Search
Search results
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated The Umbrella Academy in TV
Jul 5, 2020
A Gamble That Pays Off - 8/10
The Umbrella Academy is a 2019 dark comedy sci-fi/drama superhero tv show developed by Steve Blackman and Jeremy Slater for Netflix. It's an adaptation of the comic book series created by Gerard Way and Gabriel Ba and published by Dark Horse Comics. The series was produced by Borderline Entertainment, Dark Horse Entertainment, and Universal Cable Productions. Starring Ellen Page, Tom Hopper, David Castaneda, and Kate Walsh.
On October 1st, 1989, 43 women around the world give birth although none of them were pregnant that morning. Eccentric billionaire Sir Reginald Hargreeves (Colman Feore) adopts 7 of the children and turns them into a superhero team called, "The Umbrella Academy. The children are given numbers instead of names and even though 6 of them fight crime, 1 of them, Vanya/#7 (Ellen Page) is kept apart for not having any powers. Present day, the estranged siblings reunite when they learn their father has died. At the funeral, #5 (Aidan Gallagher), which has been missing for over a decade, reappears from the future out of a blue portal and reveals to the others, that the world will end in a matter of days.
This show is stellar. It's a ride that you shouldn't miss. It's good to see a comic book series adaptation that is not from Marvel or DC and you can feel that it's a fresh take and different. I think the writers for the show did a good job on making it very three-dimensional. It's rated TV-14 so it's for teenagers and adults but also for comic book fans and sci-fi fans. That being said it does get pretty weird and far out there, so might not be for everybody but it's definitely better than what the critics are saying. Yes it does have some issues; like the dialogue might not be the best, there being some plot holes possibly, and some complaints of other comic book shows or movies having done that before. But it does have plenty of pluses; the soundtrack is phenomenal, the CGI is on par with that of big-budget movies, and the casting is very good. They were able to pull off the whole dysfunctional family vibe very well. I wanted to give it a point higher but I did understand some of the other points that other critics made about it. I give it a 8/10 but I also give it my "Must See" seal of approval. So if you haven't seen it yet what are you waiting for.
On October 1st, 1989, 43 women around the world give birth although none of them were pregnant that morning. Eccentric billionaire Sir Reginald Hargreeves (Colman Feore) adopts 7 of the children and turns them into a superhero team called, "The Umbrella Academy. The children are given numbers instead of names and even though 6 of them fight crime, 1 of them, Vanya/#7 (Ellen Page) is kept apart for not having any powers. Present day, the estranged siblings reunite when they learn their father has died. At the funeral, #5 (Aidan Gallagher), which has been missing for over a decade, reappears from the future out of a blue portal and reveals to the others, that the world will end in a matter of days.
This show is stellar. It's a ride that you shouldn't miss. It's good to see a comic book series adaptation that is not from Marvel or DC and you can feel that it's a fresh take and different. I think the writers for the show did a good job on making it very three-dimensional. It's rated TV-14 so it's for teenagers and adults but also for comic book fans and sci-fi fans. That being said it does get pretty weird and far out there, so might not be for everybody but it's definitely better than what the critics are saying. Yes it does have some issues; like the dialogue might not be the best, there being some plot holes possibly, and some complaints of other comic book shows or movies having done that before. But it does have plenty of pluses; the soundtrack is phenomenal, the CGI is on par with that of big-budget movies, and the casting is very good. They were able to pull off the whole dysfunctional family vibe very well. I wanted to give it a point higher but I did understand some of the other points that other critics made about it. I give it a 8/10 but I also give it my "Must See" seal of approval. So if you haven't seen it yet what are you waiting for.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Fairly Tale In Hollywood But Lacks Finesse And Excitement
Once Upon A Time In Hollywood is a 2019 dramedy (drama/comedy) movie written and directed by Quentin Tarantino and producers David Heyman and Shannon Mcintosh. It was produced by Columbia Pictures, Bona Film Group, Heyday Films, and Visiona Romantica and distributed by Sony Pictures Releasing. The movie stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad, Margot Robbie, Emile Hirsch and Al Pacino.
In 1969 Los Angeles, actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) navigate their way through an ever changing industry they hardly recognize anymore. Rick laments to Cliff that his career is over, having been the star of Bounty Law a 1950s Western television series and having trouble landing acting jobs as the lead in films. Dalton dreams of befriending actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband, director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha), who are now his neighbors, in order to resurrect his career. Booth, who lives in a trailer with his pitbull, Brandy, relies on Dalton for work because of rumors he killed his wife, and drives Dalton around town and does other odd jobs for him.
This movie was definitely not what I expected from Quentin Tarantino. It was very slow building, and honestly boring in a lot of ways. I kept waiting for something to happen, but half way through the movie, still nothing really did. The acting however was outstanding. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent as Rick Dalton and Brad Pitt was a charmer, I think this movie was awesome in its portrayal of Hollywood from that time and was almost like a fairy tale about Hollywood in a way. The ending of the movie really didn't fit with the rest of the film and was controversial, but to me it didn't fit because it hyper violent like most of Tarantino's other films. To me the ending kind of saved the movie but I see how to others it didn't go with it. I usually really like Tarantino's films but I didn't particularly like this one altogether. It kind of was a collection of good scenes and acting but didn't deliver on an actual story that was good or compelling enough for me personally. But then again I didn't like Inglorious Bastards that much, and thought The Hateful 8 could have been better too. But I loved Django Unchained, and the Kill Bill films and pretty much all his other films. So I would give this movie a 6/10, it's above average in a lot of ways but just fell through for me equally in a lot of ways that can't justify a higher rating from me. Maybe it was overrated or over-hyped, or maybe I just had too high of expectations.
In 1969 Los Angeles, actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his best friend and stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) navigate their way through an ever changing industry they hardly recognize anymore. Rick laments to Cliff that his career is over, having been the star of Bounty Law a 1950s Western television series and having trouble landing acting jobs as the lead in films. Dalton dreams of befriending actress Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie) and her husband, director Roman Polanski (Rafal Zawierucha), who are now his neighbors, in order to resurrect his career. Booth, who lives in a trailer with his pitbull, Brandy, relies on Dalton for work because of rumors he killed his wife, and drives Dalton around town and does other odd jobs for him.
This movie was definitely not what I expected from Quentin Tarantino. It was very slow building, and honestly boring in a lot of ways. I kept waiting for something to happen, but half way through the movie, still nothing really did. The acting however was outstanding. Leonardo DiCaprio was excellent as Rick Dalton and Brad Pitt was a charmer, I think this movie was awesome in its portrayal of Hollywood from that time and was almost like a fairy tale about Hollywood in a way. The ending of the movie really didn't fit with the rest of the film and was controversial, but to me it didn't fit because it hyper violent like most of Tarantino's other films. To me the ending kind of saved the movie but I see how to others it didn't go with it. I usually really like Tarantino's films but I didn't particularly like this one altogether. It kind of was a collection of good scenes and acting but didn't deliver on an actual story that was good or compelling enough for me personally. But then again I didn't like Inglorious Bastards that much, and thought The Hateful 8 could have been better too. But I loved Django Unchained, and the Kill Bill films and pretty much all his other films. So I would give this movie a 6/10, it's above average in a lot of ways but just fell through for me equally in a lot of ways that can't justify a higher rating from me. Maybe it was overrated or over-hyped, or maybe I just had too high of expectations.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Thor (2011) in Movies
Jul 21, 2020
The first Thor film gets a bad wrap, and I think it's due to a combination of people forgetting just how good it is, and it perhaps being tarnished by it's underwhelming sequel, when in reality, Thor marks Marvel Studios first steps into more cosmic territory, a realm that was once deemed a little too silly for the general public, and pulls it off in style.
Firstly, translating the many characters of the Thor comic series is no easy feat. They all talk in a Shakespearean dialect, and have ridiculous costumes. The script though is fantastic. The Asgardian characters are still very bombastic, but when mixed with humans from Earth, it's becomes naturally comical. It doesn't feel corny, and somehow, it works very well.
As for the costumes, everyone just looks badass truth be told so hats off to the costume department.
Chris Hemsworth is the embodiment of Thor, and it's truly difficult to see anyone else in the role. He's charming, funny, and has just the right amount of god-like angst, and it's easy to see why he's become a firm favourite as the MCU has continued to expand.
The same goes for Tom Hiddleston as Loki. His portrayal of the God of Mischief is equal parts sinister, slimy, and sympathetic. He's the villain that you can't help but love and it's a testament to his performance that Loki has remained a mainstay in the MCU, a franchise that is often guilty of the one-and-done method when it comes to villains.
The cast is rounded out by a stellar lineup, including Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Jaime Alexander, Stellan Skaragård, Idris Elba and even includes a bigger role for the always excellent Clark Gregg. This film also serves as the introduction of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, another MCU staple. It's a strong cast list without a doubt.
The action set pieces are all pretty fun, and the effects still just about hold up. I'd argue that Thor looks better than the first two Iron Man films in that respect. Asgard looks great as well.
Another thing I absolutely LOVE about Thor is the music score by Patrick Doyle. In terms of original orchestral music, it's probably by favourite within the MCU (possibly on par with Infinity War and Endgame) but it's fantastic, and gives me goosebumps every damn time I watch this movie
Thor is action packed, with a fantastic script and score, and a great cast with well fleshed out characters. Bringing Kenneth Branagh on board as director was a great choice, and overall, the film deserves way more love than it gets.
Ignoring the first Avengers movie, Thor is the crown jewel of phase one!
Firstly, translating the many characters of the Thor comic series is no easy feat. They all talk in a Shakespearean dialect, and have ridiculous costumes. The script though is fantastic. The Asgardian characters are still very bombastic, but when mixed with humans from Earth, it's becomes naturally comical. It doesn't feel corny, and somehow, it works very well.
As for the costumes, everyone just looks badass truth be told so hats off to the costume department.
Chris Hemsworth is the embodiment of Thor, and it's truly difficult to see anyone else in the role. He's charming, funny, and has just the right amount of god-like angst, and it's easy to see why he's become a firm favourite as the MCU has continued to expand.
The same goes for Tom Hiddleston as Loki. His portrayal of the God of Mischief is equal parts sinister, slimy, and sympathetic. He's the villain that you can't help but love and it's a testament to his performance that Loki has remained a mainstay in the MCU, a franchise that is often guilty of the one-and-done method when it comes to villains.
The cast is rounded out by a stellar lineup, including Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Jaime Alexander, Stellan Skaragård, Idris Elba and even includes a bigger role for the always excellent Clark Gregg. This film also serves as the introduction of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, another MCU staple. It's a strong cast list without a doubt.
The action set pieces are all pretty fun, and the effects still just about hold up. I'd argue that Thor looks better than the first two Iron Man films in that respect. Asgard looks great as well.
Another thing I absolutely LOVE about Thor is the music score by Patrick Doyle. In terms of original orchestral music, it's probably by favourite within the MCU (possibly on par with Infinity War and Endgame) but it's fantastic, and gives me goosebumps every damn time I watch this movie
Thor is action packed, with a fantastic script and score, and a great cast with well fleshed out characters. Bringing Kenneth Branagh on board as director was a great choice, and overall, the film deserves way more love than it gets.
Ignoring the first Avengers movie, Thor is the crown jewel of phase one!
Ross (3284 KP) rated We Ride The Storm in Books
May 18, 2021
Great Asian-inspired twisting, back-stabbing fantasy
'We Ride the Storm' is an epic fantasy book set in an Asian-inspired world, with savage tribes, in-bred empires and age-old family rivalries.
We see the story unfold through the eyes of three characters: a princess of the Kisian empire (who is the step-daughter of the empire, so a princess in name only); an intriguing assassin and a tribal warrior forced into nomadic life. The plot revolves around a building conflict between the empire and its subjects and neighbours, largely driven by the accidental actions of the aforementioned assassin.
The princess is a well-formed character who quickly moves from plotting with her brother to take their family's rightful place at the head of the empire to siding with the crippled cruel emperor, seeking her own place. Her story is straight out of a Disney film, refused her chance to use her martial skills and forced to marry into power as her only contribution to the family's strength.
The nomadic warrior should have been intriguing, given his initial scene where he is cutting the heads off his fallen comrades and enemies, driven by a religious zeal that a person's head must be removed and properly laid to rest to release their soul. However, he quickly became flat and irritating, his zealous nature making him whiny. His story is the most exciting, though, as his tribe is forced into serving the empire (I think) and put aside their traditionally passive nature in order to secure new lands for themselves.
The final PoV character, the assassin, is by far the most original - she has an extra voice in her head (the background still a mystery), a presence who can inhabit corpses, allowing for some interesting escapes and plans. Her role is slightly comedic, dashing from one job to another across the country, often conflicting jobs, in order to try and release herself from the voice in her head.
The story involves a great amount of plotting and double-crossing, some excellent action scenes and a complex, weaving plot. The only downside for me was remembering who was who, who the empire was, their enemies etc, as different names were sometimes given and I found it hard to remember. Also, some major plot points were initially exposed in fairly throw-away style and later passages made no sense without picking up on them (specifically the voice in the assassin's head, but also aspects of the possession and other events which were easy to miss).
A great read and with a sequel already out, a series I will stick with.
I received a free copy from the publishers and netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
We see the story unfold through the eyes of three characters: a princess of the Kisian empire (who is the step-daughter of the empire, so a princess in name only); an intriguing assassin and a tribal warrior forced into nomadic life. The plot revolves around a building conflict between the empire and its subjects and neighbours, largely driven by the accidental actions of the aforementioned assassin.
The princess is a well-formed character who quickly moves from plotting with her brother to take their family's rightful place at the head of the empire to siding with the crippled cruel emperor, seeking her own place. Her story is straight out of a Disney film, refused her chance to use her martial skills and forced to marry into power as her only contribution to the family's strength.
The nomadic warrior should have been intriguing, given his initial scene where he is cutting the heads off his fallen comrades and enemies, driven by a religious zeal that a person's head must be removed and properly laid to rest to release their soul. However, he quickly became flat and irritating, his zealous nature making him whiny. His story is the most exciting, though, as his tribe is forced into serving the empire (I think) and put aside their traditionally passive nature in order to secure new lands for themselves.
The final PoV character, the assassin, is by far the most original - she has an extra voice in her head (the background still a mystery), a presence who can inhabit corpses, allowing for some interesting escapes and plans. Her role is slightly comedic, dashing from one job to another across the country, often conflicting jobs, in order to try and release herself from the voice in her head.
The story involves a great amount of plotting and double-crossing, some excellent action scenes and a complex, weaving plot. The only downside for me was remembering who was who, who the empire was, their enemies etc, as different names were sometimes given and I found it hard to remember. Also, some major plot points were initially exposed in fairly throw-away style and later passages made no sense without picking up on them (specifically the voice in the assassin's head, but also aspects of the possession and other events which were easy to miss).
A great read and with a sequel already out, a series I will stick with.
I received a free copy from the publishers and netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Re-Animator (1985) in Movies
Oct 30, 2020
Jeffrey Combs (2 more)
Bruce Abbott
Stuart Gordan
Mad Man
Re-Animator- is frankenstien. But alot more gorer. So much gory, so much viloence, so much horror. Its different than frankenstein, but has a lot in common.
The plot: Loosely based on H P Lovecraft's classic horror tale, Herbert West is a young scientist who has a good head on his shoulders and another on the lab table in front of him.
Originally devised by Gordon as a theatrical stage production and later a half-hour television pilot, the television script was revised to become a feature film.
The film originally received an X rating, and was later edited to obtain an R rating for video rental stores.
The idea to make Re-Animator came from a discussion Stuart Gordon had with friends one night about vampire films. He felt that there were too many Dracula films and expressed a desire to see a Frankenstein film. Someone asked if he had read "Herbert West–Reanimator" by H. P. Lovecraft.
Originally, Gordon was going to adapt Lovecraft's story for the stage, but eventually decided along with writers Dennis Paoli and William Norris to make it as a half-hour television pilot. The story was set around the turn of the century, and they soon realized that it would be too expensive to recreate. They updated it to the present day in Chicago with the intention of using actors from the Organic Theater company. They were told that the half hour format was not salable and so they made it an hour, writing 13 episodes. Special effects technician Bob Greenberg, who had worked on John Carpenter's Dark Star, repeatedly told Gordon that the only market for horror was in feature films, and introduced him to producer Brian Yuzna. Gordon showed Yuzna the script for the pilot and the 12 additional episodes.
Yuzna described the film as having the "sort of shock sensibility of an Evil Dead with the production values of, hopefully, The Howling."
Naulin said that Re-Animator was the bloodiest film he had ever worked on. In the past, he had never used more than two gallons of blood on a film; on Re-Animator, he used 24 gallons.
The biggest makeup challenge in the film was the headless Dr. Hill zombie. Tony Doublin designed the mechanical effects and was faced with the problem of proportion once the 9–10 inches of the head were removed from the body. Each scene forced him to use a different technique. For example, one technique involved building an upper torso that actor David Gale could bend over and stick his head through so that it appeared to be the one that the walking corpse was carrying around.
Its excellent gory film
The plot: Loosely based on H P Lovecraft's classic horror tale, Herbert West is a young scientist who has a good head on his shoulders and another on the lab table in front of him.
Originally devised by Gordon as a theatrical stage production and later a half-hour television pilot, the television script was revised to become a feature film.
The film originally received an X rating, and was later edited to obtain an R rating for video rental stores.
The idea to make Re-Animator came from a discussion Stuart Gordon had with friends one night about vampire films. He felt that there were too many Dracula films and expressed a desire to see a Frankenstein film. Someone asked if he had read "Herbert West–Reanimator" by H. P. Lovecraft.
Originally, Gordon was going to adapt Lovecraft's story for the stage, but eventually decided along with writers Dennis Paoli and William Norris to make it as a half-hour television pilot. The story was set around the turn of the century, and they soon realized that it would be too expensive to recreate. They updated it to the present day in Chicago with the intention of using actors from the Organic Theater company. They were told that the half hour format was not salable and so they made it an hour, writing 13 episodes. Special effects technician Bob Greenberg, who had worked on John Carpenter's Dark Star, repeatedly told Gordon that the only market for horror was in feature films, and introduced him to producer Brian Yuzna. Gordon showed Yuzna the script for the pilot and the 12 additional episodes.
Yuzna described the film as having the "sort of shock sensibility of an Evil Dead with the production values of, hopefully, The Howling."
Naulin said that Re-Animator was the bloodiest film he had ever worked on. In the past, he had never used more than two gallons of blood on a film; on Re-Animator, he used 24 gallons.
The biggest makeup challenge in the film was the headless Dr. Hill zombie. Tony Doublin designed the mechanical effects and was faced with the problem of proportion once the 9–10 inches of the head were removed from the body. Each scene forced him to use a different technique. For example, one technique involved building an upper torso that actor David Gale could bend over and stick his head through so that it appeared to be the one that the walking corpse was carrying around.
Its excellent gory film
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Run Lola Run (1999) in Movies
Nov 2, 2020
Heart-racing!
If someone asked me to describe Run Lola Run in a phrase or a few words, I would say, “Think Groundhog Day if it were a heist movie.” Though not quite on the same level as Groundhog Day, Run Lola Run definitely provides its share of intriguing moments. The plot: Lola has twenty minutes to come up with the money her boyfriend lost or he will be killed by gangsters.
Acting: 10
Very believable performances all around. Franka Potente is great as Lola, really helping to add to the overall desperation of the story. As leads go, I was very impressed with how she kept me engaged in the story with her great command of the role. What she had to do was not easy in the slightest. I won’t go into detail as to why for fear of ruining the movie, but let’s just say she was asked to do a lot in a short amount of time.
Beginning: 5
Characters: 6
With everything happening at such a fast clip, they definitely didn’t waste time on character development. While this alone wouldn’t have been enough to propel this movie to high-quality status, it certainly would have helped. Without stronger characters, I felt like the movie lacked in true substance. Sure it was fun, but the end result didn’t leave room for me to care because I didn’t have strong characters to care about.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Time is the conflict here and that concept is used extremely well. Every moment feels dire and extreme. You honestly don’t know what’s going to happen next. The movie does an excellent job of keeping you guessing. Expect a lot of strong moments that will keep your heart racing!
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 3
Personally, the movie didn’t do enough to stick out in my memory bank. Not that it wasn’t decent, but that was the problem for me: It was just decent. There were no over-the-top scenes that blew me away. I would be happy watching this once…and never again.
Pace: 10
Full use was made of the 81-minute runtime. Run Lola Run keeps you engaged from beginning to end. For what it’s worth, I don’t recall many dull parts, if any.
Plot: 2
Resolution: 10
Satisfying ending to tie the story up nicely. It was good, almost frustratingly so. If the story had been that level of quality, I would be in love with this movie.
Overall: 73
Don’t get me wrong, I can totally see why so many people are enamored with Run Lola Run. Unfortunately for me it was just ok. I would certainly recommend a one-time watch, but it doesn’t hold up as a classic for me.
Acting: 10
Very believable performances all around. Franka Potente is great as Lola, really helping to add to the overall desperation of the story. As leads go, I was very impressed with how she kept me engaged in the story with her great command of the role. What she had to do was not easy in the slightest. I won’t go into detail as to why for fear of ruining the movie, but let’s just say she was asked to do a lot in a short amount of time.
Beginning: 5
Characters: 6
With everything happening at such a fast clip, they definitely didn’t waste time on character development. While this alone wouldn’t have been enough to propel this movie to high-quality status, it certainly would have helped. Without stronger characters, I felt like the movie lacked in true substance. Sure it was fun, but the end result didn’t leave room for me to care because I didn’t have strong characters to care about.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
Time is the conflict here and that concept is used extremely well. Every moment feels dire and extreme. You honestly don’t know what’s going to happen next. The movie does an excellent job of keeping you guessing. Expect a lot of strong moments that will keep your heart racing!
Entertainment Value: 7
Memorability: 3
Personally, the movie didn’t do enough to stick out in my memory bank. Not that it wasn’t decent, but that was the problem for me: It was just decent. There were no over-the-top scenes that blew me away. I would be happy watching this once…and never again.
Pace: 10
Full use was made of the 81-minute runtime. Run Lola Run keeps you engaged from beginning to end. For what it’s worth, I don’t recall many dull parts, if any.
Plot: 2
Resolution: 10
Satisfying ending to tie the story up nicely. It was good, almost frustratingly so. If the story had been that level of quality, I would be in love with this movie.
Overall: 73
Don’t get me wrong, I can totally see why so many people are enamored with Run Lola Run. Unfortunately for me it was just ok. I would certainly recommend a one-time watch, but it doesn’t hold up as a classic for me.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Mother May I in Books
Apr 15, 2021
A riveting and addictive thriller about the power of motherhood
Bree Cabbat wakes up in the middle night, convinced a witch was peering into her bedroom window. Surely it was just a dream, she thinks, trying to get over the bad feeling the dream leaves behind. But the next day she sees the witch again--a haggard old woman--at the private school her daughters attend. Minutes later, Bree's infant son, Robert, vanishes, stolen from his car seat while she watches her oldest daughter rehearse. There's a note left behind, and Bree is told she cannot go to the police or fail to the follow instructions whatsoever. A woman contacts Bree, and Bree learns the old woman is a mother herself. She has a task for Bree; Bree agrees to do it, for she would do anything to get her son back. But completing that request sets off a series of events that Bree could have never foreseen, unleashing buried secrets and disastrous consequences. And in the end, it comes down to this: how far will two mothers go to protect their children?
"I felt more than I thought, Something bad is coming for us."
Wow, MOTHER MAY I was an excellent thriller! I was sucked in from the beginning, and this riveting page-turner never let me go. It was surprisingly captivating and so suspenseful--Bree's son Robert is taken nearly immediately, and the rest of the book revolves around her frantically trying to get him back. As she does, she learns more about the woman who stole him. The relationship the two form over the phone is fascinating. Bree is one tough cookie, as is her friend from college, Marshall, a PI at her husband's law firm.
"If you ever want to see your baby again, GO HOME"
Bree was once a poor kid, raised by a fearful mother in rural Georgia, but she's now a wealthy wife and mother, having married an attorney with family money and connections. She's worked hard to push off her mom's fears and wariness and feels like that her picture perfect life has proved her right. But with Robert's kidnapping, she starts to wonder if her mom was justified all along. The novel deftly explores the theme of class. It offers some wonderful messages on the power of motherhood--no matter how wealthy you may be. It certainly makes you think: what would you do in Bree's situation? And the old woman's?
Perhaps not everything in this tale is plausible, but I could have cared less. I was here for all of it! It was incredibly suspenseful and twisty, with information oozing out and surprising you at every turn. I truly couldn't put it down. This is definitely a winning thriller in my book! 4.5 stars.
"I felt more than I thought, Something bad is coming for us."
Wow, MOTHER MAY I was an excellent thriller! I was sucked in from the beginning, and this riveting page-turner never let me go. It was surprisingly captivating and so suspenseful--Bree's son Robert is taken nearly immediately, and the rest of the book revolves around her frantically trying to get him back. As she does, she learns more about the woman who stole him. The relationship the two form over the phone is fascinating. Bree is one tough cookie, as is her friend from college, Marshall, a PI at her husband's law firm.
"If you ever want to see your baby again, GO HOME"
Bree was once a poor kid, raised by a fearful mother in rural Georgia, but she's now a wealthy wife and mother, having married an attorney with family money and connections. She's worked hard to push off her mom's fears and wariness and feels like that her picture perfect life has proved her right. But with Robert's kidnapping, she starts to wonder if her mom was justified all along. The novel deftly explores the theme of class. It offers some wonderful messages on the power of motherhood--no matter how wealthy you may be. It certainly makes you think: what would you do in Bree's situation? And the old woman's?
Perhaps not everything in this tale is plausible, but I could have cared less. I was here for all of it! It was incredibly suspenseful and twisty, with information oozing out and surprising you at every turn. I truly couldn't put it down. This is definitely a winning thriller in my book! 4.5 stars.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Playing the Palace in Books
Jul 29, 2021
Funny and sweet romantic comedy
Carter Ogden fantasized about the Prince of England growing up--who didn't? Openly gay Prince Edgar is handsome and easy to adore. When Carter meets Edgar through a work event, sparks fly. Before he knows it, it seems like the two are dating. But their relationship receives intense media scrutiny--and the disapproval of the Queen of England. Can they find a happily ever after when it seems like everything--and everyone--are against them?
"He was destined to become the king of England, and I was a nice Jewish boy from New Jersey; we both knew what we were supposed to be doing, but we were fighting it. When it came to emotional stability, neither of us had a prayer."
This is a cute and funny story overall. We have Carter, who is reeling from a breakup and does not feel worthy of love and then Edgar, who is scared to trust. It's not easy to be in a relationship when you're the Prince of England. As Edgar states, he's "a symbol and an institution." The two meet at the United Nations and there's definitely some insta-chemistry, but they are also pretty sweet together. You can't help but root for this pair.
"Because ever since I can remember, there's been only one unthinkable sin, and that was disgracing my family and my country, in any way. I was being held to a different standard, which I agreed with. I had one job: to represent the royal household and to make England proud, and I was a calamity."
The book is a little ping pong-ish in its highs and lows. Everything is good... and then it's not. Rinse and repeat. At times, it seems a little insane that Edgar and his family cannot trust Carter, yet you can understand how utterly crazy and invasive the British media is--we see it all the time. I would have liked to see the two communicate a bit more, but new relationships are hard.
The cast of characters in PALACE are wonderful--completely engaging. Carter's family and friends are adorable, especially his sister and aunt Miriam. They make you laugh and cry. There's an excellent vomiting scene with poor Carter that will have you cringing and chuckling. Parts of this story are just plain hilarious. But it's also serious in its look at finding love after loss, insight into homophobia, and seeking acceptance for yourself and your partner, no matter what kind of relationship you may be in.
Overall, this is a fast and fluffy romantic read that also offers a good take on acceptance. 3.5 stars.
"He was destined to become the king of England, and I was a nice Jewish boy from New Jersey; we both knew what we were supposed to be doing, but we were fighting it. When it came to emotional stability, neither of us had a prayer."
This is a cute and funny story overall. We have Carter, who is reeling from a breakup and does not feel worthy of love and then Edgar, who is scared to trust. It's not easy to be in a relationship when you're the Prince of England. As Edgar states, he's "a symbol and an institution." The two meet at the United Nations and there's definitely some insta-chemistry, but they are also pretty sweet together. You can't help but root for this pair.
"Because ever since I can remember, there's been only one unthinkable sin, and that was disgracing my family and my country, in any way. I was being held to a different standard, which I agreed with. I had one job: to represent the royal household and to make England proud, and I was a calamity."
The book is a little ping pong-ish in its highs and lows. Everything is good... and then it's not. Rinse and repeat. At times, it seems a little insane that Edgar and his family cannot trust Carter, yet you can understand how utterly crazy and invasive the British media is--we see it all the time. I would have liked to see the two communicate a bit more, but new relationships are hard.
The cast of characters in PALACE are wonderful--completely engaging. Carter's family and friends are adorable, especially his sister and aunt Miriam. They make you laugh and cry. There's an excellent vomiting scene with poor Carter that will have you cringing and chuckling. Parts of this story are just plain hilarious. But it's also serious in its look at finding love after loss, insight into homophobia, and seeking acceptance for yourself and your partner, no matter what kind of relationship you may be in.
Overall, this is a fast and fluffy romantic read that also offers a good take on acceptance. 3.5 stars.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Party of Two (The Wedding Date #5) in Books
Feb 18, 2021
An absolutely charming romance with lots of cake!
This is the sixteenth book in my #atozchallenge! I'm challenging myself to read a book from my shelves that starts with each letter of the alphabet. Let's clear those shelves and delve into that backlist!
When Olivia Monroe randomly chats with a handsome stranger at a hotel bar, she has no idea that they will wind up making a lasting connection. After her chance encounter, she learns that man was no other than Max Powell, a hotshot junior senator from California, where Olivia has just moved to start her own law firm. Olivia is focused on her firm--and she has no desire to date someone well-known--but when she and Max meet again, and he then sends her a cake, she can't help but be charmed. She finds she really likes Max, but not the scrutiny that comes with dating a high-profile figure. Olivia knows she and Max have something special, but is it worth all the other stuff?
This was my first book by Jasmine Guillory, but it will certainly not be my last. I found PARTY to be completely charming. I had no idea it was the fifth book in a series, and I'll definitely be going back and catching up on the previous books. That being said, this one seems to stand-alone.
PARTY is one of those romance books that just sweeps you off your feet from the beginning. It's incredibly fun and sexy and made me smile while reading it. Oh how I needed a book that made me smile. Olivia is smart and easy to identify with: I have a soft spot for skeptical workaholics. She also loves cake, and there are so many references to baked goods in this book. I was truly in heaven! (And hungry.) Max is handsome and a bit too perfect, but, yes, you learn, he too has flaws. And honestly, I was quite protective of my Olivia, so I only wanted the best for her anyway.
So sure, maybe this is a little predictable, but who cares, because it's so fun, and it made me laugh and tear up. Our couple is adorable, and the supporting cast is excellent (and, as far as I can tell, links to other books). I liked the references to politics and adored any and all mention of sweets. The book also touches on racism and the issues plaguing working women, so it's not just fluff. Overall, I loved basically every moment, and I can't wait to read the copy of THE WEDDING DATE I immediately bought upon finishing this book. 4.5 stars.
When Olivia Monroe randomly chats with a handsome stranger at a hotel bar, she has no idea that they will wind up making a lasting connection. After her chance encounter, she learns that man was no other than Max Powell, a hotshot junior senator from California, where Olivia has just moved to start her own law firm. Olivia is focused on her firm--and she has no desire to date someone well-known--but when she and Max meet again, and he then sends her a cake, she can't help but be charmed. She finds she really likes Max, but not the scrutiny that comes with dating a high-profile figure. Olivia knows she and Max have something special, but is it worth all the other stuff?
This was my first book by Jasmine Guillory, but it will certainly not be my last. I found PARTY to be completely charming. I had no idea it was the fifth book in a series, and I'll definitely be going back and catching up on the previous books. That being said, this one seems to stand-alone.
PARTY is one of those romance books that just sweeps you off your feet from the beginning. It's incredibly fun and sexy and made me smile while reading it. Oh how I needed a book that made me smile. Olivia is smart and easy to identify with: I have a soft spot for skeptical workaholics. She also loves cake, and there are so many references to baked goods in this book. I was truly in heaven! (And hungry.) Max is handsome and a bit too perfect, but, yes, you learn, he too has flaws. And honestly, I was quite protective of my Olivia, so I only wanted the best for her anyway.
So sure, maybe this is a little predictable, but who cares, because it's so fun, and it made me laugh and tear up. Our couple is adorable, and the supporting cast is excellent (and, as far as I can tell, links to other books). I liked the references to politics and adored any and all mention of sweets. The book also touches on racism and the issues plaguing working women, so it's not just fluff. Overall, I loved basically every moment, and I can't wait to read the copy of THE WEDDING DATE I immediately bought upon finishing this book. 4.5 stars.
