a masterful job capturing not only the look of the earlier films but also creating an intense thriller that gives audiences what they want and more as use of physical effects was very effective.
The cast was strong and Spaeny and Jonsson have a great chemistry with one another which helps in the face of the growing danger and tensions in the film.
I found myself not only loving the nostalgic touches but also the way that elements of the Company are explained and how much they truly knew which adds new dimensions to the first two films in the series but raises all sorts of possibilities for future films in the series.
“Alien: Romulus” was a true joy from start to finish for me and as a fan who has enjoyed the franchise since I was a small child; it delivered what I wanted and for me was the most enjoyable and satisfying entry in the series since “Aliens” and Alvarez and the cast are to be commended for creating a film that invigorates the franchise and delivers.