Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
I’m a big fan of Tom Cruise. He is a real old-fashioned film star, generous with his fans on the red carpet and with real star power at the box office. And I can happily sit down in front of just about any one of his DVD’s time and time again and still enjoy it. Unlike many critics, I even enjoyed his last outing as Jack Reacher.
Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing – “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back” – is a bit dull.
Lee Child’s Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major (“No, ex-Major”) intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the “Avengers” world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).
Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains – led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) – haven’t counted on Reacher’s ‘particular set of skills’.
My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It’s as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.
Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don’t add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the ‘investigation’: the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.
Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born-leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the “hero” it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.
The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise’s more interesting movie “The Last Samurai”.
The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately – for me at least – the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.
Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this but, his latest outing – “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back” – is a bit dull.
Lee Child’s Reacher has many years before turned his back on his military past and wanders the country as a drifter righting wrongs outside of the law. In this film, his military past again makes a major (“No, ex-Major”) intrusion into his life. Potential love interest Major Susan Turner (Colbie Smulders, from the “Avengers” world) is arrested on trumped-up espionage charges and Cruise sets out to clear her name. Along the way he accidentally (and rather too conveniently for the plot) discovers that a paternity suit has been filed against him and Reacher confronts the rebellious and light-fingered teenager Samantha (Danika Yarosh, aged 18 playing 15).
Unfortunately the big-cheeses involved in the international arms skulduggery are determined to tie up each and every loose end in their intrigue, and that includes Reacher, Turner and young Samantha by association. Needless to say, the villains – led by a one-man killing machine (Patrick Heusinger) – haven’t counted on Reacher’s ‘particular set of skills’.
My problem with the film (after an entertaining opening) is that the screenplay lumbers from standard thriller set-piece to standard thriller set-piece in a highly predictable way. It’s as if the scripts from 20 different films have been stuck in a blender. Shadowy arms dealing shenanigans: check; Cute teenager in peril: check; Gun fight on a dockside: check; Rooftop chase: check.
Are all the individual set-pieces decently done? Yes, sure. But the combination of these bits of action tapas really don’t add up to a satisfying meal. The story arc is almost non-existent as there is no suspense in the ‘investigation’: the plot is all pretty well laid out for you.
Where there is some fun to be had is in the play-off between the born-leader Reacher and the born-leader Turner, both trying to be top-dog in the decision making. The romantic connection between the leads seems almost plausible despite their 20 (TWENTY!) year age difference: this is more down to how incredibly good Cruise still looks at age 54 (damn him!). Turner makes a good female role-model right up to the point where there is a confrontation in a hotel room and Turner backs down: despite Cruise being the “hero” it would have been nice for female equality for this face-off to have gone the other way.
The director is Edward Zwick, who helmed Cruise’s more interesting movie “The Last Samurai”.
The trailer started off well and then progressed into general mediocrity. Unfortunately – for me at least – the film lived up to the trailer. Watchable, but not memorable.
FilmIntuition (33 KP) rated Gate 76 in Books
Jun 1, 2018
Oozing With Tension
In the right place at the right time, boxer turned private eye Freddy Ferguson catches sight of some very wrong people in an airport security line just before a flight explodes at the San Francisco International Airport.
And even though he's been contracted to go through passenger lists as part of the B team hired by the airline, Freddy can't help but follow up on what he'd witnessed on that deadly night when an enigmatic blonde woman escaped certain death by checking in only to change her appearance in an airport bathroom rather than get on that flight. Is she a part of a bigger conspiracy or merely the last living witness of a horrific crime?
Stylistically reminiscent of Raymond Chandler and Elmore Leonard with its no-nonsense first person point-of-view, indie author Andrew Diamond's Noir flavored page turner is terse, strong, and oozing with tension.
But while Freddy's redemptive plight is fascinating indeed, the otherwise terrific Gate 76 makes a few missteps in its final third as – instead of zeroing in on its increasingly complicated Grisham level mystery – one of its female leads begins to preach at Freddy, and therefore the reader. And even though I appreciate the book's bold characterization and vivid description, moments like this are not only the opposite of subtle but they also pull focus away from the main storyline.
Juggling a large number of characters to the point that in the end, Freddy has to phone a few to literally tell them and the reader what is going on, Gate 76 might've worked even better if it had cut down on some of the middle-men to avoid the repetition of needing to explain something we've already figured out alongside our lead.
From its dynamic opening that plays just like an action movie, Gate 76 is a largely effective and entertaining thriller. With his keen sense of humor, eye for details, and ability to weave together an intricate number of subplots with style, this was a great introduction for me to Andrew Diamond and makes me eager to pick up some of his other reads.
Note: I received an ARC of this title via Bookish First in exchange for my honest opinion.
And even though he's been contracted to go through passenger lists as part of the B team hired by the airline, Freddy can't help but follow up on what he'd witnessed on that deadly night when an enigmatic blonde woman escaped certain death by checking in only to change her appearance in an airport bathroom rather than get on that flight. Is she a part of a bigger conspiracy or merely the last living witness of a horrific crime?
Stylistically reminiscent of Raymond Chandler and Elmore Leonard with its no-nonsense first person point-of-view, indie author Andrew Diamond's Noir flavored page turner is terse, strong, and oozing with tension.
But while Freddy's redemptive plight is fascinating indeed, the otherwise terrific Gate 76 makes a few missteps in its final third as – instead of zeroing in on its increasingly complicated Grisham level mystery – one of its female leads begins to preach at Freddy, and therefore the reader. And even though I appreciate the book's bold characterization and vivid description, moments like this are not only the opposite of subtle but they also pull focus away from the main storyline.
Juggling a large number of characters to the point that in the end, Freddy has to phone a few to literally tell them and the reader what is going on, Gate 76 might've worked even better if it had cut down on some of the middle-men to avoid the repetition of needing to explain something we've already figured out alongside our lead.
From its dynamic opening that plays just like an action movie, Gate 76 is a largely effective and entertaining thriller. With his keen sense of humor, eye for details, and ability to weave together an intricate number of subplots with style, this was a great introduction for me to Andrew Diamond and makes me eager to pick up some of his other reads.
Note: I received an ARC of this title via Bookish First in exchange for my honest opinion.
Merissa (11758 KP) rated Teach Me in Books
Apr 10, 2023
This book is about how a young man's life changes when he tells his parents that he is gay... and not in a good way. He ends up on the streets, not knowing which way to turn. Luckily for him, Bree and Casey are there and they show him the ropes. Casey lets Austin know that there is work for the weekend on a construction site so off they go. There David sees Austin for the first time and the story really kicks off.
David is 15 years older than Austin and, some of the time, this is really obvious. Other times, not so much. I found it hard at times to stick with Austin's character just because he did act so immature but then you have to remember the abuse that he lived with plus his age and it does become more understandable. David certainly deserves a medal for putting up with it though - although he does also have his own temper tantrums in the book. You don't actually learn that much more about David's past than what you read in the synopsis which I found a bit of a shame.
The supporting characters are brilliantly written and do just that... support the main leads. Chad is brilliant because he has concerns about David and Austin and isn't afraid to say so. However, he also is prepared to say that he was wrong and even to tell David when he's behaving like an idiot. Becky and Bree help the female side of the story and both are warm and caring towards Austin which helps him. Casey - I'd like to see a follow-up on him even though he's not the most likeable character in the book I just know there's more to him. I don't know if I want him to have a HEA with Bree though, I sort of feel he's put her through the mill enough!
Highly recommended for all fans of the M/M genre.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
August 9, 2016
David is 15 years older than Austin and, some of the time, this is really obvious. Other times, not so much. I found it hard at times to stick with Austin's character just because he did act so immature but then you have to remember the abuse that he lived with plus his age and it does become more understandable. David certainly deserves a medal for putting up with it though - although he does also have his own temper tantrums in the book. You don't actually learn that much more about David's past than what you read in the synopsis which I found a bit of a shame.
The supporting characters are brilliantly written and do just that... support the main leads. Chad is brilliant because he has concerns about David and Austin and isn't afraid to say so. However, he also is prepared to say that he was wrong and even to tell David when he's behaving like an idiot. Becky and Bree help the female side of the story and both are warm and caring towards Austin which helps him. Casey - I'd like to see a follow-up on him even though he's not the most likeable character in the book I just know there's more to him. I don't know if I want him to have a HEA with Bree though, I sort of feel he's put her through the mill enough!
Highly recommended for all fans of the M/M genre.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
August 9, 2016
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Battle of the Sexes (2016) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tennis and sex, but without the grunting.
Here’s a good test of someone’s age…. ask the question “Billie-Jean?”. Millennials will probably come back with “Huh?”; those in their 30’s or 40’s might come back with “Michael Jackson!”; those older than that will probably reply “King!”.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
“Battle of the Sexes” (which I just managed to catch before it left cinemas) tells the true-life story of US tennis star Billie-Jean King (Emma Stone, “La La Land“). The year is 1973 and Billie-Jean is riding high as the Number 1 female tennis player. She is a feminist; she is married (to hunk Larry – no not that one – King played by Austin Stowell (“Whiplash“, “Bridge of Spies“)); …. and she is also attracted to women, not something she has yet acted on. That all changes when her path crosses with LA-hairdresser Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough, “Birdman“, “Oblivion”).
But this is a side story: the main event is a bet made by aging ex-star Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell, “Foxcatcher“); that – even at his age – as a man he could beat the leading female tennis player of the day.
The film is gloriously retro, starting with the old-school 20th Century Fox production logo. And it contains breathtakingly sexist dialogue by writer Simon Beaufoy (“Everest“, “The Full Monty”). Surely men couldn’t have been so crass and outrageous in the 70’s? Sorry ladies, but the answer is yes, and the film is testament to how far women’s rights have come in 50 years.
This is a tour de force in acting from both Emma Stone and Steve Carell, particularly the latter: a scene where Carell tries to re-engage with his estranged wife (Elisabeth Shue, “Leaving Las Vegas”) is both nuanced and heart-breaking. Stone’s performance is also praiseworthy, although it feels slightly less so as it is an impersonation of a (relatively) well-known figure: this is extremely well-studied though, right down to her strutting walk around the court which I had both forgotten and was immediately again reminded of.
One of my favourite movie awards are the Screen Actor’s Guild (SAG) “cast” awards that celebrate ensemble performances, and here is a film that should have been nominated (it unfortunately wasn’t). Andrea Riseborough; Natalie Morales (as fellow tennis player Rosie Casals); comedian Sarah Silverman (“A Million Ways to Die in the West“), almost unrecognisable as the brash publicist Gladys Heldman; Bill Pullman as LTA head Jack Kramer; the great Alan Cumming (“The Good Wife”) as the team’s flamboyant, gay, costume designer; Lewis Pullman as Riggs’s son Larry; Jessica McNamee (magnetic eyes!) as King’s Australian tennis nemesis Margaret Court. All bounce off the leads, and each other, just beautifully.
Cinematography by Linus Sandgren (“La La Land“) and editing by Pamela Martin (“Little Miss Sunshine”) unite to deliver one of the most sexually charged haircuts you are ever likely to see on the screen. For those put off by this aspect of the storyline, the “girl-on-girl action” is pretty tastefully done and not overly graphic: it’s mostly “first-base” stuff rather than “third-base”!
“What a waste of a lovely night”. Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) and Billie-Jean (Emma Stone) get serious.
Directed with panache by the co-directors of the 2006 smash “Little Miss Sunshine” – Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris – all in all it’s a delight, especially for older audiences who will get a blast of nostalgia from days when sports were still played at a slightly more leisurely pace… and definitely without the grunting.
Fred (860 KP) rated Captain Marvel (2019) in Movies
Apr 29, 2019
Not worth your time
Let's face it, Marvel doesn't really have any female characters that can lead a movie by themselves. We are told this is the first, but yet our main character is surrounded by men & well established characters like Nick Fury & Agent Coulson from S.H.I.E.L.D.
This movie was surrounded by controversy because it's star, Brie Larson, said something about the movie being for the empowerment of women & doesn't care what white men think about it. This set off white men who boycotted the movie, which didn't amount to much, since the movie was still a hit. But did it deserve it?
Okay, so when I see a movie, I quite frankly watch the movie & base my review on it. Yes, I'm a white male who should be bothered by Larson's words, but being a movie fan & a superhero movie fan, I am able to block that out & watch the movie.
So, here we go. I am a Fantastic Four fan. They have been & always will be my favorite comic book. And so, I was looking forward to finally seeing the Skrulls on film. I won't give anything away, but I'll say the Skrulls were done very well, as were the Kree. Now we've seen the Kree before in the Marvel films, but not the Skrulls. So, the movie has that going for it.
The effects to give us a young Samuel Jackson & a young Clark Gregg have been perfected. Yes, we've seen it before, but now it's not even noticeable.
Now, let's get to the movie itself. It's typical Marvel fare, starts off good, gets boring, ends with a bang. The story is quite mediocre, with no real surprises. It's set in the 90s, to try to get that nostalgia people love in today's film. But quite frankly, the 90s were not that great. The music sucked (evidenced by the horrible songs in this movie) & had nothing worth while to be nostalgic over. Yeah, you 90s kids will disagree, but don't worry, the music's only got worse since then, so at least you music is better than the last 20 years'. Now, get off my lawn, punks!
The main problem with this movie is Captain Marvel herself. Like I said, she's not a great enough character to pull off having her own movie to begin with. The character is not a strong character. Yes, she's powerful, but that's not what I mean. I mean she's not a huge comic book character. Is she as well know as let's say, Wonder Woman? Not even close. I can guarantee that most of the people who saw this movie knew little about the character. It's not Marvel's fault. See, although the new thing in movies is to have strong women in the leads, to use older comic book characters doesn't work too well. Women in the comics were hardly represented the way they are in the films of today. They were always weaker, always the damsels in distress. So when today we get the movie people saying "This female character is the strongest in the universe." or "This female character is the smartest in the universe.", it takes years of pushing aside comic book discrimination to accept that.
But okay, I can push that aside. An even bigger problem is Brie Larson herself. She is bland to say the least. We needed a strong actor to push this character in our faces & say "Yeah! She's the best! A real hero!" But, no. She's not. She doesn't even make the character interesting at all. She's a shell of a character. At the end when she's flighting & flying around & smashing things, she feels like she's a CGI puppet being pushed through the scene. There's no sense of power. I don't care about her. I'm not cheering her on, nor am I wanting her to fail. There's just nothing. When she appears in Endgame, it's the same feeling. If the main character is uninteresting, how can the movie be any good?
In the end, I'm giving this one of the lowest scores of all the Marvel films. If not for the supporting cast, which were good, I probably would have given this a 2 out of 10. This movie is unnecessary to the overall plot of the MCU. There are some good lines, good parts, but not enough to want to watch it again.
This movie was surrounded by controversy because it's star, Brie Larson, said something about the movie being for the empowerment of women & doesn't care what white men think about it. This set off white men who boycotted the movie, which didn't amount to much, since the movie was still a hit. But did it deserve it?
Okay, so when I see a movie, I quite frankly watch the movie & base my review on it. Yes, I'm a white male who should be bothered by Larson's words, but being a movie fan & a superhero movie fan, I am able to block that out & watch the movie.
So, here we go. I am a Fantastic Four fan. They have been & always will be my favorite comic book. And so, I was looking forward to finally seeing the Skrulls on film. I won't give anything away, but I'll say the Skrulls were done very well, as were the Kree. Now we've seen the Kree before in the Marvel films, but not the Skrulls. So, the movie has that going for it.
The effects to give us a young Samuel Jackson & a young Clark Gregg have been perfected. Yes, we've seen it before, but now it's not even noticeable.
Now, let's get to the movie itself. It's typical Marvel fare, starts off good, gets boring, ends with a bang. The story is quite mediocre, with no real surprises. It's set in the 90s, to try to get that nostalgia people love in today's film. But quite frankly, the 90s were not that great. The music sucked (evidenced by the horrible songs in this movie) & had nothing worth while to be nostalgic over. Yeah, you 90s kids will disagree, but don't worry, the music's only got worse since then, so at least you music is better than the last 20 years'. Now, get off my lawn, punks!
The main problem with this movie is Captain Marvel herself. Like I said, she's not a great enough character to pull off having her own movie to begin with. The character is not a strong character. Yes, she's powerful, but that's not what I mean. I mean she's not a huge comic book character. Is she as well know as let's say, Wonder Woman? Not even close. I can guarantee that most of the people who saw this movie knew little about the character. It's not Marvel's fault. See, although the new thing in movies is to have strong women in the leads, to use older comic book characters doesn't work too well. Women in the comics were hardly represented the way they are in the films of today. They were always weaker, always the damsels in distress. So when today we get the movie people saying "This female character is the strongest in the universe." or "This female character is the smartest in the universe.", it takes years of pushing aside comic book discrimination to accept that.
But okay, I can push that aside. An even bigger problem is Brie Larson herself. She is bland to say the least. We needed a strong actor to push this character in our faces & say "Yeah! She's the best! A real hero!" But, no. She's not. She doesn't even make the character interesting at all. She's a shell of a character. At the end when she's flighting & flying around & smashing things, she feels like she's a CGI puppet being pushed through the scene. There's no sense of power. I don't care about her. I'm not cheering her on, nor am I wanting her to fail. There's just nothing. When she appears in Endgame, it's the same feeling. If the main character is uninteresting, how can the movie be any good?
In the end, I'm giving this one of the lowest scores of all the Marvel films. If not for the supporting cast, which were good, I probably would have given this a 2 out of 10. This movie is unnecessary to the overall plot of the MCU. There are some good lines, good parts, but not enough to want to watch it again.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated The Waking Land (The Waking Land, #1) in Books
May 16, 2018
Looking for a delightful, magical read? Callie Bates’s The Waking Land may sate your hunger. With several strong, female leads (like Rhia Knoll), the practice of forbidden arts, war, and just a taste of romance, this book easily lands as one of my most enjoyable reads so far this year.
I can honestly say this is one of the few books where the main character begins as the weakest. When we meet Lady Elanna Valtai, she appears weak and, quite honestly, brainwashed by her Ereni up-bringing. Throughout the first two-thirds of the novel, El proves to be unreliable. She is clueless as to where her loyalties truly lie, even as the truth rams itself down her throat. Fortunately, those she counts among her friends know what they’re doing and don’t have to rely on her for quite a while.
Loyce, the new Queen of Eren, on the other hand is an awful brat. Unfaithful to her husband (who readers never meet), she colludes with an equally disgusting noble boy, Denis Falconier. Their command over the Butcher of Novarre strikes fear into the hearts of those that dare to rebel. And the Butcher? He’s an altogether interesting figure on his own. Trust me on that one.
Eren and Caeris, the lands where this tale takes place, on beautifully rendered, proving Bates’s strength with the written word. Her command of language coupled with her love of nature come together seamlessly, visualizing a truly fantastic world. The story Bates weaves into this battle-worn land offers readers a faint taste of epic fantasy, in a style pleasing for fans of young adult literature. For some, The Waking Land may be the gateway to delving into high fantasy – Bates’s concept of magic is that wonderful.
The Waking Land is a fantastic ride through a world that fears magic. It is the timeless tale of how war erodes nations. Because of El’s wishy-washy portrayal and the sheer fact that we don’t see a lot of action until the last fifteen percent of the book, I cannot give this one five stars. A four though, certainly.
I would like to thank NetGalley, the publisher, and the author for providing me with a free copy of this book for the purpose of unbiased review.
I can honestly say this is one of the few books where the main character begins as the weakest. When we meet Lady Elanna Valtai, she appears weak and, quite honestly, brainwashed by her Ereni up-bringing. Throughout the first two-thirds of the novel, El proves to be unreliable. She is clueless as to where her loyalties truly lie, even as the truth rams itself down her throat. Fortunately, those she counts among her friends know what they’re doing and don’t have to rely on her for quite a while.
Loyce, the new Queen of Eren, on the other hand is an awful brat. Unfaithful to her husband (who readers never meet), she colludes with an equally disgusting noble boy, Denis Falconier. Their command over the Butcher of Novarre strikes fear into the hearts of those that dare to rebel. And the Butcher? He’s an altogether interesting figure on his own. Trust me on that one.
Eren and Caeris, the lands where this tale takes place, on beautifully rendered, proving Bates’s strength with the written word. Her command of language coupled with her love of nature come together seamlessly, visualizing a truly fantastic world. The story Bates weaves into this battle-worn land offers readers a faint taste of epic fantasy, in a style pleasing for fans of young adult literature. For some, The Waking Land may be the gateway to delving into high fantasy – Bates’s concept of magic is that wonderful.
The Waking Land is a fantastic ride through a world that fears magic. It is the timeless tale of how war erodes nations. Because of El’s wishy-washy portrayal and the sheer fact that we don’t see a lot of action until the last fifteen percent of the book, I cannot give this one five stars. A four though, certainly.
I would like to thank NetGalley, the publisher, and the author for providing me with a free copy of this book for the purpose of unbiased review.
City of Girls
10.0
Rate It
Book
From the # 1 New York Times bestselling author of Eat, Pray, Love and The Signature of All Things, a...
Lindsay (1700 KP) rated Bound Across Time (Bound #1) in Books
Jun 16, 2024 - 5:54 AM
Bound Across Time is intrigued with the title. The description also pulled me in. Who doesn't like a bit of paranormal with historical fiction mixed in? I was surprised by something I usually do not read, which brings in some magic.
Bound Across Time offers a unique perspective, blending historical fiction with elements of time travel or 'time slipping '. The narrative is enriched by a female main character, a rarity in this genre. Alongside her, a male main character adds depth to the story. The book initially presents itself as a blend of paranormal romance and historical fiction, a combination that it delivers on.
Though most of the story action takes place in the castle and its grounds, I do like that the author included a bit of witchcraft and soulers. Though the pace of the book at the beginning is a bit slow, it does pick up and get a bit more interesting when things start to happen without FMC and our MMC meeting each other.
Bound Across Time weaves a tantalizing mystery into its narrative, keeping the reader on the edge of their seat. The FMC's initial ignorance of her family history adds a layer of intrigue, and as the story unfolds, her research on a young man who is a ghost leads to unexpected and fascinating revelations. This element of suspense is a major draw for readers interested in historical fiction with a paranormal twist.
CeCe wants to go to Wales to use her history degree. What she finds is different from what she expected. The plot is really good. However, I was unsure if CeCe found out who she was in the plot. But it was good nonetheless. Mixing in love and witchcraft and a little magic was really good. I enjoyed it and will read more about it. The ending has me wanting more. I would have liked to hear more about CeCe and her lover.
This book may be your ally if you're a fan of witchcraft and historical fiction with a paranormal romance. I was craving to find out more about CeCe and what happened at the end. I wanted more, and there is a bit of explicit sex in this book, but nothing to offend anyone. Does CeCe and her lover have sons or not, or does CeCe have a big family? You will need to find out by reading.
Bound Across Time offers a unique perspective, blending historical fiction with elements of time travel or 'time slipping '. The narrative is enriched by a female main character, a rarity in this genre. Alongside her, a male main character adds depth to the story. The book initially presents itself as a blend of paranormal romance and historical fiction, a combination that it delivers on.
Though most of the story action takes place in the castle and its grounds, I do like that the author included a bit of witchcraft and soulers. Though the pace of the book at the beginning is a bit slow, it does pick up and get a bit more interesting when things start to happen without FMC and our MMC meeting each other.
Bound Across Time weaves a tantalizing mystery into its narrative, keeping the reader on the edge of their seat. The FMC's initial ignorance of her family history adds a layer of intrigue, and as the story unfolds, her research on a young man who is a ghost leads to unexpected and fascinating revelations. This element of suspense is a major draw for readers interested in historical fiction with a paranormal twist.
CeCe wants to go to Wales to use her history degree. What she finds is different from what she expected. The plot is really good. However, I was unsure if CeCe found out who she was in the plot. But it was good nonetheless. Mixing in love and witchcraft and a little magic was really good. I enjoyed it and will read more about it. The ending has me wanting more. I would have liked to hear more about CeCe and her lover.
This book may be your ally if you're a fan of witchcraft and historical fiction with a paranormal romance. I was craving to find out more about CeCe and what happened at the end. I wanted more, and there is a bit of explicit sex in this book, but nothing to offend anyone. Does CeCe and her lover have sons or not, or does CeCe have a big family? You will need to find out by reading.
JT (287 KP) rated Dredd (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
From the opening slow motion bullet to the face and exit wound that leaves a spray of deep red across the screen, it’s clear to see that this Dredd reboot is all about eradicating the memory of Stallone. It also does its best to stay true to the graphic novels in which this Judge Dredd leaves his helmet on for the entirety.
Karl Urban steps into the boots for this outing and complete with grizzled voice that echoes of Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry he goes up against female villain Ma-Ma (Headey) who is as nasty as she is ruthless.
Mega City one, set on the East Coast and running from Boston to Washington DC is the Judges stomping ground and its being overrun by a new drug called SLO-MO in which users experience reality at a fraction of the speed. When a routine homicide leads Dredd and rookie Judge Cassandra Anderson (Thirlby) to The Peach Trees, a 200-storey slum tower block (wait, another tower block?), they must fight their way through the scum to get to the top and bring down the prostitute turned drug lord.
The film is certainly grittier and bloodier than its almost comic predecessor, and director Travis does not shy away from this.
An early encounter in which Dredd and Anderson infiltrate a drug house is slowed right down, maybe in some way to mirror the feeling the SLO-MO drug has on its users. Bullets and blood fly as the casualties and body count rise significantly, Dredd quips the occasional one liner with deadpan expression “negotiation’s over. Sentence is death.”
Those that saw The Raid would have been mesmerized by the action which was none stop from start to finish, sadly Dredd doesn’t live up to those high expectations but does its best to stay with mainstream carnage, of which there is plenty to satisfy.
It’s all about the facial expression
Thirlby’s psychic abilities prove useful but almost disappointing that she can second guess her opponents, a mutant, she’d probably fit in well with the X-Men. She’s the sense of reason to Dredd’s brute force, although most of the time he’s right in what he does, after all he is the law. The film is stripped back, humour is used when needed, and the action set pieces are exceptional. Urban a long time supporting actor now gets a chance to be front and centre in a franchise that can really go places.
Karl Urban steps into the boots for this outing and complete with grizzled voice that echoes of Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry he goes up against female villain Ma-Ma (Headey) who is as nasty as she is ruthless.
Mega City one, set on the East Coast and running from Boston to Washington DC is the Judges stomping ground and its being overrun by a new drug called SLO-MO in which users experience reality at a fraction of the speed. When a routine homicide leads Dredd and rookie Judge Cassandra Anderson (Thirlby) to The Peach Trees, a 200-storey slum tower block (wait, another tower block?), they must fight their way through the scum to get to the top and bring down the prostitute turned drug lord.
The film is certainly grittier and bloodier than its almost comic predecessor, and director Travis does not shy away from this.
An early encounter in which Dredd and Anderson infiltrate a drug house is slowed right down, maybe in some way to mirror the feeling the SLO-MO drug has on its users. Bullets and blood fly as the casualties and body count rise significantly, Dredd quips the occasional one liner with deadpan expression “negotiation’s over. Sentence is death.”
Those that saw The Raid would have been mesmerized by the action which was none stop from start to finish, sadly Dredd doesn’t live up to those high expectations but does its best to stay with mainstream carnage, of which there is plenty to satisfy.
It’s all about the facial expression
Thirlby’s psychic abilities prove useful but almost disappointing that she can second guess her opponents, a mutant, she’d probably fit in well with the X-Men. She’s the sense of reason to Dredd’s brute force, although most of the time he’s right in what he does, after all he is the law. The film is stripped back, humour is used when needed, and the action set pieces are exceptional. Urban a long time supporting actor now gets a chance to be front and centre in a franchise that can really go places.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Trouble In Paradise (1932) in Movies
Sep 30, 2019
Highly Entertaining
I love that I don’t have to score on a curve when watching the classics. Movies like Trouble In Paradise really do stand the test of time and are quality movies in comparison with even today’s standards. Sure, techniques may have been adjusted for today’s time, but the movie as is is truly a joy. in Trouble In Paradise, two crooks in love plan a heist against a perfume company executive, but the plot truly thickens when things don’t quite go as planned.
Acting: 10
When it comes to performances, each person played their part extremely well. However, I have to give the biggest nod to Herbert Marshall as Gaston. He handles the role with a suave nature that takes over every scene he appears in. He handles the emotional brunt of the movie in a way where you can truly see how torn he is.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Gaston will make you laugh but he will also make you feel. He is a flawed character with many layers. I love that you really don’t know what he’s going to do next. While I thoroughly enjoyed the two female leads as well, Gaston carried the movie in my opinion.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The movie takes you all over Paris from grand hotels to expansive ballrooms. I enjoyed how director Ernst Lubitsch captures the sleight of hand from the thieves. There were also a few shots hit from different angles to capture point-of-view that I especially appreciated. Overall, the cinematography added to the beauty of the film.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 9
What makes this film so entertaining and separates it from other classics is that feeling of the unknown. I couldn’t guess what was going to happen if I tried and it made me appreciate the movie that much more. In addition, not only does it have its hilarious moments but some emotional ones as well. Trouble In Paradise takes you on a rollercoaster from start to finish.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Great story that keeps you guessing. Also, the movie proves that less is more with a plot that’s extremely easy to follow but also intuitive. In the end it’s a story that leaves much for interpretation and lets you decide how you think things unfold.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 99
From the beginning, this movie grabs your attention and holds it until the last shot. The more I thought about Trouble In Paradise, the more it captivated me. If you are looking for a quality classic, look no further.
Acting: 10
When it comes to performances, each person played their part extremely well. However, I have to give the biggest nod to Herbert Marshall as Gaston. He handles the role with a suave nature that takes over every scene he appears in. He handles the emotional brunt of the movie in a way where you can truly see how torn he is.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Gaston will make you laugh but he will also make you feel. He is a flawed character with many layers. I love that you really don’t know what he’s going to do next. While I thoroughly enjoyed the two female leads as well, Gaston carried the movie in my opinion.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
The movie takes you all over Paris from grand hotels to expansive ballrooms. I enjoyed how director Ernst Lubitsch captures the sleight of hand from the thieves. There were also a few shots hit from different angles to capture point-of-view that I especially appreciated. Overall, the cinematography added to the beauty of the film.
Conflict: 10
Entertainment Value: 9
What makes this film so entertaining and separates it from other classics is that feeling of the unknown. I couldn’t guess what was going to happen if I tried and it made me appreciate the movie that much more. In addition, not only does it have its hilarious moments but some emotional ones as well. Trouble In Paradise takes you on a rollercoaster from start to finish.
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Plot: 10
Great story that keeps you guessing. Also, the movie proves that less is more with a plot that’s extremely easy to follow but also intuitive. In the end it’s a story that leaves much for interpretation and lets you decide how you think things unfold.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 99
From the beginning, this movie grabs your attention and holds it until the last shot. The more I thought about Trouble In Paradise, the more it captivated me. If you are looking for a quality classic, look no further.