Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Violent night (2022) in Movies
Dec 27, 2023
A Ton of Fun
The 2022 “Christmas” movie VIOLENT NIGHT was mis-marketed a year ago as ads made it appear that this was just another “slasher” flick, when…in fact…it is a fun action flick that settles the DIE HARD Christmas movie debate once and for all.
Compared to VIOLENT NIGHT, DIE HARD is not a Christmas movie for VIOLENT NIGHT (which is a DIE HARD knock-off) is MOST DEFINITELY a Christmas Movie, but instead of former Cop John McClane thwarting bad guys, it is SANTA CLAUS.
Yes, you read that right, Santa Claus.
Director Tommy Wirkola got the idea for VIOLENT NIGHT when watching another Christmas Classic - HOME ALONE. He thought that the traps Kevin sets up for the crooks would really do some physical damage to people and decided to make a movie that did just that…add a dash of “Die Hard with Santa Claus” and…voila…you got yourself a fun action flick.
David Harbour (STRANGER THINGS) hits just the right notes as a burned out Santa Claus who just wants to get through the night, but when he is stranded in an isolated compound (when his reindeer are scared away by gunfire) he must decide to stay and help or stay out of the way.
Jon Leguizamo (MOULIN ROUGE) is the “Hans Gruber” of this piece - a mercenary named SCROOGE and he is a “good enough” villain. While Leah Brady is “charming enough” as the little girl that Santa decides to help. All the rest of the hostages and mercenaries (including CHRISTMAS VACATION’s Beverly D’Angelo) are underwritten “cannon fodder” for the action that takes place.
And…that is just fine as this is an action/comedy flick, so the enjoyment lies in the creativity that Santa (and others) use in dispatching the bad guys. Candy Canes, Christmas Stars, Ice Skates and…yes…SnowThrowers are all used to the advantage of the good guys (and the ultimate demise of the bad guys).
It’s not going to win any Oscars, but Violent Night is a fun “anti-Holiday” action film that the older folks in the crowd will enjoy later at night after the kiddo-s go to bed.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
P.S.: Violent Night is streaming for free (with your Amazon Prime subscription) or you can rent or own it in many of the usual ways.
Compared to VIOLENT NIGHT, DIE HARD is not a Christmas movie for VIOLENT NIGHT (which is a DIE HARD knock-off) is MOST DEFINITELY a Christmas Movie, but instead of former Cop John McClane thwarting bad guys, it is SANTA CLAUS.
Yes, you read that right, Santa Claus.
Director Tommy Wirkola got the idea for VIOLENT NIGHT when watching another Christmas Classic - HOME ALONE. He thought that the traps Kevin sets up for the crooks would really do some physical damage to people and decided to make a movie that did just that…add a dash of “Die Hard with Santa Claus” and…voila…you got yourself a fun action flick.
David Harbour (STRANGER THINGS) hits just the right notes as a burned out Santa Claus who just wants to get through the night, but when he is stranded in an isolated compound (when his reindeer are scared away by gunfire) he must decide to stay and help or stay out of the way.
Jon Leguizamo (MOULIN ROUGE) is the “Hans Gruber” of this piece - a mercenary named SCROOGE and he is a “good enough” villain. While Leah Brady is “charming enough” as the little girl that Santa decides to help. All the rest of the hostages and mercenaries (including CHRISTMAS VACATION’s Beverly D’Angelo) are underwritten “cannon fodder” for the action that takes place.
And…that is just fine as this is an action/comedy flick, so the enjoyment lies in the creativity that Santa (and others) use in dispatching the bad guys. Candy Canes, Christmas Stars, Ice Skates and…yes…SnowThrowers are all used to the advantage of the good guys (and the ultimate demise of the bad guys).
It’s not going to win any Oscars, but Violent Night is a fun “anti-Holiday” action film that the older folks in the crowd will enjoy later at night after the kiddo-s go to bed.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
P.S.: Violent Night is streaming for free (with your Amazon Prime subscription) or you can rent or own it in many of the usual ways.
Christmas Mafia Prince (The Naughty List)
10.0
Rate It
Book
Expectations: Christmas break in Aspen. Reality: Married to a mafia hitman who hunts people for...
Dark Seasonal Contemporary MM Romance
Annie Chanse (15 KP) rated Shadows & Dreams in Books
Dec 19, 2017
Review** spoiler alert ** *Warning: contains spoilers, bad words, and quite a long rant*
To be honest, I was very disappointed in this book. It had a great premise, which meant it had the potential to be a really good story, but the writing style of the author just completely ruined this book for me.
The basic idea behind the story is that Kate Kane, a paranormal PI, sets off on a case to find the brother of a woman she slept with once, and during this investigation, she runs into ALL MANNER OF TROUBLE. There are vampires and werewolves and ex-girlfriends around every corner, just lurking and waiting to pounce on Miss Kane. It's a very busy and involved story, and if it had been better written, I would have easily given it four stars at least, but there was just TOO much about this book -- style-wise -- that drove me insane.
For instance:
1. The plot, itself, is actually fairly well thought out and developed and is nowhere NEAR as cheesy as it sounds when you hear, "Vampires fighting werewolves," -- which, let's be honest, these days is so trite and overdone that it is scoffed at on a regular basis. However, there IS a good story in this novel. But the way Hall writes the not-cheesy story is so cheesy that it makes you THINK the story is cheesy. A lot of cheese, huh? A little confusing? Well then, let me give you an example.
Page 7-8: "Truth be told it was a little bit awkward, but my social weirdness threshold has gone way up since my girlfriend tried to murder my ex-girlfriend because her ex-girlfriend tried to murder her."
Okay... a bit ridiculous, especially seven/eight pages in, but I can roll with it. However, at the bottom of page eight:
Kane asks, "Who saw him last?"
Her assistant -- who is actually a statue brought to life and gifted to Kate by a group of rats who are apparently all seeing and all knowing God-types -- says, "I don't know. [...] Probably somebody at the hospital."
Kane asks, "Which one?"
And the assistant replies with this fantastic line: "The Whittington. He broke his leg changing a light bulb. Because he was standing on a swivel chair because he's an idiot."
Okay, I concede that maybe this line is supposed to sound ridiculous and funny, so I can even let that one slide. But then, three pages later, Hall completely turns me off to the book with this:
"Well, fuck. I was about to be hired by a woman I'd very nearly slept with to find her missing brother who was working for the woman who'd left me for a tech startup at the tech startup she left me for."
Wh-wh-what?! Are you kidding me? Could that sentence BE anymore convoluted or that plot-point any more ridiculously stereotypical?
And what is truly awful is that the story itself REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD. I mean, the writing was awful, which, overall, meant that the novel was -- in my opinion, of course -- bad, but the way the story progressed WAS interesting. It was nowhere near as bad as these 'recaps' by the main character make it sound, but the problem is that Hall throws in these inner-monologues for Kane ALL throughout the book, and they are terrible! Which, in turn, decreases the value of the entire story.
Another example falls right on the heels of the page 11 jewel.
Page 14: "I really really hoped this wasn't going to be another zombie plague. There'd been an outbreak when I'd taken Eve up to Lake Windermere for our third anniversary, and we'd spent the whole weekend under siege in the hotel, making molotovs from the minibar and clubbing re-animated tourists to death with souvenir walking sticks."
Really? Zombies now? On top of the vampires, witches, and werewolves? Can we POSSIBLY fit anymore para into this normal?
Enough with that.
Now on to point number 2. The girl on girl sex scenes in this book between sexy, snarky PI and her vampire girlfriend, the Prince (yes, Prince) of Cups, should be hot, right? No. They are forced, fake, and ridiculous. Halfway through the first one, I thought, "Jesus. This isn't lesbian sex. This is lesbian sex if it was written by a man who WISHES he could see some lesbian sex." That was the point at which I decided to look up more info on Alexis Hall, and I found out that he is, in fact, a man, which at least explains the sex scenes.
#3. Speaking of sex scenes, Hall also has this really irritating -- and distracting -- habit of throwing in random, explicitly sexual thoughts at TOTALLY inappropriate times. Right in the middle of the most stressful situations -- being locked up, about to be killed, thrown in prison/on trial -- Kate Kane begins inner-monologuing with herself about how much she'd like to fuck whatever female happens to be standing in front of her. RIDICULOUS! And annoying. Hated it.
4. One of the MOST annoying things about this book, however, was that it was in DESPERATE need of a SERIOUS case of editing. All throughout the book there were glaring errors that any first year college student should have caught while reading. I'm willing to discount SOME of these "errors" as simply being lost in translation, as the book is written with a British tone, and I am very much American. However, SOME of these errors simply CANNOT be due to anything other than careless editing.
For instance, page 113: "It's main distinguishing feature, right, was that was it was blue."
WAS that WAS it WAS blue? What does that even mean? Oh, yes, it means that no one bothered editing this beast before printing.
Page 141: "Piercing the heart will paralyse, but it won't kill, and anything will do, it doesn't have to wood."
Okay, so maybe the "paralyse" is simply British, but surely the "doesn't have to wood" bit needs a "be" in there somewhere, right?
Page 157: "Have we have achieved case closed, Miss Kane?"
Yes, yes have we have.
There are several -- SEVERAL -- more examples of these type errors, but I'm not about to point them all out. If you read the book, I'm sure you'll easily catch them on your own.
5. Another thing that drove me NUTS was the repetition. The awful thing is I'm fairly certain that Hall used these repetitious lines PURPOSELY to create some kind of effect -- humor, maybe? Whatever the desired result, it failed to do anything other than annoy me.
For instance, page 163: "'Hi. So. Look.' I tried to find a way to express the fact I had some good news and some bad news that wasn't I've got some good news and some bad news. 'I've got some good news and some bad news.'"
...blink... ...falls over...
Page 177: "All the more reason to tell them. [...] If they know that we know that she has returned, then they will not be tempted to conspire against us out of the false belief that we do not know. Of course, they may already know, but at present, we have no way to know what they know. If we tell them, we will know what they know, and all we will not know is how long they have known it."
Oh. Jumping. Jesus. On. A. Pogo. Stick. Please tell me you aren't serious.
And there was this one thing that repeated over and over again throughout the book. The first time, it was actually pretty clever. The second time, even, was okay. But by the time I'd read it nine times -- yes, NINE TIMES, no exaggeration whatsoever -- I was ready to never EVER read anything like it ever again.
This particular phrase was something Kate Kane internalized or muttered aloud to herself each time she decided to do something stupid OR she felt her life was in danger. The basic format went something like this:
"Here lies Kate Kane, died peacefully in her sleep aged 94. Beloved daughter."
The "Here lies Kate Kane" part remained constant, as did the "Beloved daughter." It was only the middle part that changed, for instance, "Here lies Kate Kate. Should have minded her own business. Beloved daughter." Or perhaps, "Here lies Kate Kane. She made a difference to dozens. Beloved daughter."
This continued NINE TIMES. It is not cute, funny, or clever after about the second time, definitely after the third. BUT NINE TIMES?! Come on!
And finally, my last complaint.
6. Several of the items, scenes, quotes, etc. in this book seemed waaaaaaaaaay too close to things from other books for my taste. Perhaps it is simply a coincidence and the author did not intentionally siphon plot points and details from other authors -- except, of course, when he obviously did in his quotations, such as his use of "Not all those who wander are lost" and "As old as my tongue, a little bit older than my teeth" which are DIRECTLY taken from other books, but I'm hoping those were intentional and not attempted-to-get-away-with-it plagiarism.
But there are several things in this novel that could have been taken from Jim Butcher's "Dresden Files", Lewis' "Narnia" chronicles, and Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" series. I'm hoping, however, that they weren't, but they were very, very similar.
All in all, I'm disappointed to say that I was not a fan of this book at all, and I will most likely not be reading anymore Kate Kane books.
To be honest, I was very disappointed in this book. It had a great premise, which meant it had the potential to be a really good story, but the writing style of the author just completely ruined this book for me.
The basic idea behind the story is that Kate Kane, a paranormal PI, sets off on a case to find the brother of a woman she slept with once, and during this investigation, she runs into ALL MANNER OF TROUBLE. There are vampires and werewolves and ex-girlfriends around every corner, just lurking and waiting to pounce on Miss Kane. It's a very busy and involved story, and if it had been better written, I would have easily given it four stars at least, but there was just TOO much about this book -- style-wise -- that drove me insane.
For instance:
1. The plot, itself, is actually fairly well thought out and developed and is nowhere NEAR as cheesy as it sounds when you hear, "Vampires fighting werewolves," -- which, let's be honest, these days is so trite and overdone that it is scoffed at on a regular basis. However, there IS a good story in this novel. But the way Hall writes the not-cheesy story is so cheesy that it makes you THINK the story is cheesy. A lot of cheese, huh? A little confusing? Well then, let me give you an example.
Page 7-8: "Truth be told it was a little bit awkward, but my social weirdness threshold has gone way up since my girlfriend tried to murder my ex-girlfriend because her ex-girlfriend tried to murder her."
Okay... a bit ridiculous, especially seven/eight pages in, but I can roll with it. However, at the bottom of page eight:
Kane asks, "Who saw him last?"
Her assistant -- who is actually a statue brought to life and gifted to Kate by a group of rats who are apparently all seeing and all knowing God-types -- says, "I don't know. [...] Probably somebody at the hospital."
Kane asks, "Which one?"
And the assistant replies with this fantastic line: "The Whittington. He broke his leg changing a light bulb. Because he was standing on a swivel chair because he's an idiot."
Okay, I concede that maybe this line is supposed to sound ridiculous and funny, so I can even let that one slide. But then, three pages later, Hall completely turns me off to the book with this:
"Well, fuck. I was about to be hired by a woman I'd very nearly slept with to find her missing brother who was working for the woman who'd left me for a tech startup at the tech startup she left me for."
Wh-wh-what?! Are you kidding me? Could that sentence BE anymore convoluted or that plot-point any more ridiculously stereotypical?
And what is truly awful is that the story itself REALLY WASN'T THAT BAD. I mean, the writing was awful, which, overall, meant that the novel was -- in my opinion, of course -- bad, but the way the story progressed WAS interesting. It was nowhere near as bad as these 'recaps' by the main character make it sound, but the problem is that Hall throws in these inner-monologues for Kane ALL throughout the book, and they are terrible! Which, in turn, decreases the value of the entire story.
Another example falls right on the heels of the page 11 jewel.
Page 14: "I really really hoped this wasn't going to be another zombie plague. There'd been an outbreak when I'd taken Eve up to Lake Windermere for our third anniversary, and we'd spent the whole weekend under siege in the hotel, making molotovs from the minibar and clubbing re-animated tourists to death with souvenir walking sticks."
Really? Zombies now? On top of the vampires, witches, and werewolves? Can we POSSIBLY fit anymore para into this normal?
Enough with that.
Now on to point number 2. The girl on girl sex scenes in this book between sexy, snarky PI and her vampire girlfriend, the Prince (yes, Prince) of Cups, should be hot, right? No. They are forced, fake, and ridiculous. Halfway through the first one, I thought, "Jesus. This isn't lesbian sex. This is lesbian sex if it was written by a man who WISHES he could see some lesbian sex." That was the point at which I decided to look up more info on Alexis Hall, and I found out that he is, in fact, a man, which at least explains the sex scenes.
#3. Speaking of sex scenes, Hall also has this really irritating -- and distracting -- habit of throwing in random, explicitly sexual thoughts at TOTALLY inappropriate times. Right in the middle of the most stressful situations -- being locked up, about to be killed, thrown in prison/on trial -- Kate Kane begins inner-monologuing with herself about how much she'd like to fuck whatever female happens to be standing in front of her. RIDICULOUS! And annoying. Hated it.
4. One of the MOST annoying things about this book, however, was that it was in DESPERATE need of a SERIOUS case of editing. All throughout the book there were glaring errors that any first year college student should have caught while reading. I'm willing to discount SOME of these "errors" as simply being lost in translation, as the book is written with a British tone, and I am very much American. However, SOME of these errors simply CANNOT be due to anything other than careless editing.
For instance, page 113: "It's main distinguishing feature, right, was that was it was blue."
WAS that WAS it WAS blue? What does that even mean? Oh, yes, it means that no one bothered editing this beast before printing.
Page 141: "Piercing the heart will paralyse, but it won't kill, and anything will do, it doesn't have to wood."
Okay, so maybe the "paralyse" is simply British, but surely the "doesn't have to wood" bit needs a "be" in there somewhere, right?
Page 157: "Have we have achieved case closed, Miss Kane?"
Yes, yes have we have.
There are several -- SEVERAL -- more examples of these type errors, but I'm not about to point them all out. If you read the book, I'm sure you'll easily catch them on your own.
5. Another thing that drove me NUTS was the repetition. The awful thing is I'm fairly certain that Hall used these repetitious lines PURPOSELY to create some kind of effect -- humor, maybe? Whatever the desired result, it failed to do anything other than annoy me.
For instance, page 163: "'Hi. So. Look.' I tried to find a way to express the fact I had some good news and some bad news that wasn't I've got some good news and some bad news. 'I've got some good news and some bad news.'"
...blink... ...falls over...
Page 177: "All the more reason to tell them. [...] If they know that we know that she has returned, then they will not be tempted to conspire against us out of the false belief that we do not know. Of course, they may already know, but at present, we have no way to know what they know. If we tell them, we will know what they know, and all we will not know is how long they have known it."
Oh. Jumping. Jesus. On. A. Pogo. Stick. Please tell me you aren't serious.
And there was this one thing that repeated over and over again throughout the book. The first time, it was actually pretty clever. The second time, even, was okay. But by the time I'd read it nine times -- yes, NINE TIMES, no exaggeration whatsoever -- I was ready to never EVER read anything like it ever again.
This particular phrase was something Kate Kane internalized or muttered aloud to herself each time she decided to do something stupid OR she felt her life was in danger. The basic format went something like this:
"Here lies Kate Kane, died peacefully in her sleep aged 94. Beloved daughter."
The "Here lies Kate Kane" part remained constant, as did the "Beloved daughter." It was only the middle part that changed, for instance, "Here lies Kate Kate. Should have minded her own business. Beloved daughter." Or perhaps, "Here lies Kate Kane. She made a difference to dozens. Beloved daughter."
This continued NINE TIMES. It is not cute, funny, or clever after about the second time, definitely after the third. BUT NINE TIMES?! Come on!
And finally, my last complaint.
6. Several of the items, scenes, quotes, etc. in this book seemed waaaaaaaaaay too close to things from other books for my taste. Perhaps it is simply a coincidence and the author did not intentionally siphon plot points and details from other authors -- except, of course, when he obviously did in his quotations, such as his use of "Not all those who wander are lost" and "As old as my tongue, a little bit older than my teeth" which are DIRECTLY taken from other books, but I'm hoping those were intentional and not attempted-to-get-away-with-it plagiarism.
But there are several things in this novel that could have been taken from Jim Butcher's "Dresden Files", Lewis' "Narnia" chronicles, and Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" series. I'm hoping, however, that they weren't, but they were very, very similar.
All in all, I'm disappointed to say that I was not a fan of this book at all, and I will most likely not be reading anymore Kate Kane books.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Hotel Transylvania 4 (2021) in Movies
Jan 22, 2022
The transformation sequences. (1 more)
The 2D animated end credits
Genndy Tartakovsky not directing (2 more)
Humor exchanged for annoying behavior
Feels almost like a soft reboot for a final film.
A Monstrous Monstrosity
Hotel Transylvania: Tranformania is the final film in the Hotel Transylvania franchise. With Genndy Tartakavsky no longer directing (he co-writes and executive produces this time around) and Adam Sandler and Kevin James not returning (Brian Hull and Brad Abrell now voice Dracula and Frankenstein), Transformania takes an awkward step back from the previous three films.
Despite some character designs (Bela in the second film, the Kraken in the third) and some tremendous end credit animations that are done in a very recognizable Tartakavsky style (think Dexter’s Lab or Powerpuff Girls), the films are mediocre at best and yet became a billion dollar franchise.
Hull and Abrell do a decent job matching their voices to the Drac and Frank characters. You may not have noticed the characters were voiced by someone else if you hadn’t known beforehand. However, the animation looks noticeably different. Maybe new directors Jennifer Kluska and Derek Drymon are to credit for that. Kluska was a storyboard artist on Hotel Transylvania 2 and 3 while Drymon was an executive producer of Adventure Time and was a storyboard artist on The Spongebob Squarepants Movie.
The film was also moved around several times thanks to COVID and the pandemic. Sony Pictures Releasing eventually nixed the film’s theatrical run and sold distribution rights to Amazon Studios. This is the only Hotel Transylvania film to be released directly to a streaming platform.
Considering that this is the fourth film, Transformania basically rewrites several characters to an extent that it ignores key details from other films. Johnny is now akin to Homer Simpson since he is dumber than he has ever been here. He had a stoner or frat boy with a heart of gold kind of vibe about him originally. He was very mellow by nature, but had seen a good chunk of the world and knew more than his behavior let on. He had stories even though he was young and he was likeable. Transformania turns him into a dumb and unfunny dork that is borderline offensive due to how annoying he is.
Dracula has lost whatever made him somewhat charming in the previous three films, as well. In Transformania, he’s looking to settle down with Ericka and retire from running the hotel. The intention is to give the hotel to Mavis and Johnny, but all of a sudden Dracula hates Johnny. The first three films are built around how close Johnny and Dracula become. Now Dracula just finds Johnny unbearable.
After establishing in the second film that Dennis is part vampire and has powers, that concept is totally erased in Transformania. Dracula hypnotizes Dennis in the beginning of the film and he remains that way for the bulk of the film without ever utilizing any sort of power or doing anything remotely relevant.
Instead of downright telling Johnny that he can’t stand him, Dracula lies and says that he can’t leave the hotel in the hands of a human; it can only be inherited by monsters. Johnny then discusses the matter with Abraham Van Helsing who uses his Monsterfication Ray to turn Johnny into a giant lizard-like monster. But the ray can also turn monsters into humans. Once Dracula discovers what Johnny has done, he attempts to turn Johnny back before Mavis finds out. The plan backfires and Dracula gets hit with the ray and is turned human. His friends Wayne, Griffin, Murray, and Frankenstein are also turned human. If a cure isn’t found, the results may be permanent.
The highlight of the film is the transformation sequences since they are noticeably inspired by the horror film genre; specifically An American Werewolf in London. The end credits sequence is also done in a similar style to the first three films, so that sequence is fairly entertaining as well.
Transformania otherwise feels like a downgrade all around and the bar wasn’t all the high to begin with. As expected, there is a dancing sequence that may or may not be something you look forward to. None of the gags come off as humorous as every character mostly seems to be aiming to be more obnoxious than the other. The “fun” lies within seeing the monster characters as humans. The most notable is Griffin who has been totally invisible until now.
Hotel Transylvania: Transformania had a lot of obstacles relating to its release and after viewing the film you can understand why. It’s a lukewarm sendoff that mostly feels like a lethargic attempt to recapture its former glory. It’s built around an entertaining concept that it doesn’t fully capitalize on. It ultimately obliterates character traits for trite gags and cliché punch lines.
Despite some character designs (Bela in the second film, the Kraken in the third) and some tremendous end credit animations that are done in a very recognizable Tartakavsky style (think Dexter’s Lab or Powerpuff Girls), the films are mediocre at best and yet became a billion dollar franchise.
Hull and Abrell do a decent job matching their voices to the Drac and Frank characters. You may not have noticed the characters were voiced by someone else if you hadn’t known beforehand. However, the animation looks noticeably different. Maybe new directors Jennifer Kluska and Derek Drymon are to credit for that. Kluska was a storyboard artist on Hotel Transylvania 2 and 3 while Drymon was an executive producer of Adventure Time and was a storyboard artist on The Spongebob Squarepants Movie.
The film was also moved around several times thanks to COVID and the pandemic. Sony Pictures Releasing eventually nixed the film’s theatrical run and sold distribution rights to Amazon Studios. This is the only Hotel Transylvania film to be released directly to a streaming platform.
Considering that this is the fourth film, Transformania basically rewrites several characters to an extent that it ignores key details from other films. Johnny is now akin to Homer Simpson since he is dumber than he has ever been here. He had a stoner or frat boy with a heart of gold kind of vibe about him originally. He was very mellow by nature, but had seen a good chunk of the world and knew more than his behavior let on. He had stories even though he was young and he was likeable. Transformania turns him into a dumb and unfunny dork that is borderline offensive due to how annoying he is.
Dracula has lost whatever made him somewhat charming in the previous three films, as well. In Transformania, he’s looking to settle down with Ericka and retire from running the hotel. The intention is to give the hotel to Mavis and Johnny, but all of a sudden Dracula hates Johnny. The first three films are built around how close Johnny and Dracula become. Now Dracula just finds Johnny unbearable.
After establishing in the second film that Dennis is part vampire and has powers, that concept is totally erased in Transformania. Dracula hypnotizes Dennis in the beginning of the film and he remains that way for the bulk of the film without ever utilizing any sort of power or doing anything remotely relevant.
Instead of downright telling Johnny that he can’t stand him, Dracula lies and says that he can’t leave the hotel in the hands of a human; it can only be inherited by monsters. Johnny then discusses the matter with Abraham Van Helsing who uses his Monsterfication Ray to turn Johnny into a giant lizard-like monster. But the ray can also turn monsters into humans. Once Dracula discovers what Johnny has done, he attempts to turn Johnny back before Mavis finds out. The plan backfires and Dracula gets hit with the ray and is turned human. His friends Wayne, Griffin, Murray, and Frankenstein are also turned human. If a cure isn’t found, the results may be permanent.
The highlight of the film is the transformation sequences since they are noticeably inspired by the horror film genre; specifically An American Werewolf in London. The end credits sequence is also done in a similar style to the first three films, so that sequence is fairly entertaining as well.
Transformania otherwise feels like a downgrade all around and the bar wasn’t all the high to begin with. As expected, there is a dancing sequence that may or may not be something you look forward to. None of the gags come off as humorous as every character mostly seems to be aiming to be more obnoxious than the other. The “fun” lies within seeing the monster characters as humans. The most notable is Griffin who has been totally invisible until now.
Hotel Transylvania: Transformania had a lot of obstacles relating to its release and after viewing the film you can understand why. It’s a lukewarm sendoff that mostly feels like a lethargic attempt to recapture its former glory. It’s built around an entertaining concept that it doesn’t fully capitalize on. It ultimately obliterates character traits for trite gags and cliché punch lines.
Annie Chanse (15 KP) rated Death is but a Dream in Books
Dec 19, 2017
Contains spoilers, click to show
*contains spoilers*
A police detective -- Callista, Callie for short -- saves a little girl from getting hit by a bus. She, herself, is then hit instead. She wakes up to find herself in the Underworld where she is taken before Hades and offered a deal. Protect his son, Plutus, and find out who wants him dead, and Hades will restore her to life. However, if Callie fails in her objective or dies while in the Underworld, she will die an eternal death, and her soul will never be allowed to have an afterlife.
It doesn't seem like a super great choice, but when a god offers you a deal, the "offering" part is really just a polite term to cover up the fact that you are going to do what that god wants you to do or your screwed. And so Callie has little choice but to accept Hades' offer. She meets several interesting characters along the way, including one of the Furies, Tisiphone, who becomes Callie's friend and ally in the Underworld.
Callie's job is complicated, however, by the fact that Hades forbids her to interview, interrogate, or even outwardly suspect any of his royal family of trying to kill his son, and even FURTHER complicated by the fact that Hades lies to her and manipulates her at every turn.
"Death is but a Dream" is a beautiful and original story of the Olympian gods, and it is quite unique in its view of Greek mythology. Perhaps the closest comparison I can make to a book/series already out there in the market is with Amber Benson's series that starts with "Death's Daughter." (I'm sorry. I can't actually remember what the series is called as a whole.) It has the same tone. Both feature strong, independent female protagonists who are thrown into a fantastical world that they want no part of, so yes, fans of Amber Benson's work will really enjoy this book, I think.
The only complaint I have is that the book could have benefited from some series editing. I had an e-book copy of the novel, and there were quite a few more errors than I would expect a published, completed book to have. Most of the errors were inconsequential -- missing commas, wrong words, etc. -- and could be easily overlooked or fixed by the reader simply inserting the correct word while reading, but still, a polished book should be as free of errors as is possible, and this book had a good number.
I still really, really enjoyed the book, though. I highly recommend it.
A police detective -- Callista, Callie for short -- saves a little girl from getting hit by a bus. She, herself, is then hit instead. She wakes up to find herself in the Underworld where she is taken before Hades and offered a deal. Protect his son, Plutus, and find out who wants him dead, and Hades will restore her to life. However, if Callie fails in her objective or dies while in the Underworld, she will die an eternal death, and her soul will never be allowed to have an afterlife.
It doesn't seem like a super great choice, but when a god offers you a deal, the "offering" part is really just a polite term to cover up the fact that you are going to do what that god wants you to do or your screwed. And so Callie has little choice but to accept Hades' offer. She meets several interesting characters along the way, including one of the Furies, Tisiphone, who becomes Callie's friend and ally in the Underworld.
Callie's job is complicated, however, by the fact that Hades forbids her to interview, interrogate, or even outwardly suspect any of his royal family of trying to kill his son, and even FURTHER complicated by the fact that Hades lies to her and manipulates her at every turn.
"Death is but a Dream" is a beautiful and original story of the Olympian gods, and it is quite unique in its view of Greek mythology. Perhaps the closest comparison I can make to a book/series already out there in the market is with Amber Benson's series that starts with "Death's Daughter." (I'm sorry. I can't actually remember what the series is called as a whole.) It has the same tone. Both feature strong, independent female protagonists who are thrown into a fantastical world that they want no part of, so yes, fans of Amber Benson's work will really enjoy this book, I think.
The only complaint I have is that the book could have benefited from some series editing. I had an e-book copy of the novel, and there were quite a few more errors than I would expect a published, completed book to have. Most of the errors were inconsequential -- missing commas, wrong words, etc. -- and could be easily overlooked or fixed by the reader simply inserting the correct word while reading, but still, a polished book should be as free of errors as is possible, and this book had a good number.
I still really, really enjoyed the book, though. I highly recommend it.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Haunting of Hill House in Books
Jul 30, 2017
Extremely clever (2 more)
Slow-burn terror
Ambiguous and open to interpretation
Indirect and slow plot (1 more)
Dense with metaphor
Is Hill House haunted or is it madness?
Hill House is suffocating in its isolation–the house is buried in hills far away from the nearest town. The house’s architecture is imperfect, the crookedness throwing one’s balance just a little bit off. The urban legends of the house’s tragic history are dark and ripe for a haunted house story. But is the house actually haunted? Is there some supernatural force that drives the inhabitants to madness? Or perhaps the hauntings are the product of a disturbed mind?
This book is absolutely brilliant in its ambiguity. I loved that things aren’t very direct, leaving the reader to decide how to interpret the story for themselves. A reader’s imagination is a writer’s best tool.
One of the first things that struck me was the unusual dialogue between characters, particularly Eleanor. At times it felt like characters were talking at the other person rather than with them. This behavior is a sign of a person that is unable to relate or empathize with other people.
It becomes clear not long after this that there’s something not quite right about Eleanor. She’s lonely and depressed, she lies constantly about her life and desperately seeks approval. She reassures herself constantly that she belongs at Hill House with the other people there and struggles with her attempts to make connections with the other guests. As the story goes on Eleanor perceives everyone else as being both loving and cruel. She sneers at Theo for trying to steal attention away from her out of some conceived notion of jealousy. Eleanor can only view relationships as being built on dependency, she is a textbook definition of an unreliable narrator.
I won’t go into too much more of my thoughts because I don’t want to spoil the plot. It’s definitely not an average ghost story and those looking for more visceral horror will probably be disappointed. The plot is thick with metaphor and the slow-burn while it worked for me may be too slow for others. Regardless, I loved this book and completely understand why it is held in such high regard and the more I think about it, the more my love for it grows. There were points where my gut was in knots with anxiety and anticipation and I just have to admire Jackson’s master craft with her prose.
This book is absolutely brilliant in its ambiguity. I loved that things aren’t very direct, leaving the reader to decide how to interpret the story for themselves. A reader’s imagination is a writer’s best tool.
One of the first things that struck me was the unusual dialogue between characters, particularly Eleanor. At times it felt like characters were talking at the other person rather than with them. This behavior is a sign of a person that is unable to relate or empathize with other people.
It becomes clear not long after this that there’s something not quite right about Eleanor. She’s lonely and depressed, she lies constantly about her life and desperately seeks approval. She reassures herself constantly that she belongs at Hill House with the other people there and struggles with her attempts to make connections with the other guests. As the story goes on Eleanor perceives everyone else as being both loving and cruel. She sneers at Theo for trying to steal attention away from her out of some conceived notion of jealousy. Eleanor can only view relationships as being built on dependency, she is a textbook definition of an unreliable narrator.
I won’t go into too much more of my thoughts because I don’t want to spoil the plot. It’s definitely not an average ghost story and those looking for more visceral horror will probably be disappointed. The plot is thick with metaphor and the slow-burn while it worked for me may be too slow for others. Regardless, I loved this book and completely understand why it is held in such high regard and the more I think about it, the more my love for it grows. There were points where my gut was in knots with anxiety and anticipation and I just have to admire Jackson’s master craft with her prose.
This book is an excellent resource for anyone who has gone through a painful experience and has yet to heal from it. Big or small, public or secret. Maybe you've gone through the Bible, gone to counseling, talked to people, taken medicine, and nothing is helping. Maybe you haven't told a soul and you don't know what to do.
This book is for you.
The ten decisions (and ten lies exposed!) are so straightforward that they totally change your thinking. It's blunt, clear, easy to read, and divided up into chunks that are easy to swallow (although I had no problem tearing through several chunks at a time because of how clear and understandable it is).
Here are 5 reasons why this is a great book for individuals and small groups:
It comes from someone who has not only counseled people with problems, but someone who has been through emotional and spiritual pain himself. He understands what you're thinking and feeling, and he has a way of writing it that everything makes sense.
It is extremely biblically founded. It's not just quoting a few verses and most of it psychology… It's all straight from God's word.
The new version has a workbook built right into it. There are journaling places, Bible verses to look up and relate back to the chapter, and exercises to complete (individually, or as a group, depending on your situation).
It can be used as a devotional, or as a small-group handbook, because everything in here will apply to every small or large problem you have.
I know this is really random, but there are decent sized margins and good space between the lines. This makes for good annotating and note taking. I don't know about you, but all my non-fiction books—especially God books—have writing all over them. It annoys me when I don't have space to write my thoughts in the book. There is space in this one.
All in all, I encourage you to grab this book. It's excellent and I love it, and have been using it for my personal Bible study.
Content/Recommendation: Some of the stories used for examples included in this book are about very…mature topics. I would recommend ages 14+, and if used for anyone younger than that, maybe a parent or small-group leader to guide the younger students and explain certain things, or assign only specific readings. That being said, there is nothing graphic or offensive. In my experience, however, some young teens are just not ready for certain content. As always, this is only a personal recommendation.
This book is for you.
The ten decisions (and ten lies exposed!) are so straightforward that they totally change your thinking. It's blunt, clear, easy to read, and divided up into chunks that are easy to swallow (although I had no problem tearing through several chunks at a time because of how clear and understandable it is).
Here are 5 reasons why this is a great book for individuals and small groups:
It comes from someone who has not only counseled people with problems, but someone who has been through emotional and spiritual pain himself. He understands what you're thinking and feeling, and he has a way of writing it that everything makes sense.
It is extremely biblically founded. It's not just quoting a few verses and most of it psychology… It's all straight from God's word.
The new version has a workbook built right into it. There are journaling places, Bible verses to look up and relate back to the chapter, and exercises to complete (individually, or as a group, depending on your situation).
It can be used as a devotional, or as a small-group handbook, because everything in here will apply to every small or large problem you have.
I know this is really random, but there are decent sized margins and good space between the lines. This makes for good annotating and note taking. I don't know about you, but all my non-fiction books—especially God books—have writing all over them. It annoys me when I don't have space to write my thoughts in the book. There is space in this one.
All in all, I encourage you to grab this book. It's excellent and I love it, and have been using it for my personal Bible study.
Content/Recommendation: Some of the stories used for examples included in this book are about very…mature topics. I would recommend ages 14+, and if used for anyone younger than that, maybe a parent or small-group leader to guide the younger students and explain certain things, or assign only specific readings. That being said, there is nothing graphic or offensive. In my experience, however, some young teens are just not ready for certain content. As always, this is only a personal recommendation.
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Masquerade in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I was surprised at how much I enjoyed reading this novel by the end of it. The beginning is a bit slow and dry, as Moser sets up the background information and almost struggles to get the reader to "side" with the main character Charlotte Gleason by using her maid's voice to excuse Charlotte's "spoiled rich girl" behavior. I really have a hard time buying the lines that Charlotte really is a good person even though she chooses to be naive about the world she lives in because she feels helpless to enact change. But what happens to her family to force her to travel to America is just the thing to wake her up to the real world and her own responsibilities in it.
I feel much more sympathetic to Dora Conners' plight, as she has little to no say in her life and what Charlotte forces on her, even if it does seem to benefit Dora in theory. To be forced into a position in which she has to lie about who she is and where she is from by her "boss" is atrocious, no matter how much a "friendship" has been built between them. In addition, the endgame is that she is expected to give of her own body to a man in marriage who does not even know who she really is - it's completely shameful.
The parallel way that the story is told once the girls get to America is quite interesting, especially how their paths intersect in seemingly coincidental ways, such as the sweat shop where Charlotte works temporarily manufacturing the clothes that Dora orders from the Tremaine's department store. The more that Charlotte suffers and the guiltier she feels for the lies she has told and has also forced on Dora makes me like her more for the maturation in character she experiences.
In contrast, I have a hard time blaming Dora for the choices she has to make while living in the Tremaine household given her circumstances. She was made to come to this place and perform to certain expectations, and she has no backup plan should she decide to do otherwise. The guilt she feels despite her lack of personal choice in the matter only make her more likeable to the reader. Given where she is from and what is being handed to her, there are not many who would fault her for going along with the "masquerade."
In the end, the goal of both girls is true love over financial stability, and since I am a romantic at heart, I can't help but approve of the ending.
I feel much more sympathetic to Dora Conners' plight, as she has little to no say in her life and what Charlotte forces on her, even if it does seem to benefit Dora in theory. To be forced into a position in which she has to lie about who she is and where she is from by her "boss" is atrocious, no matter how much a "friendship" has been built between them. In addition, the endgame is that she is expected to give of her own body to a man in marriage who does not even know who she really is - it's completely shameful.
The parallel way that the story is told once the girls get to America is quite interesting, especially how their paths intersect in seemingly coincidental ways, such as the sweat shop where Charlotte works temporarily manufacturing the clothes that Dora orders from the Tremaine's department store. The more that Charlotte suffers and the guiltier she feels for the lies she has told and has also forced on Dora makes me like her more for the maturation in character she experiences.
In contrast, I have a hard time blaming Dora for the choices she has to make while living in the Tremaine household given her circumstances. She was made to come to this place and perform to certain expectations, and she has no backup plan should she decide to do otherwise. The guilt she feels despite her lack of personal choice in the matter only make her more likeable to the reader. Given where she is from and what is being handed to her, there are not many who would fault her for going along with the "masquerade."
In the end, the goal of both girls is true love over financial stability, and since I am a romantic at heart, I can't help but approve of the ending.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated The Beguiled in Books
Jun 5, 2019
“A classic slice of Southern Gothic, shot through with psychological suspense, which is the basis for Sofia Coppola’s (winner of Best Director at Cannes) 2017 film of the same name starring Nicola Kidman, Colin Farrell and Kirsten Dunst”. Source: wiki/The_Beguiled_(2017_film).
The book was originally written with the title A Painted Devil and some of you eagle-eyed readers and film fanatics may also remember this was a film starring Clint Eastwood and Geraldine Page in the ’70s. The maid in the latter film and this 1966 novel, was black and there was also another bi-racial character, too. However, in the new film, mentioned above, this bi-racial character was played by Kirsten Dunst. This totally ruined the whole point of the book that the black woman was really a slave in their household and the bi-racial woman (who was a free woman) could not seem to see that she herself was not truly white. And that, dear readers, is a very relevant part of the original book, why change it? (Rolls eyes). Is it so wrong to portray this black woman exactly how the author intended her to be? The way I see it, what she did in that house was her way of surviving. It’s an integral part of the story. Why hide it?
After all, if you look at the underage sex and the way the main male character acts by taking advantage of his position in a household full of young girls who are basically shut away from society, should he also be seen as wrong? These young girls are easy prey, but some, are also very willing to learn… Incidentally, I must say the heat and sexual tension within the book is superbly done.
I found parts of the way this was written to be a little repetitive and confusing in style, despite this, it was still a great story. It’s only told from the girls’ perspective, which in many ways adds to this atmospheric, hothouse of lies and deceit the further into the story you delve.
The Beguiled is chock full with a Gothic sense of foreboding and unease, set against a backdrop of the Civil War, which made for some serious, ghostly tension. Who is this injured solider who turns up on their doorstep? How can these girls protect themselves from this seductive man when they have no idea what life is like outside the four walls of the house they live in?
If you read right to the end you’ll find out the brilliant twist of fate this story has in store for you. A devious surprise!
The book was originally written with the title A Painted Devil and some of you eagle-eyed readers and film fanatics may also remember this was a film starring Clint Eastwood and Geraldine Page in the ’70s. The maid in the latter film and this 1966 novel, was black and there was also another bi-racial character, too. However, in the new film, mentioned above, this bi-racial character was played by Kirsten Dunst. This totally ruined the whole point of the book that the black woman was really a slave in their household and the bi-racial woman (who was a free woman) could not seem to see that she herself was not truly white. And that, dear readers, is a very relevant part of the original book, why change it? (Rolls eyes). Is it so wrong to portray this black woman exactly how the author intended her to be? The way I see it, what she did in that house was her way of surviving. It’s an integral part of the story. Why hide it?
After all, if you look at the underage sex and the way the main male character acts by taking advantage of his position in a household full of young girls who are basically shut away from society, should he also be seen as wrong? These young girls are easy prey, but some, are also very willing to learn… Incidentally, I must say the heat and sexual tension within the book is superbly done.
I found parts of the way this was written to be a little repetitive and confusing in style, despite this, it was still a great story. It’s only told from the girls’ perspective, which in many ways adds to this atmospheric, hothouse of lies and deceit the further into the story you delve.
The Beguiled is chock full with a Gothic sense of foreboding and unease, set against a backdrop of the Civil War, which made for some serious, ghostly tension. Who is this injured solider who turns up on their doorstep? How can these girls protect themselves from this seductive man when they have no idea what life is like outside the four walls of the house they live in?
If you read right to the end you’ll find out the brilliant twist of fate this story has in store for you. A devious surprise!
Ellie seems to have the picture perfect life - and now, the picture perfect wedding. She's finally marrying Rob, seemingly the man of her dreams. But at her wedding, Ellie's world collapses, as she finds out Rob is not what he seems. She is quickly swept up into his world of lies and yes, murder. Rob is counting on Ellie to free them from the constrictive life he's been leading, but that may mean she has to kill someone. Is Ellie prepared to do this? Is Rob what he seems? What has happened to Ellie's perfect life?
This was an interesting thriller, to say the least. It starts out a little slow (seems like a conventional he said/she said back and forth point-of-view tale) but quickly turned into an actual, compelling mystery. The book is told in a "Then" and "Now" format, but with a couple of twists: first, you hear not only from Ellie and Rob, but also a detective, Lucien, who is investigating several cases that have ensnared the pair, and second, the "Then" portions aren't chronological, so you are really skipping around in time. It is confusing at times, but certainly adds to the page-turning aspect. A good 3/4 of the book passes by in a flash.
I was wary most of the book - who is telling the truth? Rob? Ellie? No one? This one reminded me a bit of another excellent book I read recently - J.T. Ellison's "No One Knows" (which I preferred), where you just don't know which spouse to trust, or if you even like either of them! They are both flawed, but not really in a way you could sympathize with. Lucien was certainly the only character who seemed to have any redemptive qualities to him at times, and his inclusion was intriguing and enjoyable.
Overall, this book left me feeling confused and a little wanting. It seemed to fall apart a little with the ending - I was almost not quite sure exactly what transpired. It left me a little wanting. Still, as I write my review 24 hours later, the book is still haunting me, and I imagine it will for quite some time-- which is certainly a feat in itself. I'm glad I read it; it was a strange and interesting experience to say the least.
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley (thank you!); it is available for publication on 3/22. You can check out a review of this novel and many others on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.
This was an interesting thriller, to say the least. It starts out a little slow (seems like a conventional he said/she said back and forth point-of-view tale) but quickly turned into an actual, compelling mystery. The book is told in a "Then" and "Now" format, but with a couple of twists: first, you hear not only from Ellie and Rob, but also a detective, Lucien, who is investigating several cases that have ensnared the pair, and second, the "Then" portions aren't chronological, so you are really skipping around in time. It is confusing at times, but certainly adds to the page-turning aspect. A good 3/4 of the book passes by in a flash.
I was wary most of the book - who is telling the truth? Rob? Ellie? No one? This one reminded me a bit of another excellent book I read recently - J.T. Ellison's "No One Knows" (which I preferred), where you just don't know which spouse to trust, or if you even like either of them! They are both flawed, but not really in a way you could sympathize with. Lucien was certainly the only character who seemed to have any redemptive qualities to him at times, and his inclusion was intriguing and enjoyable.
Overall, this book left me feeling confused and a little wanting. It seemed to fall apart a little with the ending - I was almost not quite sure exactly what transpired. It left me a little wanting. Still, as I write my review 24 hours later, the book is still haunting me, and I imagine it will for quite some time-- which is certainly a feat in itself. I'm glad I read it; it was a strange and interesting experience to say the least.
I received an ARC of this novel from Netgalley (thank you!); it is available for publication on 3/22. You can check out a review of this novel and many others on my <a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">blog</a>;.