Search
Search results
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated If I Stay (If I Stay, #1) in Books
May 10, 2018
Mia is a typical 17 year old girl. She has a great family, plays the cello, has good friends and an incredible boyfriend. On a very non-typical day in her home of Oregon, a dusting of snow keeps the whole family home from work and school. Her family decides to take a drive and visit some family and friends. Unfortunately, on this journey, tragedy strikes. Mia's family is involved in a car accident. As Mia's life hangs in the balance, she reflects on all that has happened in her short time on earth and what would or could happen if she decided to stay.
I thought this was going to be a tear-jerker, but it wasn't so much. The events that took place are sad for sure, but I didn't find myself crying like I thought I would. Imagine if everyone in your immediate family is killed in a car accident and you are the only survivor. What do you do? You watch your whole family laying in pools of blood and then you watch yourself being operated on and see the looks in the eyes of your friends and family as they try to make sense of it all as well. In the book, the movie Ghost is referenced, and this book does remind me a bit of that movie. Patrick Swayze is dead though, and Mia is just trying to figure out if she should stay with the living, or go and be with her parents and her brother. It's a hard decision to make and I'm not sure if it is one that I could make. For me or for any other member of my family. How can you make the decision to let someone live or die? How do you make that decision yourself? Are we really able to make that decision?
My favorite part of this book, is looking back into Mia's life. Getting an understanding of who she is and who her family was. I love the fact that her family was so close and most of her life treated her like a little adult instead of a child. They were encouraging and always there for her. Her boyfriend and her best friend were the same way. They may not have always agreed on everything, but they were always understanding and willing to give a listening ear. I'm not sure if the series follows Mia along the rest of her journey, but I would like to know what her decision was.
I thought this was going to be a tear-jerker, but it wasn't so much. The events that took place are sad for sure, but I didn't find myself crying like I thought I would. Imagine if everyone in your immediate family is killed in a car accident and you are the only survivor. What do you do? You watch your whole family laying in pools of blood and then you watch yourself being operated on and see the looks in the eyes of your friends and family as they try to make sense of it all as well. In the book, the movie Ghost is referenced, and this book does remind me a bit of that movie. Patrick Swayze is dead though, and Mia is just trying to figure out if she should stay with the living, or go and be with her parents and her brother. It's a hard decision to make and I'm not sure if it is one that I could make. For me or for any other member of my family. How can you make the decision to let someone live or die? How do you make that decision yourself? Are we really able to make that decision?
My favorite part of this book, is looking back into Mia's life. Getting an understanding of who she is and who her family was. I love the fact that her family was so close and most of her life treated her like a little adult instead of a child. They were encouraging and always there for her. Her boyfriend and her best friend were the same way. They may not have always agreed on everything, but they were always understanding and willing to give a listening ear. I'm not sure if the series follows Mia along the rest of her journey, but I would like to know what her decision was.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Ghostbusters (1984) in Movies
Apr 15, 2018
Stellar
A group of four armed with special proton packs come together to protect Manhattan from crazy supernatural forces that have taken hold of the city.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the opening scene, Peter Venkman (Bill Murray) is doing an ESP exercise with a couple. He's having them use their brain power to identify something from a card they can't see. He's clearly sweet on the girlfriend because he keeps giving her soft-lob answers while taking the boyfriend through hell. The scene is one of the best openers I've seen in a movie and is a clever, hilarious way to kick things off. It doesn't take long for you to fall in love with Murray's character.
Characters: 10
Without Venkman, the film doesn't exist period. He carries a lax, dry attitude while everyone else around him is freaking out and for good reason. He's not even close to being a scientist like his counterparts, but that's a strong reason for what makes the film so great. All four of the characters are unique and bring something different to the table. The supporting roles are also awesome, each providing their own quirky, unique flare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Considering the film was made in 1984 (and special effects have greatly increased since then), I was pretty happy with the visuals throughout Ghostbusters. The ghosts are creative and original providing enough variety without being overly repetitive. This film put Slimer on the map, a disgusting green blob of a ghost that tries to devour everything in his path. Watching food pass from his mouth and through his body before exiting out the other end was a hilarious touch.
Oh, and can't forget about Stay Puft. Fun times watching that scene unfold.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Consistent blending of comedy and the paranormal helps maintain a healthy pace. The dialogue is so crisp and on point, it's hard to get bored as there is always something happening or something hilarious being said. Director Ivan Reitman even managed to take advantage of moments that would have otherwise been bland. The best example that comes to mind is the scene where they are riding up an elevator. Instead of just sitting around aimlessly, the group takes turns firing up their proton packs for the first time. One memorable scene among many.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Ghostbusters is an unforgettable ride from start to finish. It's one of those films you can watch over and over and it never gets old. A definite classic.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
In the opening scene, Peter Venkman (Bill Murray) is doing an ESP exercise with a couple. He's having them use their brain power to identify something from a card they can't see. He's clearly sweet on the girlfriend because he keeps giving her soft-lob answers while taking the boyfriend through hell. The scene is one of the best openers I've seen in a movie and is a clever, hilarious way to kick things off. It doesn't take long for you to fall in love with Murray's character.
Characters: 10
Without Venkman, the film doesn't exist period. He carries a lax, dry attitude while everyone else around him is freaking out and for good reason. He's not even close to being a scientist like his counterparts, but that's a strong reason for what makes the film so great. All four of the characters are unique and bring something different to the table. The supporting roles are also awesome, each providing their own quirky, unique flare.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Considering the film was made in 1984 (and special effects have greatly increased since then), I was pretty happy with the visuals throughout Ghostbusters. The ghosts are creative and original providing enough variety without being overly repetitive. This film put Slimer on the map, a disgusting green blob of a ghost that tries to devour everything in his path. Watching food pass from his mouth and through his body before exiting out the other end was a hilarious touch.
Oh, and can't forget about Stay Puft. Fun times watching that scene unfold.
Conflict: 10
Genre: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Consistent blending of comedy and the paranormal helps maintain a healthy pace. The dialogue is so crisp and on point, it's hard to get bored as there is always something happening or something hilarious being said. Director Ivan Reitman even managed to take advantage of moments that would have otherwise been bland. The best example that comes to mind is the scene where they are riding up an elevator. Instead of just sitting around aimlessly, the group takes turns firing up their proton packs for the first time. One memorable scene among many.
Plot: 10
Resolution: 10
Overall: 100
Ghostbusters is an unforgettable ride from start to finish. It's one of those films you can watch over and over and it never gets old. A definite classic.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Among the Ten Thousand Things in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Review on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/2016/01/oh-im-becoming-ghost-in-your-life-and.html">blog here</a>.
Jack Shanley is a fairly well-known New York artist. He's a married father of two. He's also an adulterer, who carries on affairs in his New York studio. This comes back to bite him, so to speak, when one of his exes sends his wife a large box chronicling their entire relationship - emails, texts, sexts - all printed and contained in this one box. The box is delivered to Jack's apartment and opened by his eleven-year-old daughter, Kay, and fifteen-year-old son, Simon. They show the box to their mother, Deb, forcing her to confront the many flaws of her husband. Meanwhile, Kay and Simon are (justifiably) traumatized by the box's contents and the possible dissolution of their parents' marriage.
This was an odd book. As a child of divorce, a lot of this book hit home, and I felt myself feeling a great deal of sympathy for Deb, Kay, and Simon - especially as they disappear off to their vacation home, of sorts, to recover. (Alas, no vacation home when I was a child.) Julia Pierpoint is certainly a strong writer and her prose is lovely and well-crafted. Still, the book often just seems a little flat.
The strangest part of this book, to me, as many other reviewers have pointed out - is that is constructed in four parts - parts one and three basically deal with the immediate aftermath of the box's delivery and how the family reacts. Parts two and four tell us what happen to Jack, Deb, Kay, and Simon for their entire lives. It's an odd author tool, and I'm not sure it entirely works. For me, I was caught up enough in Part One's tale and then found Part Two incredibly jarring - even more so to be dumped back into the current story at Part Three. Part Four repeats Two a bit and tells a bit more about what happens to the characters. It's an odd device, and I really would have preferred not to have had Part Two stuck in there at all. I suppose it's an artistic overreach that appeals to critics but not most actual readers.
Overall, I found the book an intriguing look at a family dealing with a father's betrayal. Not a ton happens - it's not that sort of book - but Pierpont's writing is strong, and I liked Simon and Kay. I am not sure the book is one that will leave a lasting impression with me, though.
Jack Shanley is a fairly well-known New York artist. He's a married father of two. He's also an adulterer, who carries on affairs in his New York studio. This comes back to bite him, so to speak, when one of his exes sends his wife a large box chronicling their entire relationship - emails, texts, sexts - all printed and contained in this one box. The box is delivered to Jack's apartment and opened by his eleven-year-old daughter, Kay, and fifteen-year-old son, Simon. They show the box to their mother, Deb, forcing her to confront the many flaws of her husband. Meanwhile, Kay and Simon are (justifiably) traumatized by the box's contents and the possible dissolution of their parents' marriage.
This was an odd book. As a child of divorce, a lot of this book hit home, and I felt myself feeling a great deal of sympathy for Deb, Kay, and Simon - especially as they disappear off to their vacation home, of sorts, to recover. (Alas, no vacation home when I was a child.) Julia Pierpoint is certainly a strong writer and her prose is lovely and well-crafted. Still, the book often just seems a little flat.
The strangest part of this book, to me, as many other reviewers have pointed out - is that is constructed in four parts - parts one and three basically deal with the immediate aftermath of the box's delivery and how the family reacts. Parts two and four tell us what happen to Jack, Deb, Kay, and Simon for their entire lives. It's an odd author tool, and I'm not sure it entirely works. For me, I was caught up enough in Part One's tale and then found Part Two incredibly jarring - even more so to be dumped back into the current story at Part Three. Part Four repeats Two a bit and tells a bit more about what happens to the characters. It's an odd device, and I really would have preferred not to have had Part Two stuck in there at all. I suppose it's an artistic overreach that appeals to critics but not most actual readers.
Overall, I found the book an intriguing look at a family dealing with a father's betrayal. Not a ton happens - it's not that sort of book - but Pierpont's writing is strong, and I liked Simon and Kay. I am not sure the book is one that will leave a lasting impression with me, though.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Red Clocks in Books
Jul 31, 2018
Red Clocks first caught my attention because it's set in a small fishing town in Oregon, my home state. After that, learning that it's a dystopia where abortion and in vitro fertilization have both been banned outright meant I HAD to read it. Of course, I got it from the library some weeks ago and had so many other books to read that I didn't get to it until the day it was due back to the library! Luckily, I read fast!
I think the cover description oversells the book a little. I wouldn't call Gin's trial "frenzied" nor the drama exactly "riveting" but it did keep my attention throughout the book. I really enjoyed the relationships between the characters, and the point that none of them really know what is going on in each other's personal lives. One moment I particularly liked is slightly spoilery, but I loved how Ro was able to put her personal feelings aside to help Mattie, her student. That was really, really hard for her, but she recognized how much damage it would do to Mattie to not help her.
I think I found Gin the most interesting - given all the reading I've been doing lately about autism, her entire personality screams autism to me, but she was never labeled as autistic. So I'm marking her as a possibly autistic character. (I'd love if any of my autistic readers could weigh in on that, if you've read the book!) Between preferring to live in the woods with animals and NOT around people, specifically, and the way she reacts to the textures and smells in the jail when she's arrested (shoving the bleach-scented blankets as far away in the cell as possible, and refusing to eat the food), and how she stumbles over her answers in the courtroom when she's interrogated - it seems likely.
My only actual complaint about this book had nothing to do with the writing or plot! But it refers to the ghost pepper as "the hottest pepper known to man" which the Carolina Reaper growing in my backyard would have an issue with!
Other than that very minor quibble, I thought this dystopia was pretty good. I'm always interested in Reproductive Rights-related dystopias. This isn't as good as The Handmaid's Tale, but it's MILES better than Future Home of the Living God. It's good at showing the lengths women will go to, to ensure their own reproductive freedom. Outlawing abortion doesn't eliminate abortion. It just makes it less safe.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
I think the cover description oversells the book a little. I wouldn't call Gin's trial "frenzied" nor the drama exactly "riveting" but it did keep my attention throughout the book. I really enjoyed the relationships between the characters, and the point that none of them really know what is going on in each other's personal lives. One moment I particularly liked is slightly spoilery, but I loved how Ro was able to put her personal feelings aside to help Mattie, her student. That was really, really hard for her, but she recognized how much damage it would do to Mattie to not help her.
I think I found Gin the most interesting - given all the reading I've been doing lately about autism, her entire personality screams autism to me, but she was never labeled as autistic. So I'm marking her as a possibly autistic character. (I'd love if any of my autistic readers could weigh in on that, if you've read the book!) Between preferring to live in the woods with animals and NOT around people, specifically, and the way she reacts to the textures and smells in the jail when she's arrested (shoving the bleach-scented blankets as far away in the cell as possible, and refusing to eat the food), and how she stumbles over her answers in the courtroom when she's interrogated - it seems likely.
My only actual complaint about this book had nothing to do with the writing or plot! But it refers to the ghost pepper as "the hottest pepper known to man" which the Carolina Reaper growing in my backyard would have an issue with!
Other than that very minor quibble, I thought this dystopia was pretty good. I'm always interested in Reproductive Rights-related dystopias. This isn't as good as The Handmaid's Tale, but it's MILES better than Future Home of the Living God. It's good at showing the lengths women will go to, to ensure their own reproductive freedom. Outlawing abortion doesn't eliminate abortion. It just makes it less safe.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.wordpress.com
Darren (1599 KP) rated 1922 (2017) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 1922 starts as Wilfred James (Jane) is about to lose part of his property to his wife Arlette (Parker), Wilfred doesn’t want to lose the farmland he has raised his son Henry (Schmid) on and wants to come up with a way to keep all the land.
Wilfred’s plan is to get his son to help him murder Arlette, to get the financial gain of taking ownership of the property. The guilt of what he did only ends up driving Wilfred crazy here as the mental state start to unfold.
Thoughts on 1922
Characters – Wilfred is a farmer and father that doesn’t want to leave his farm, he designs a plan to get that as he looks to stay but soon his mind starts slipping into insanity. Arlette is the wife that wants to move away but has to overcome the husband’s decision not to, only to find herself murdered and visiting him in ghost form. Henry is the son that helps with the cover up, but soon goes out on his own to learn the harsh reality of the world.
Performances – Thomas Jane does give us a good performance in this film, but the rest of the cast are just ok, none of the performances drag us into the film in any way to see where it will end up going.
Story – The story was hard to follow, I think the idea is that one man loses everything because of killing his wife, the problem is that this is an incredibly slow-moving film that doesn’t seem to go very far or have any redeemable qualities. Is gets caught in the middle of a breakdown and a supernatural movie without being set on one that could make either feel stronger.
Crime/Horror/Mystery – There was a crime as it leads to a cover up of a murder which leads to the horror involved in the story as the past comes to haunt Wilfred.
Settings – The settings do fit the time in question which is fine but nothing stands out as the best of the best.
Special Effects – The effects are good when used but the film doesn’t just turn to effects to make things happen.
Scene of the Movie – Final Scene.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It was so so so so slow.
Final Thoughts – Well this is one of the dullest movies of the year, it has nothing happening for the most part and for a Stephen King spin it only disappoints.
Overall: Boring is being polite.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/10/24/1922-2017/
Wilfred’s plan is to get his son to help him murder Arlette, to get the financial gain of taking ownership of the property. The guilt of what he did only ends up driving Wilfred crazy here as the mental state start to unfold.
Thoughts on 1922
Characters – Wilfred is a farmer and father that doesn’t want to leave his farm, he designs a plan to get that as he looks to stay but soon his mind starts slipping into insanity. Arlette is the wife that wants to move away but has to overcome the husband’s decision not to, only to find herself murdered and visiting him in ghost form. Henry is the son that helps with the cover up, but soon goes out on his own to learn the harsh reality of the world.
Performances – Thomas Jane does give us a good performance in this film, but the rest of the cast are just ok, none of the performances drag us into the film in any way to see where it will end up going.
Story – The story was hard to follow, I think the idea is that one man loses everything because of killing his wife, the problem is that this is an incredibly slow-moving film that doesn’t seem to go very far or have any redeemable qualities. Is gets caught in the middle of a breakdown and a supernatural movie without being set on one that could make either feel stronger.
Crime/Horror/Mystery – There was a crime as it leads to a cover up of a murder which leads to the horror involved in the story as the past comes to haunt Wilfred.
Settings – The settings do fit the time in question which is fine but nothing stands out as the best of the best.
Special Effects – The effects are good when used but the film doesn’t just turn to effects to make things happen.
Scene of the Movie – Final Scene.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – It was so so so so slow.
Final Thoughts – Well this is one of the dullest movies of the year, it has nothing happening for the most part and for a Stephen King spin it only disappoints.
Overall: Boring is being polite.
https://moviesreview101.com/2017/10/24/1922-2017/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Blood Myth (2019) in Movies
Oct 31, 2019
Characters – James Lincoln is a journalist, his latest case involves in trying to debunk folklore which he is finding all too easy, until he learns about this newest one, which he decides to use as his final part of the article, he takes his fiancée who is pregnant and he has cheated on before to investigate. He spends time trying to find his missing fiancée learning that not everything is a myth. Harriet is the pregnant wife that joins James on his journey, she does disappear, being the mystery about what is going on. Alexandra is the local woman that has been studying the myth for years, being the only person that helps James out. We do meet plenty of locals, with most just dismissing James cries for help.
Performances – Jonathan McClean is the star of the show, he is involved in nearly every scene, it is his work dealing with being tired of the investigations, which is clear how he is dealing with this story. The rest of the cast don’t get much time to do anything more than the basics required, not given enough time to do much more.
Story – The story follows a journalist that is investigating myths and folklores with the latest one being one that might have more truths behind it. The story is interesting because it does show how frustrated the journalist is doing this story, which is against the normal as we usually see overly enthusiastic ghost hunters trying to debunk them. The story flows as James learns more about everything, but just like him, we don’t learn much about what is happening until he does. We do get plenty of mystery, but like most films like this the story ends up going in the same direction.
Horror – The horror in this film comes from the unknown, this does leave us wondering just what is going on, with the darkness and noise being used to the strongest effects.
Settings – The film is set in a small British village, which does help play into the folklore because the small villages are always going to have them.
Special Effects – The effects are saved for big moments in the film, they are kept hidden more than thrown onto the audience.
Scene of the Movie – The day after the first night.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Too much searching though.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror that does ask plenty of questions, with what is going on, only to follow a simple instruction on how everything ends up unfolding.
Overall: Folklore horror 101
Performances – Jonathan McClean is the star of the show, he is involved in nearly every scene, it is his work dealing with being tired of the investigations, which is clear how he is dealing with this story. The rest of the cast don’t get much time to do anything more than the basics required, not given enough time to do much more.
Story – The story follows a journalist that is investigating myths and folklores with the latest one being one that might have more truths behind it. The story is interesting because it does show how frustrated the journalist is doing this story, which is against the normal as we usually see overly enthusiastic ghost hunters trying to debunk them. The story flows as James learns more about everything, but just like him, we don’t learn much about what is happening until he does. We do get plenty of mystery, but like most films like this the story ends up going in the same direction.
Horror – The horror in this film comes from the unknown, this does leave us wondering just what is going on, with the darkness and noise being used to the strongest effects.
Settings – The film is set in a small British village, which does help play into the folklore because the small villages are always going to have them.
Special Effects – The effects are saved for big moments in the film, they are kept hidden more than thrown onto the audience.
Scene of the Movie – The day after the first night.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Too much searching though.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror that does ask plenty of questions, with what is going on, only to follow a simple instruction on how everything ends up unfolding.
Overall: Folklore horror 101
Erika (17789 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) in Movies
Dec 22, 2019
A Sequel to Force Awakens
It's no secret, I hate the Last Jedi. Now, at this point it's completely null and void, and I am thrilled. Yes, I threw shade at Rose, because I thought that them pushing her into the background was hilarious, and the correct thing to do with the vanilla-boring character. No hate towards Kelly Marie Tran, you can't fault her for her character being lame AF.
I debated on whether to write a spoiler filled review, or a non-spoiler review. I decided upon a non-spoiler review.
The first half of the film did have a ton of planet-hopping and moved very quickly. I think it was this way to sort of show the main trio working together. You know, since TLJ did nothing to develop their relationships to one another.
It was a mistake to keep Carrie Fisher in the film. The scenes with her felt forced and fake. She did serve some sort of purpose, but I feel like it would have made more sense had she been dead.
Finally, what we'd all been waiting for happened, Rey's family was finally revealed. It was a little anti-climactic, and predictable. The entire film was fairly predictable, but was that a bad thing? In my book, no, I like being right about my theories. I liked the ending, and thought that certain characters endings made sense.
I didn't think the cameos were all that much fan service, they could have thrown in a lot more... Like, who was piloting the Ghost (see Star Wars Rebels)? Was it Hera or Jaden Syndulla? I loved, loved everyone they included in the very specific group cameo.
Overall, it was a satisfactory ending. I'm going to have to read more about the Knights of Ren when the collected volume comes out.
I saw articles b-tching about the additional force powers and force-sensitive people, this hasn't been a secret. Force-sensitive beings: Chirrut Îmwe (Rogue One), Finn (suggested in TFA and TROS trailers), Maz Katana, Bendu (Rebels). Beings with additional force powers: The Child from the Mandalorian (healing and suggested telekinesis), Ezra Bridger from Rebels (speaks and has strong connections to animals), and Karr from the Force Collector (sees the past from touching artefacts). I'm now ready to see more of the Star Wars universe, without the Skywalker family being the focus. Knights of the Old Republic plz.
I debated on whether to write a spoiler filled review, or a non-spoiler review. I decided upon a non-spoiler review.
The first half of the film did have a ton of planet-hopping and moved very quickly. I think it was this way to sort of show the main trio working together. You know, since TLJ did nothing to develop their relationships to one another.
It was a mistake to keep Carrie Fisher in the film. The scenes with her felt forced and fake. She did serve some sort of purpose, but I feel like it would have made more sense had she been dead.
Finally, what we'd all been waiting for happened, Rey's family was finally revealed. It was a little anti-climactic, and predictable. The entire film was fairly predictable, but was that a bad thing? In my book, no, I like being right about my theories. I liked the ending, and thought that certain characters endings made sense.
I didn't think the cameos were all that much fan service, they could have thrown in a lot more... Like, who was piloting the Ghost (see Star Wars Rebels)? Was it Hera or Jaden Syndulla? I loved, loved everyone they included in the very specific group cameo.
Overall, it was a satisfactory ending. I'm going to have to read more about the Knights of Ren when the collected volume comes out.
I saw articles b-tching about the additional force powers and force-sensitive people, this hasn't been a secret. Force-sensitive beings: Chirrut Îmwe (Rogue One), Finn (suggested in TFA and TROS trailers), Maz Katana, Bendu (Rebels). Beings with additional force powers: The Child from the Mandalorian (healing and suggested telekinesis), Ezra Bridger from Rebels (speaks and has strong connections to animals), and Karr from the Force Collector (sees the past from touching artefacts). I'm now ready to see more of the Star Wars universe, without the Skywalker family being the focus. Knights of the Old Republic plz.
Deborah (162 KP) rated Six Tudor Queens: Katherine of Aragon, the True Queen: Six Tudor Queens 1 in Books
Dec 19, 2018
Weir again goes from traditionalist historian to historical novelist, but she can't seem to leave the historian bit behind. Much as I dislike wholesale abandonment of historical accuracy and the flagrant sensationalism of Phillipa Gregory and her Ilk, I really found this book over long and tedious - I could quite cheerfully have done some poisoning myself just to get the book over and done with! It feels like Weir has looked up every single historical quote she could find from people in the period and tried to squeeze them into the book. I had read biographies of the period that are more enlightening that this and do more to bring the people and period to life.
During the third quarter of the book, we get a lot of Henry coming in to visit Katherine, giving us a bit of plot exposition and then having a strop and stomping out like a child having a tantrum. After about the tenth occurrence this gets rather tedious and doesn't feel altogether likely.
I was slightly weirded by the implication that Katherine on arrival quite fancied the ten year old Henry and the bit in the Tower with the 'ghost lady' and the shivers down the spine in Peterborough cathedral seemed out of place and both only really play off if you have a knowledge of the period already, in which case you really don't need to be reading this.
Finally, for all the historical stuff Weir has stuffed in there, she really does need to pay better attention to her geography. I know Ampthill isn't that far from Dunstable, but I think I little effort would inform her that it's more like 14 miles and not the 4 she has in the book!
While the writing isn't awful, it's just not engaging and the book is far too long and becomes tedious. Does Weir really believe that Katherine believed that, after everything that he had done, Henry would meekly accept the Pope's vastly overdue ruling, put Anne and Elizabeth and the change of a male heir aside along with his leadership of the Church of England? hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I find it hard to beleive that Katherine was as stupid and naive as she comes across here. She says she still loves Henry and wouldn't do anything against him, yet writes to the Pope and the Emperor with a clear intention of inciting war! I think Weir means to make her sympathetic, but I just found her exasperating. I would recommend some good non-fiction book on the period ahead of this.
During the third quarter of the book, we get a lot of Henry coming in to visit Katherine, giving us a bit of plot exposition and then having a strop and stomping out like a child having a tantrum. After about the tenth occurrence this gets rather tedious and doesn't feel altogether likely.
I was slightly weirded by the implication that Katherine on arrival quite fancied the ten year old Henry and the bit in the Tower with the 'ghost lady' and the shivers down the spine in Peterborough cathedral seemed out of place and both only really play off if you have a knowledge of the period already, in which case you really don't need to be reading this.
Finally, for all the historical stuff Weir has stuffed in there, she really does need to pay better attention to her geography. I know Ampthill isn't that far from Dunstable, but I think I little effort would inform her that it's more like 14 miles and not the 4 she has in the book!
While the writing isn't awful, it's just not engaging and the book is far too long and becomes tedious. Does Weir really believe that Katherine believed that, after everything that he had done, Henry would meekly accept the Pope's vastly overdue ruling, put Anne and Elizabeth and the change of a male heir aside along with his leadership of the Church of England? hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I find it hard to beleive that Katherine was as stupid and naive as she comes across here. She says she still loves Henry and wouldn't do anything against him, yet writes to the Pope and the Emperor with a clear intention of inciting war! I think Weir means to make her sympathetic, but I just found her exasperating. I would recommend some good non-fiction book on the period ahead of this.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) in Movies
Jan 17, 2020
Implausibility Can't Stop This Fun Movie
The gang from the original are back to deal with new issues and square off against new zombies. Definitely not as good as the first, Zombieland: Double Tap packs enough of an entertaining punch to be worth your while.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
Conflict: 10
Between the group’s personal issues and loads beyond loads of zombies, the movie definitely isn’t short of conflict. The film wins ultimately with the originality and variety of the zombie kills. The action is fun and, although lighthearted at times, it keeps you engaged in the movie.
Entertainment Value: 8
There was some implausibility here that made it a challenge at times to enjoy the movie. I also felt like the movie spent more time than needed trying to “chase a ghost” rather than just stand out and be its own thing. In spite of those shortcomings, man was this movie fun to watch!
Memorability: 5
Its been-there-done-that feel keeps this movie out of the classics range. There are quite a few bright spots, but nothing that made me say, “I want to watch this again right now!” Good? Absolutely. Memorable? Meh…
Pace: 10
A quick adventure that moves at a solid clip. I was never bored at any point. In fact, I had to pee extremely bad at one point and was pissed (pun intended) I had to get up. Not surprising, I missed a pretty important part of the movie. Damn you, Alamo Drafthouse, for having bathrooms so far away! What I’m saying is, the story’s flow was extremely smooth.
Plot: 2
The story is so weak it’s maddening at times. I swear, if it wasn’t such an insanely fun movie to watch, I wouldn’t have scored it nearly as high. I say maddening because the first film had so many layers to it while this one seems content on being mediocre in story.
Resolution: 10
Fun ending with a great payoff. If you’re a fan of the original, make sure not to leave right away as the credits are coming up. Cracked me up for sure!
Overall: 80
Despite a plot as strong as Jello, Zombieland: Double Tap will entertain you if you allow yourself a suspension of disbelief. The fun characters and consistent action are enough to carry the movie as a whole. Not as good as the first, but certainly not the first sequel to suffer from that issue. I recommend!
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 8
Cinematography/Visuals: 7
Conflict: 10
Between the group’s personal issues and loads beyond loads of zombies, the movie definitely isn’t short of conflict. The film wins ultimately with the originality and variety of the zombie kills. The action is fun and, although lighthearted at times, it keeps you engaged in the movie.
Entertainment Value: 8
There was some implausibility here that made it a challenge at times to enjoy the movie. I also felt like the movie spent more time than needed trying to “chase a ghost” rather than just stand out and be its own thing. In spite of those shortcomings, man was this movie fun to watch!
Memorability: 5
Its been-there-done-that feel keeps this movie out of the classics range. There are quite a few bright spots, but nothing that made me say, “I want to watch this again right now!” Good? Absolutely. Memorable? Meh…
Pace: 10
A quick adventure that moves at a solid clip. I was never bored at any point. In fact, I had to pee extremely bad at one point and was pissed (pun intended) I had to get up. Not surprising, I missed a pretty important part of the movie. Damn you, Alamo Drafthouse, for having bathrooms so far away! What I’m saying is, the story’s flow was extremely smooth.
Plot: 2
The story is so weak it’s maddening at times. I swear, if it wasn’t such an insanely fun movie to watch, I wouldn’t have scored it nearly as high. I say maddening because the first film had so many layers to it while this one seems content on being mediocre in story.
Resolution: 10
Fun ending with a great payoff. If you’re a fan of the original, make sure not to leave right away as the credits are coming up. Cracked me up for sure!
Overall: 80
Despite a plot as strong as Jello, Zombieland: Double Tap will entertain you if you allow yourself a suspension of disbelief. The fun characters and consistent action are enough to carry the movie as a whole. Not as good as the first, but certainly not the first sequel to suffer from that issue. I recommend!
JT (287 KP) rated Insidious (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
James Wan has all the talent but for some reason is unable to put the killer instinct into his films and finish them off like they should be. With the exception of being one of the founding members of the Saw franchise, his films to date haven’t quite lived up to the expectations we know he can and should be able to deliver on.
Wan returns with Leigh Whannell the creator and writer of Saw, with the pair looking to yet again scare everyone shitless with a haunted house tale, this time focussing on a young boy whose slipped into a coma and drifted into the outer realms called The Further.
When writing Insidious Whannell wanted to make sure that he avoided all the haunted house cliches, and he pretty much did that. What he failed to do though was script a stronger third act, something which might have brought this up on a par with Saw.
Dalton is the one in peril as he suddenly slips into a coma one morning, his mother Renai (Byrne) is then forced to spend time looking after her trio of kids all the while looking over her shoulder, as she hears one bump to the next occurring both in broad daylight and at night.
After some decent scares from the outset including the old “he’s behind you” and murmurings through the baby monitor the film was almost guilty of slipping into a farce as our protagonist Josh Lambert (Wilson) was forced to engage in some astro physics in order to save the day.
It was a real shame as up till that point you’d have spent most of the run time hiding under the covers, as Wan introduced one jolt after another, some more subtle than others but ultimately offering the same desired effect.
The introduction of Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye) the Ghost hunter whose come to see what all the fuss is about is pretty much inevitable. Armed with the latest high tech equipment and a couple of geeks, the aptly named Specs and Tucker, provides much amusement as Rainier delivers the killer line “It’s not the house that’s haunted”.
The film moves through the gears well, but it’s that annoyingly poor third act that ruins it for me. It does try and redeem itself with an all too predictable ending, those that have seen Wan and Whannel’s other film Dead Silence will know what I mean.
At the end of the day you feel all Wan had to do was hit the target, but this is just off to the right!
Wan returns with Leigh Whannell the creator and writer of Saw, with the pair looking to yet again scare everyone shitless with a haunted house tale, this time focussing on a young boy whose slipped into a coma and drifted into the outer realms called The Further.
When writing Insidious Whannell wanted to make sure that he avoided all the haunted house cliches, and he pretty much did that. What he failed to do though was script a stronger third act, something which might have brought this up on a par with Saw.
Dalton is the one in peril as he suddenly slips into a coma one morning, his mother Renai (Byrne) is then forced to spend time looking after her trio of kids all the while looking over her shoulder, as she hears one bump to the next occurring both in broad daylight and at night.
After some decent scares from the outset including the old “he’s behind you” and murmurings through the baby monitor the film was almost guilty of slipping into a farce as our protagonist Josh Lambert (Wilson) was forced to engage in some astro physics in order to save the day.
It was a real shame as up till that point you’d have spent most of the run time hiding under the covers, as Wan introduced one jolt after another, some more subtle than others but ultimately offering the same desired effect.
The introduction of Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye) the Ghost hunter whose come to see what all the fuss is about is pretty much inevitable. Armed with the latest high tech equipment and a couple of geeks, the aptly named Specs and Tucker, provides much amusement as Rainier delivers the killer line “It’s not the house that’s haunted”.
The film moves through the gears well, but it’s that annoyingly poor third act that ruins it for me. It does try and redeem itself with an all too predictable ending, those that have seen Wan and Whannel’s other film Dead Silence will know what I mean.
At the end of the day you feel all Wan had to do was hit the target, but this is just off to the right!