Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Knowing my love of reading, a friend of mine suggested I read The Maze Runner by James Dashner a few years ago. I had just finished reading Hunger Games so, honestly, I was burned out on post-apocalyptic survival stories so I set it aside. However, being familiar with the title, my interest was piqued when the movie was announced and I found myself drawn into the story more than I expected when I screened The Maze Runner movie in 2014. It didn’t have the desperate drama of The Hunger Games, but the mystery of the maze was intriguing enough.
If you haven’t seen the first movie in this series, you’ll want to watch that first as Scorch Trials picks up pretty much where the last movie ended. There are no recaps or flashbacks which fans may appreciate as the full 2 hours and 12 minute running time is dedicated to advancing the story, but it’s definitely not a movie that stands well on its own.
Having escaped from the Glade, Thomas and his somber band of Gladers are transported to a fortified military installation where for a brief moment they believe they’re safe from Ava Paige and WCKD, the mysterious organization that placed them in the Glade for reasons still unknown.
Suspicious and untrusting (by nature, or conditioning?), Thomas, played with grim determination by Dylan O’Brien, uncovers the outpost’s connection to WCKD and the gang is on the run again but this time, instead of a maze, they find themselves in a desolate landscape known as the Scorch.
If the first movie was “The Great Escape”, this movie is “The Amazing Race”. Hoping to find “The Right Hand”, a vigilante group of resistance fighters that have allegedly rescued other Gladers, Thomas and gang set out across a barren wasteland. The movie follows their desperate flight to avoid both WCKD operatives and “cranks”, zombies who were victims of a virus that has wiped out most of humanity.
I watched most of The Scorch Trials, much like I watch The Walking Dead, with my eyes clenched shut but still listening earnestly, but I’m a bit of a wimp that way. There’s definitely more action in this installment and those who enjoyed the first movie, will appreciate this one more even though the last 20 minutes or so of the movie was set up for the third Maze Runner: The Death Cure due in 2017.
The core band of Gladers, played by O’Brien, Kaya Scodelario (Teresa), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Newt), Ki Hong Lee (Minho), Dexter Darden (Frypan) and Alexander Flores (Winston) are easy to root for, while Game of Thrones’ Aiden Gillen (Janson) and Patricia Clarkson, who reprises her role as Ava Paige, are very easy to dislike. The Scorch Trials introduces new characters, like Aris another maze escapee played by Jacob Lofland, and Brenda and Jorge, survivors turned mercenaries played by Rosa Salazar and Giancarlo Esposito who add a new dimension to the story. Will they help lead the Gladers to The Right Hand or turn them over to WCKD for the right price?
In addition to nearly maiming my husband by squeezing his hand too tight, I also left the movie a little winded from holding my breath in suspense, and watching these kids do a hell of a lot of running. A worthy sequel, The Scorch Trials definitely leaves you ready for the story to continue.
If you haven’t seen the first movie in this series, you’ll want to watch that first as Scorch Trials picks up pretty much where the last movie ended. There are no recaps or flashbacks which fans may appreciate as the full 2 hours and 12 minute running time is dedicated to advancing the story, but it’s definitely not a movie that stands well on its own.
Having escaped from the Glade, Thomas and his somber band of Gladers are transported to a fortified military installation where for a brief moment they believe they’re safe from Ava Paige and WCKD, the mysterious organization that placed them in the Glade for reasons still unknown.
Suspicious and untrusting (by nature, or conditioning?), Thomas, played with grim determination by Dylan O’Brien, uncovers the outpost’s connection to WCKD and the gang is on the run again but this time, instead of a maze, they find themselves in a desolate landscape known as the Scorch.
If the first movie was “The Great Escape”, this movie is “The Amazing Race”. Hoping to find “The Right Hand”, a vigilante group of resistance fighters that have allegedly rescued other Gladers, Thomas and gang set out across a barren wasteland. The movie follows their desperate flight to avoid both WCKD operatives and “cranks”, zombies who were victims of a virus that has wiped out most of humanity.
I watched most of The Scorch Trials, much like I watch The Walking Dead, with my eyes clenched shut but still listening earnestly, but I’m a bit of a wimp that way. There’s definitely more action in this installment and those who enjoyed the first movie, will appreciate this one more even though the last 20 minutes or so of the movie was set up for the third Maze Runner: The Death Cure due in 2017.
The core band of Gladers, played by O’Brien, Kaya Scodelario (Teresa), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (Newt), Ki Hong Lee (Minho), Dexter Darden (Frypan) and Alexander Flores (Winston) are easy to root for, while Game of Thrones’ Aiden Gillen (Janson) and Patricia Clarkson, who reprises her role as Ava Paige, are very easy to dislike. The Scorch Trials introduces new characters, like Aris another maze escapee played by Jacob Lofland, and Brenda and Jorge, survivors turned mercenaries played by Rosa Salazar and Giancarlo Esposito who add a new dimension to the story. Will they help lead the Gladers to The Right Hand or turn them over to WCKD for the right price?
In addition to nearly maiming my husband by squeezing his hand too tight, I also left the movie a little winded from holding my breath in suspense, and watching these kids do a hell of a lot of running. A worthy sequel, The Scorch Trials definitely leaves you ready for the story to continue.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Interview (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Thanks to the negative attention that “The Interview” received, it will be viewed by many more people than it would have without the controversy. The film, which was almost never released due to a cyberattack on Sony, is now the most widely accessible of this season.
The comedy follows two average journalists, Aaron Rapoport (Seth Rogan) and David Skylark (James Franco), who become pawns in a CIA plot to assassinate the leader of North Korea.
Skylark is an overzealous news anchor who seems to have no shame in what he reports on. He hosts a celebrity talk show, where he discusses the latest gossip. Fitting perfectly into this scenario are hilarious cameo appearances by Eminem and Rob Lowe.
When Skylark discovers his show is one of Kim Jong-un’s (Randall Park) favorites, he is struck with the genius idea to ask for an interview. Amazingly that request is granted, but attracts the attention of the CIA. Once the two guys are plunged into the outrageous mission, the film carries a fast pace through to the end.
Rogan, who codirected the film with Evan Goldberg, obviously did some real research. Some details are actually based on real world observations.
North Korea is a place shrouded in mystery and little information about the odd dictatorship has surfaced in the outside world. However, there are multiple documentaries by Vice which detail very regimented and monitored trips journalist have taken inside the isolated country.
Elements appearing in the film which are similar to actual documented information about North Korea include: the placement of fake stores with fake food, the discussion of famine and labor camps, and the only pictures allowed on any wall being that of the “supreme leader” or those leaders before him.
Regardless of its very serious political undertones, the film can hardly be taken seriously.
Little touches keep the movie silly and lighthearted. There are quite a few inside jokes that develop throughout the story, cleverly pulling the audience in and making them laugh.
The use of the song “Firework” by Katy Perry is one example. It is established as Kim Jong-un’s favorite song, comedically revealing his “softer” side. It also happens to be Skylark’s favorite song, which creates a common ground between the two characters as they begin to form their own bromance. The song works its way into the plot and reappears at the most mismatched moments, making them that much more absurd.
In general, the execution of the plot and mannerisms of the characters stand out as even cheesier than the past work of Rogan and Franco. The extremely animated facial expressions of Franco in his role as the cocky and lovably stupid reporter, look almost cartoon like. Sex jokes and awkward moments abound. People who do not enjoy that type of comedy will not find much value in this film.
Despite the heavy political attention surrounding “The Interview,” it is one of the most ridiculous comedies to hit theaters. The film has all of the typical features of a Rogan – Franco comedy. It’s filled with over the top raunchy humor, graphic violence, and of course plenty of “bromance.” However this time, it is also a highly entertaining political satire.
I give “The Interview” 3.5 out of 5 stars for quality, and 5 out of 5 stars for becoming an outrageous international controversy.
The comedy follows two average journalists, Aaron Rapoport (Seth Rogan) and David Skylark (James Franco), who become pawns in a CIA plot to assassinate the leader of North Korea.
Skylark is an overzealous news anchor who seems to have no shame in what he reports on. He hosts a celebrity talk show, where he discusses the latest gossip. Fitting perfectly into this scenario are hilarious cameo appearances by Eminem and Rob Lowe.
When Skylark discovers his show is one of Kim Jong-un’s (Randall Park) favorites, he is struck with the genius idea to ask for an interview. Amazingly that request is granted, but attracts the attention of the CIA. Once the two guys are plunged into the outrageous mission, the film carries a fast pace through to the end.
Rogan, who codirected the film with Evan Goldberg, obviously did some real research. Some details are actually based on real world observations.
North Korea is a place shrouded in mystery and little information about the odd dictatorship has surfaced in the outside world. However, there are multiple documentaries by Vice which detail very regimented and monitored trips journalist have taken inside the isolated country.
Elements appearing in the film which are similar to actual documented information about North Korea include: the placement of fake stores with fake food, the discussion of famine and labor camps, and the only pictures allowed on any wall being that of the “supreme leader” or those leaders before him.
Regardless of its very serious political undertones, the film can hardly be taken seriously.
Little touches keep the movie silly and lighthearted. There are quite a few inside jokes that develop throughout the story, cleverly pulling the audience in and making them laugh.
The use of the song “Firework” by Katy Perry is one example. It is established as Kim Jong-un’s favorite song, comedically revealing his “softer” side. It also happens to be Skylark’s favorite song, which creates a common ground between the two characters as they begin to form their own bromance. The song works its way into the plot and reappears at the most mismatched moments, making them that much more absurd.
In general, the execution of the plot and mannerisms of the characters stand out as even cheesier than the past work of Rogan and Franco. The extremely animated facial expressions of Franco in his role as the cocky and lovably stupid reporter, look almost cartoon like. Sex jokes and awkward moments abound. People who do not enjoy that type of comedy will not find much value in this film.
Despite the heavy political attention surrounding “The Interview,” it is one of the most ridiculous comedies to hit theaters. The film has all of the typical features of a Rogan – Franco comedy. It’s filled with over the top raunchy humor, graphic violence, and of course plenty of “bromance.” However this time, it is also a highly entertaining political satire.
I give “The Interview” 3.5 out of 5 stars for quality, and 5 out of 5 stars for becoming an outrageous international controversy.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated As Above So Below (2014) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
The film “As above so below” is part horror, part treasure adventure, and
all shaky cam. This found-footage film could also be more aptly titled as
“Lara Croft goes to hell.” The story centers around an excitable young
adventurer with a British accent named Scarlett on a search for the
mythological Philosopher’s Stone. A self-professed scholar of alchemy, she
hopes proving that the stone exists will fulfill her father’s legacy and
prove to the world that he wasn’t crazy. This search leads her and her
partners through the secret areas of the haunted catacombs of Pairs, France
into what could be hell itself. The movie starts with her traveling to Iran
for clues on the location of the Philosopher’s Stone.
The action opens without introductions which I enjoyed, as it gets right
into the action and sets the a good pace for the rest of the film. After
retrieving clues to the location of the stone and narrowly avoiding
security and a cave-in in Iran, our heroine sets off to Paris, France to
gather the rest of the crew for her adventure (the rest of our films
characters). These characters include her old friend Benji, a translator, a
group of French miscreants: Papillion (the leader), Zed and Souxie (the
Banshee, no kidding) all of whom are experts on the secret underground
catacombs. Her loyal documentarian George rounds out the crew who has
followed her around since the film’s opening shot.
Up until this point, the horror element of this film is non-existent. Once
the crew journey into the secret catacombs is when things begin to get
eerie. Plot and circumstance is good and all, but it’s a horror movie, is
it scary? Well, I wasn’t scared at all, neither was my wife whom I saw the
movie with. I’d call it more of a psychological thriller, a slight one at
that. Lots of supernatural happenings occur in the caverns akin to what
you’d find in a haunted house movie. Things like phone’s ringing
inexplicably in an area devoid of electricity and hundreds of feet below
the ground, spooky ghost like figures chanting occult hymns, and dead
drowned children. There isn’t much gore in this film, the little found is
reserved for the last 3rd of the movie. Some fear and wince inducing
moments are supplied via claustrophobia as the group squeezes themselves
through tight corridors and underwater channels. They did a pretty good job
of getting your heart racing. These scenes were reminiscent of a greater
horror entry “The Descent.” If you’ve seen that film, then you know what to
expect when it comes to the 1st person moments of claustrophobia.
Once in the catacombs what follows is a maze of twists and turns and
strange occurrences as the crew tries to solve the mystery of the hidden
Philosopher’s Stone as one by one the crew members get killed off in their
attempt to escape the demonic maze of underground tunnels. As for the
ending? Well prepare to be underwhelmed. The definitive worst part of the
film is its ending. It is so mundane and handled extremely poorly as to
come to an abrupt and seemingly rushed finish without any sense of
accomplishment or endearment to any of the characters or what they have
been through. Although they don’t all make it out alive (naturally this is
a horror film) those that do give off the impression of a group that has
just passed out of the end of a haunted house maze similar to those at the
upcoming Halloween Horror Nights at Universal Studios.
all shaky cam. This found-footage film could also be more aptly titled as
“Lara Croft goes to hell.” The story centers around an excitable young
adventurer with a British accent named Scarlett on a search for the
mythological Philosopher’s Stone. A self-professed scholar of alchemy, she
hopes proving that the stone exists will fulfill her father’s legacy and
prove to the world that he wasn’t crazy. This search leads her and her
partners through the secret areas of the haunted catacombs of Pairs, France
into what could be hell itself. The movie starts with her traveling to Iran
for clues on the location of the Philosopher’s Stone.
The action opens without introductions which I enjoyed, as it gets right
into the action and sets the a good pace for the rest of the film. After
retrieving clues to the location of the stone and narrowly avoiding
security and a cave-in in Iran, our heroine sets off to Paris, France to
gather the rest of the crew for her adventure (the rest of our films
characters). These characters include her old friend Benji, a translator, a
group of French miscreants: Papillion (the leader), Zed and Souxie (the
Banshee, no kidding) all of whom are experts on the secret underground
catacombs. Her loyal documentarian George rounds out the crew who has
followed her around since the film’s opening shot.
Up until this point, the horror element of this film is non-existent. Once
the crew journey into the secret catacombs is when things begin to get
eerie. Plot and circumstance is good and all, but it’s a horror movie, is
it scary? Well, I wasn’t scared at all, neither was my wife whom I saw the
movie with. I’d call it more of a psychological thriller, a slight one at
that. Lots of supernatural happenings occur in the caverns akin to what
you’d find in a haunted house movie. Things like phone’s ringing
inexplicably in an area devoid of electricity and hundreds of feet below
the ground, spooky ghost like figures chanting occult hymns, and dead
drowned children. There isn’t much gore in this film, the little found is
reserved for the last 3rd of the movie. Some fear and wince inducing
moments are supplied via claustrophobia as the group squeezes themselves
through tight corridors and underwater channels. They did a pretty good job
of getting your heart racing. These scenes were reminiscent of a greater
horror entry “The Descent.” If you’ve seen that film, then you know what to
expect when it comes to the 1st person moments of claustrophobia.
Once in the catacombs what follows is a maze of twists and turns and
strange occurrences as the crew tries to solve the mystery of the hidden
Philosopher’s Stone as one by one the crew members get killed off in their
attempt to escape the demonic maze of underground tunnels. As for the
ending? Well prepare to be underwhelmed. The definitive worst part of the
film is its ending. It is so mundane and handled extremely poorly as to
come to an abrupt and seemingly rushed finish without any sense of
accomplishment or endearment to any of the characters or what they have
been through. Although they don’t all make it out alive (naturally this is
a horror film) those that do give off the impression of a group that has
just passed out of the end of a haunted house maze similar to those at the
upcoming Halloween Horror Nights at Universal Studios.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Chernobyl Diaries (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
What do you get when you pair the director of “Paranormal Activity” with a handful of unknown actors, a one-hit wonder soap-star-turned-singer, and a plot based upon the Chernobyl meltdown? You guessed it: a sub-par suspense film with a poorly executed ending.
Meet Chris, Amanda, and Natalie – a trio of pretty Americans touring Europe and en route to Russia to meet Chris’ older brother, Paul, in Minsk. Unbeknownst to Amanda, Chris confides in his older brother his plan to propose to her upon their arrival in Moscow, their next destination. However, Paul decides to intervene and proposes a new plan: an extreme tourism excursion in the abandoned city of Pripyat, just outside of the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Despite Chris’ pleas, the group decides to take up Paul’s offer and embark the next day to Chernobyl/Pripyat under the guide of Uri, an ex-Soviet Special Forces agent.
Piling into an assault-van of sorts and accompanied by a pair of last minute travelers – an Aussie named Mike and his blonde Norse girlfriend, Zoe – they set off on the 2-hour drive to Pripyat. However, it is upon arrival at their destination that they find the area restricted to tourists by the Soviet guard. Undaunted, Uri drives the van to another remote access point, stealing them into the abandoned city of Pripyat for their excursion. It is there, as one can imagine, that some unknown element intercedes and prevents them from leaving the city. Somehow wires to the van’s starter are cut and they are forced to stay overnight. It’s at this point, as you can imagine, the horror movie element sets in and the typical suspense-film-plot takes over.
Of course, people leave the van to investigate “strange noises” and, of course, they are picked off one by one. As the movie progresses and the horror-film starts to settle in, the plot unravels and you’re ultimately left with one of the lamest endings conceived. Basically, you’ve had almost two hour’s worth of build-up and suspense for absolutely nothing.
Suspense-wise, you’re definitely going to jump here and there; my poor date had to suffer through my grabbing his hand and leg on more than one occasion. Acting wise, there’s nothing substantial. Jesse McCartney draws upon his experience as a soap actor for the more emotional role and Devin Kelley who plays Amanda seems more adept at sticking out her chest than acting her way out of a bag. But I digress, horror movies aren’t exactly based on strong acting skills, right?
If you’re looking for a good suspense film, something that gives you an excuse to grab your date’s hand or squeal like a girl, then this is a good film for that. If you’re looking for something twisted, something akin to “The Hills Have Eyes” or “Silent Hill,” then this falls rather short in comparison. The director had so many opportunities to delve further into the Chernobyl mystery and play up the radiation/mutation stab, but failed to provide any substance behind his direction. For my taste, there were too many unanswered questions and vague allusions for me to be wholly impressed with the movie. The premise had a lot of potential and promise but honestly failed to deliver.
Meet Chris, Amanda, and Natalie – a trio of pretty Americans touring Europe and en route to Russia to meet Chris’ older brother, Paul, in Minsk. Unbeknownst to Amanda, Chris confides in his older brother his plan to propose to her upon their arrival in Moscow, their next destination. However, Paul decides to intervene and proposes a new plan: an extreme tourism excursion in the abandoned city of Pripyat, just outside of the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Despite Chris’ pleas, the group decides to take up Paul’s offer and embark the next day to Chernobyl/Pripyat under the guide of Uri, an ex-Soviet Special Forces agent.
Piling into an assault-van of sorts and accompanied by a pair of last minute travelers – an Aussie named Mike and his blonde Norse girlfriend, Zoe – they set off on the 2-hour drive to Pripyat. However, it is upon arrival at their destination that they find the area restricted to tourists by the Soviet guard. Undaunted, Uri drives the van to another remote access point, stealing them into the abandoned city of Pripyat for their excursion. It is there, as one can imagine, that some unknown element intercedes and prevents them from leaving the city. Somehow wires to the van’s starter are cut and they are forced to stay overnight. It’s at this point, as you can imagine, the horror movie element sets in and the typical suspense-film-plot takes over.
Of course, people leave the van to investigate “strange noises” and, of course, they are picked off one by one. As the movie progresses and the horror-film starts to settle in, the plot unravels and you’re ultimately left with one of the lamest endings conceived. Basically, you’ve had almost two hour’s worth of build-up and suspense for absolutely nothing.
Suspense-wise, you’re definitely going to jump here and there; my poor date had to suffer through my grabbing his hand and leg on more than one occasion. Acting wise, there’s nothing substantial. Jesse McCartney draws upon his experience as a soap actor for the more emotional role and Devin Kelley who plays Amanda seems more adept at sticking out her chest than acting her way out of a bag. But I digress, horror movies aren’t exactly based on strong acting skills, right?
If you’re looking for a good suspense film, something that gives you an excuse to grab your date’s hand or squeal like a girl, then this is a good film for that. If you’re looking for something twisted, something akin to “The Hills Have Eyes” or “Silent Hill,” then this falls rather short in comparison. The director had so many opportunities to delve further into the Chernobyl mystery and play up the radiation/mutation stab, but failed to provide any substance behind his direction. For my taste, there were too many unanswered questions and vague allusions for me to be wholly impressed with the movie. The premise had a lot of potential and promise but honestly failed to deliver.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Ashes of Glass in Books
Jan 4, 2021
Contains spoilers, click to show
Ashes of Glass is a gorgeous retelling of Cinderella, and you all know what a sucker I am for a retelling!
Arella's upbringing is one we have heard numerous times, both through print and on screen. For this reason Emma Hill presents this chapter of Arella's life almost as a misty, memory montage; preferring to focus on the upcoming tale she has to tell. I must say I greatly appreciated this originality and confindence: Hill knows she has an absolute gem of a story here and doesn't need to pad it out with the sad turn of events we all know.
Anyone who has read "So, This is Love" by Elizabeth Lim will see some similarities within the two storylines in that Ella begins working in the Palace. However, Hill's Ella is , in my opinion, a much stronger character from the outset. She has no qualms in challenging Prince Freddie's prejudices in respects to gypsies and, on the whole, does not change her behaviour towards Freddie once she discovers he is the Prince.
Ella and Freddie are only two of a whole cast of characters who are beautifully portrayed within this novel. I really loved the added details such as the King's interest in elephants, the fact that the Duke was nicer (but still quite strict) and the fact that Ella had a friend alongside her. All of these factors made the story a lot more real than the classic fairy tale. Hill made it so easy for the reader to fall in love with Ella and Freddie as a couple, especially because they were not perfect and experienced real emotions such as doubt and jealousy. If anything, our love for these two made it even easier for us to hate the villain, Lord DiFortunato.
Now, we all love to hate the sleazy, slimy villain in a story, but this guy was something else! Emma Hill's villain literally made my skin crawl and, at the point in the story where Ella's curiosity puts her in a whole heap of danger, the suspense was too much I had to skim read just to know whether she was going to be OK.
The one character I did want a bit more of was Lady Izabella: I suspect she was likely Freddie's godmother due to her friendship with the Queen and I think this could have been cleverly played on a little more. Don't get me wrong she was a charming (and necessary) background character but I would have liked to see her a little more.
EJ Hill also included a lot of nods to the original fairy tale which were really appreciated. Of course the iconic pink dress becomes ruined and the ballgown is a must but Ella's affectionate use of Prince Charming as a nickname for Freddie was just gorgeous. Oh and losing the shoe: genius!
This is not to say this story lacks originality though. There is a thrilling sub plot into the investigation into the King's death which moves alongside and intersects Arella's plotline beautifully.
I would say that the chapters do shift from Arella to Freddie quite often and this could be quite confusing at times. Also faith plays a huge part within the story. I already knew Emma Hill was a Christian so this wasn't a surprise and it didn't put me off the story at all. I do think that it was included quite heavily though.
If you want the story of Cinderella, with a swoon-worthy Prince, more action, less Stepmother/sisters and an underlying murder mystery. This is the book for you!
Arella's upbringing is one we have heard numerous times, both through print and on screen. For this reason Emma Hill presents this chapter of Arella's life almost as a misty, memory montage; preferring to focus on the upcoming tale she has to tell. I must say I greatly appreciated this originality and confindence: Hill knows she has an absolute gem of a story here and doesn't need to pad it out with the sad turn of events we all know.
Anyone who has read "So, This is Love" by Elizabeth Lim will see some similarities within the two storylines in that Ella begins working in the Palace. However, Hill's Ella is , in my opinion, a much stronger character from the outset. She has no qualms in challenging Prince Freddie's prejudices in respects to gypsies and, on the whole, does not change her behaviour towards Freddie once she discovers he is the Prince.
Ella and Freddie are only two of a whole cast of characters who are beautifully portrayed within this novel. I really loved the added details such as the King's interest in elephants, the fact that the Duke was nicer (but still quite strict) and the fact that Ella had a friend alongside her. All of these factors made the story a lot more real than the classic fairy tale. Hill made it so easy for the reader to fall in love with Ella and Freddie as a couple, especially because they were not perfect and experienced real emotions such as doubt and jealousy. If anything, our love for these two made it even easier for us to hate the villain, Lord DiFortunato.
Now, we all love to hate the sleazy, slimy villain in a story, but this guy was something else! Emma Hill's villain literally made my skin crawl and, at the point in the story where Ella's curiosity puts her in a whole heap of danger, the suspense was too much I had to skim read just to know whether she was going to be OK.
The one character I did want a bit more of was Lady Izabella: I suspect she was likely Freddie's godmother due to her friendship with the Queen and I think this could have been cleverly played on a little more. Don't get me wrong she was a charming (and necessary) background character but I would have liked to see her a little more.
EJ Hill also included a lot of nods to the original fairy tale which were really appreciated. Of course the iconic pink dress becomes ruined and the ballgown is a must but Ella's affectionate use of Prince Charming as a nickname for Freddie was just gorgeous. Oh and losing the shoe: genius!
This is not to say this story lacks originality though. There is a thrilling sub plot into the investigation into the King's death which moves alongside and intersects Arella's plotline beautifully.
I would say that the chapters do shift from Arella to Freddie quite often and this could be quite confusing at times. Also faith plays a huge part within the story. I already knew Emma Hill was a Christian so this wasn't a surprise and it didn't put me off the story at all. I do think that it was included quite heavily though.
If you want the story of Cinderella, with a swoon-worthy Prince, more action, less Stepmother/sisters and an underlying murder mystery. This is the book for you!
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Little Things (2021) in Movies
Feb 1, 2021
3 Strong Actors Elevate This Above Mediocrity
Generally, when a movie is “dumped” in January, it is a sure sign of a bad film, filled with Liam Neeson kicking butt or CGI monsters attacking a small group of survivors in an isolated location, but these being times that they are, Warner Brothers release of THE LITTLE THINGS simultaneously in Movie Theaters and on HBO MAX gave me reason to change my thinking.
And…I’m glad I did for THE LITTLE THINGS is an intriguing mystery with 3 very strong actors going toe-to-toe with each other.
Written and Directed by John Lee Hancock (THE BLIND SIDE), THE LITTLE THINGS stars the great Denzel Washington as a former L.A. Detective (now a Sherriff in some small town) who returns to L.A. and teams up with his hot shot replacement (Rami Malek) to track down a serial killer (the main suspect being Jared Leto).
It is a moody, atmospheric piece with Hancock taking his time telling the story he wants to tell in the way he wants to tell it, letting this trio of Oscar winning actors take over the story while he creates interesting, moody pictures/scenarios/scenes.
And…this approach mostly works. 2 time Oscar winner Denzel Washington, as you can imagine, is terrific as Joe “Deke” Deacon a cracker-jack Detective that is living with some demons from his last case in L.A.. He is in 90% of the scenes in this film and he is more than capable of carrying this film through some pretty slow and sloggy scenes.
I would love to say that Oscar winner Rami Malek is equal to the task of playing against Washington and keeping the middle part of this film interesting - but he just isn’t. Not to say that Malek is bad - he is very good. He just isn’t as good as Washington and the chemistry between these two characters was just not all that strong.
That said…without spoiling anything…Malek has a scene at the end of this film where he is TERRIFIC and shows that he is a VERY, VERY good actor.
The wild card in this film is Oscar winner Jared Leto as the prime suspect in this case - and he is more than up to the task. As is often the case in these sorts of film (think David Fincher’s SEVEN), Leto does not show up in full force until about 2/3 of the way through the film and that is too bad for he creates sparks on the screen the moment he enters the proceedings and the 3 way interrogation scene between these 3 Oscar winners is, I’m sure, what drew all 3 of these performers to this project and is the best thing in the film.
The praise and the criticism of this film must fall on Writer/Director Hancock, for he was smart enough to cast these 3 actors and direct them well while also falling prey to falling in love too much with the script and atmosphere he created to the detriment of the film. He could have used someone telling him to speed things up.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
And…I’m glad I did for THE LITTLE THINGS is an intriguing mystery with 3 very strong actors going toe-to-toe with each other.
Written and Directed by John Lee Hancock (THE BLIND SIDE), THE LITTLE THINGS stars the great Denzel Washington as a former L.A. Detective (now a Sherriff in some small town) who returns to L.A. and teams up with his hot shot replacement (Rami Malek) to track down a serial killer (the main suspect being Jared Leto).
It is a moody, atmospheric piece with Hancock taking his time telling the story he wants to tell in the way he wants to tell it, letting this trio of Oscar winning actors take over the story while he creates interesting, moody pictures/scenarios/scenes.
And…this approach mostly works. 2 time Oscar winner Denzel Washington, as you can imagine, is terrific as Joe “Deke” Deacon a cracker-jack Detective that is living with some demons from his last case in L.A.. He is in 90% of the scenes in this film and he is more than capable of carrying this film through some pretty slow and sloggy scenes.
I would love to say that Oscar winner Rami Malek is equal to the task of playing against Washington and keeping the middle part of this film interesting - but he just isn’t. Not to say that Malek is bad - he is very good. He just isn’t as good as Washington and the chemistry between these two characters was just not all that strong.
That said…without spoiling anything…Malek has a scene at the end of this film where he is TERRIFIC and shows that he is a VERY, VERY good actor.
The wild card in this film is Oscar winner Jared Leto as the prime suspect in this case - and he is more than up to the task. As is often the case in these sorts of film (think David Fincher’s SEVEN), Leto does not show up in full force until about 2/3 of the way through the film and that is too bad for he creates sparks on the screen the moment he enters the proceedings and the 3 way interrogation scene between these 3 Oscar winners is, I’m sure, what drew all 3 of these performers to this project and is the best thing in the film.
The praise and the criticism of this film must fall on Writer/Director Hancock, for he was smart enough to cast these 3 actors and direct them well while also falling prey to falling in love too much with the script and atmosphere he created to the detriment of the film. He could have used someone telling him to speed things up.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated One Two Three in Books
Jun 10, 2021
A touching read about family and resilience
Nothing new ever happens in the town of Bourne. Everyone knows everyone. So when the moving trucks arrive, it causes a stir. Bourne is a town known for one thing: seventeen years ago, their water turned green. Many of their citizens of died, others have cancer and other illnesses, and others gave birth to children with birth defects. You'll never find a town more accommodating to wheelchairs. But it has one doctor (also the priest) and one therapist (Nora Mitchell). Bourne houses Nora's triplets, beloved by all: Mab, the "normal" one, who is expected to go to college and escape this place; Monday, who runs the town library from their home and prefers yellow everything (food, clothes, and more); and Mirabel, the smartest of them all, confined to her wheelchair, dependent on her sisters and mom for so much and on a computer to act as her Voice. Nora has been fighting for justice since the water turned green. When the newcomers come to town, the past roars up, involving the Mitchell triplets and bringing to light decades old secrets. How hard will Mab, Monday, and Mirabel fight for their town?
This is such an original book from the author of THIS IS HOW IT ALWAYS IS. It sneaks up on you with its quiet and touching story. Frankel weaves an emotional tale that makes you think. It's utterly fascinating, this devastated town and its broken people. So many of its citizens are sick or have lost someone they love. Yet there is a lot of hope in Bourne, especially as the story is told through young Mab, Monday, and Mirabel's eyes. They've only known their mom's sadness and bitterness, never having met their father, yet each has their own (often quirky) way of looking at life.
Frankel alternates viewpoints from each triplet, naming her chapters One (Mab), Two (Monday), and Three (Mirabel) and repeating from there. It takes a moment to get into the groove of each triplets' voice, but once you do, it's easy to get attached to them. Mab feels the weight of the world on her shoulders, sweet Monday takes everything literally, and Mirabel must remain cheerful, despite all her medical issues. Their mom holds a variety of jobs, including town therapist and working at the local bar, and maintains a decades long lawsuit and grievance. It's hard to know what the triplets' life might be like without Nora's anger and bitterness.
Still, ONE TWO THREE highlights the power of sisterhood and family. You'd think a book about a broken town would be depressing and a slugfest, but it's anything but. In many ways, I found this to be almost a mystery, as the sisters work together to figure out about the newcomers in their town and how they relate to the years of devastation wrecked upon Bourne. The result is utterly compelling, with years of intertwined secrets making for a fascinating read.
Still, at the core, this is a story about teenage girls and how they relate to the world. It's sweet, heartbreaking, and extremely well-written. There are a few points where I wish the plot sped up a bit, but overall, this is a touching and lovely story about a family and their small town.
I received a copy of this book from Henry Holt & Company and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review. Look for ONE TWO THREE on 6/8/2021!
This is such an original book from the author of THIS IS HOW IT ALWAYS IS. It sneaks up on you with its quiet and touching story. Frankel weaves an emotional tale that makes you think. It's utterly fascinating, this devastated town and its broken people. So many of its citizens are sick or have lost someone they love. Yet there is a lot of hope in Bourne, especially as the story is told through young Mab, Monday, and Mirabel's eyes. They've only known their mom's sadness and bitterness, never having met their father, yet each has their own (often quirky) way of looking at life.
Frankel alternates viewpoints from each triplet, naming her chapters One (Mab), Two (Monday), and Three (Mirabel) and repeating from there. It takes a moment to get into the groove of each triplets' voice, but once you do, it's easy to get attached to them. Mab feels the weight of the world on her shoulders, sweet Monday takes everything literally, and Mirabel must remain cheerful, despite all her medical issues. Their mom holds a variety of jobs, including town therapist and working at the local bar, and maintains a decades long lawsuit and grievance. It's hard to know what the triplets' life might be like without Nora's anger and bitterness.
Still, ONE TWO THREE highlights the power of sisterhood and family. You'd think a book about a broken town would be depressing and a slugfest, but it's anything but. In many ways, I found this to be almost a mystery, as the sisters work together to figure out about the newcomers in their town and how they relate to the years of devastation wrecked upon Bourne. The result is utterly compelling, with years of intertwined secrets making for a fascinating read.
Still, at the core, this is a story about teenage girls and how they relate to the world. It's sweet, heartbreaking, and extremely well-written. There are a few points where I wish the plot sped up a bit, but overall, this is a touching and lovely story about a family and their small town.
I received a copy of this book from Henry Holt & Company and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review. Look for ONE TWO THREE on 6/8/2021!
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated That Summer in Books
May 27, 2021
A touching and insightful look into the power of the past
On the surface, Daisy Shoemaker has the perfect life: a doting lawyer husband, a loving daughter, and her own cooking business. But underneath, she's full of doubts. Her husband is distant, her teenage daughter resentful, and her business--just something to keep her "occupied." Daisy's been receiving emails lately, meant for another woman named Diana, Daisy's given name. This Diana, a business consultant, seems glamorous and wealthy. When Diana invites Daisy to lunch, she impulsively says yes. But as the two form a friendship, Daisy starts to wonder if their connection was purely accidental. What exactly does Diana want from Daisy?
"For the last six months, Daisy had been receiving emails that she realized were intended not for her, but for the other Diana."
This is not a light and airy beach read, but a serious book that focuses in on the recent #MeToo topic. Much of the book doesn't even take place on the promised Cape setting. Does that mean it's not worth a read? Not at all. Weiner's constructed a compelling and heartfelt tale, with characters that pull you into the story. It feels a little reminiscent of some other #MeToo stories I've read recently, but I was still glued to the pages, wondering what had happened in Diana's past and how things would turn out for everyone.
There's a bit of a mystery here, but it's not too hard to figure out how everything pieces together. The real focus is the characters. We have Daisy, insecure and struggling in her marriage to Hal, a wealthy and arrogant man more than a decade older than her. It's clear Hal takes Daisy for granted--and that may be letting him off easy. Their daughter, Beatrice, was a favorite of mine: an original teen, with her own unique way of living her life. Beatrice's scenes stood out; she's a character I won't soon easily forget. We also have Daisy's brother, Danny, and his husband Jesse. And then there's the "other" Diana, who worms her way into Daisy's life. Can we trust her? Diana was a memorable character to me as well, along with someone close to her. (I don't want to say much more for spoilers.)
The book is told mainly from Daisy, Diana, and Beatrice's perspectives. It goes back and forth in time. It's a little confusing in the beginning, getting the timeline straight and how all the characters relate. Once I got that down, it was a fast read. Some of it may be a little predictable, but it's in turns sad, heartwarming, and funny. I loved Beatrice, as mentioned, and the dynamic between Daisy and Diana was well-written. Weiner does a good job of exploring how class and privilege relate to sexual assault (a definite trigger warning for rape in this story) and the repercussions of rape across individuals, families, and friends. She focuses, too, on the importance of accepting those you love for who they are, no strings attached.
Overall, I'm quite glad I picked this one up. Despite some of the vague familiarity to other #MeToo books, for the most part, it felt refreshing and interesting. It certainly held my attention and brought to light the important topic of rape and its aftermath. The characters here are well-drawn, and I'll always have a place in my heart for dear Beatrice. 4 stars.
"For the last six months, Daisy had been receiving emails that she realized were intended not for her, but for the other Diana."
This is not a light and airy beach read, but a serious book that focuses in on the recent #MeToo topic. Much of the book doesn't even take place on the promised Cape setting. Does that mean it's not worth a read? Not at all. Weiner's constructed a compelling and heartfelt tale, with characters that pull you into the story. It feels a little reminiscent of some other #MeToo stories I've read recently, but I was still glued to the pages, wondering what had happened in Diana's past and how things would turn out for everyone.
There's a bit of a mystery here, but it's not too hard to figure out how everything pieces together. The real focus is the characters. We have Daisy, insecure and struggling in her marriage to Hal, a wealthy and arrogant man more than a decade older than her. It's clear Hal takes Daisy for granted--and that may be letting him off easy. Their daughter, Beatrice, was a favorite of mine: an original teen, with her own unique way of living her life. Beatrice's scenes stood out; she's a character I won't soon easily forget. We also have Daisy's brother, Danny, and his husband Jesse. And then there's the "other" Diana, who worms her way into Daisy's life. Can we trust her? Diana was a memorable character to me as well, along with someone close to her. (I don't want to say much more for spoilers.)
The book is told mainly from Daisy, Diana, and Beatrice's perspectives. It goes back and forth in time. It's a little confusing in the beginning, getting the timeline straight and how all the characters relate. Once I got that down, it was a fast read. Some of it may be a little predictable, but it's in turns sad, heartwarming, and funny. I loved Beatrice, as mentioned, and the dynamic between Daisy and Diana was well-written. Weiner does a good job of exploring how class and privilege relate to sexual assault (a definite trigger warning for rape in this story) and the repercussions of rape across individuals, families, and friends. She focuses, too, on the importance of accepting those you love for who they are, no strings attached.
Overall, I'm quite glad I picked this one up. Despite some of the vague familiarity to other #MeToo books, for the most part, it felt refreshing and interesting. It certainly held my attention and brought to light the important topic of rape and its aftermath. The characters here are well-drawn, and I'll always have a place in my heart for dear Beatrice. 4 stars.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Memento (2000) in Movies
Nov 29, 2020
One of my favourite films
Film #5 on the 100 Movies Bucket List: Memento
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
I have to admit, I may be a little biased when it comes to Memento. Christopher Nolan is my favourite director and Memento is both one of my favourite films of his and one of my favourite films of all time. For me, this undoubtedly deserves its place on this bucket list.
Memento is a 2000 psychological thriller starring Guy Pearce as Leonard Shelby, a man suffering from anterograde amnesia searching for the person responsible for the death of his wife, using notes and tattoos to organise his thoughts.
One of the most noticeable features of Memento is the fact that half of the narrative is told backwards. The movie begins at the end, focusing on a rather gruesome Polaroid photograph that fades rather than develops and a victim of a shooting coming back to life. The rest of the film jumps backwards a few minutes at a time, each scene ending where the last one started. For a film about memory loss and amnesia, this mechanism of telling the story really helps put us in Leonard’s shoes. It makes you feel as confused as he is. On the original dvd release, there was a hidden feature that allowed you to play the film in chronological order and this just didn’t have the same impact. These reverse scenes are interspersed with black and white flashbacks of Leonard earlier in his wife’s murder investigation and his life as an insurance investigator, which really help with the exposition. These paired together alongside a haunting score make for an intriguing and not your run of the mill murder mystery.
There are some great performances in this that also help increase the intrigue. Carrie-Anne Moss as the apparently helpful Natalie and Joe Pantoliano as the questionable sidekick appear new to Leonard every time they meet yet their loyalties and motives waver for us as the viewers throughout the film. And Guy Pearce manages to portray the frustrated and not as innocent as he first appears Leonard incredibly well, and holds this film on his own for most of the run time. They’re helped by a clever and smart script that flawlessly blends the sinister and rather dark criminal aspects of this with some surprisingly funny lines.
This story starts at the end so you don’t have to worry about how it turns out, but despite this Memento still comes up with a rather cracking twist and denouement. This entire film is about time and memory and how unreliable it is, and the lies we tell ourselves about our own identities. Even during this, what we thought we knew about Leonard as the black and white flashback meets the backwards story, is revealed to be completely unreliable and quite shocking. Without revealing too much, the outcome of this film is both surprising, sinister and rather emotional, and features some of the best dialogue of the entire movie. Leonard’s actions and motives revealed here and the final voiceover as he drives off makes for a hugely satisfying ending.
I first watched Memento in a psychology class at college around 17 years ago. I loved it then and in the years since, it hasn’t lost its appeal. Watching it back now still evokes the same emotion and feelings when the credits roll as it did all those years ago and will always be one of my favourite films, even possibly my all time favourite.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Reverie in Books
Oct 5, 2020
I wanted to love Reverie by Ryan La Sala so much!
Reverie has a wonderful cover that draws you in immediately. The plot mentions a boy and a fantasy world that revolves around dreams. Everything I hoped this book would be – it wasn’t.
Kane is a gay teenager who is trying to pick up the pieces of his life back together after an attack leaves him with no memories of the past. He is in the search of who he is and who he was, and he discovers an alternate reality that he was involved in.
Reveries are worlds born from a person’s private fantasies, and once they manifest they can only be unraveled by bringing their conflicts to a resolution. Reveries have rules and plots, magic and monsters – anything you could wish for. And one wrong step can twist the entire thing into a lethal nightmare maze.
Sounds complicated already?
What if I told you that this is only from the blurb and the book doesn’t really explain these things at all?
Kane is an unraveler, together with The Others. Or at least he was, until one of The Others purged Kane of his memories. And here we are now, with Kane trying to solve the mystery and fight against evil.
I jumped into this book very eagerly, and was disappointing immediately, within the first couple of pages. The reveries and their whole concept were quite confusing, to the point of me not knowing whether the characters are now in a reverie, or in their real world.
Reverie had an amazing concept and it could’ve been done way better than this. I am just disappointed. It all seemed a bit messy and felt like it wasn’t thought through…
I didn’t connect with any of the characters, except for Kane, for the below reasons. And that was it… I didn’t care about any of the others, and there were quite a few characters.
One thing that annoyed me about Reverie, was the exaggeration of the #OwnVoices.
I am not against it, on the contrary! I love equality and I love diversity, and I share love everywhere and to everyone, and if you know me in real life, you will know this about me. We are all equal and different at the same time, and that is the unique thing that connects us all.
However, this book keeps mentioning that Kane is gay. And Kane is a lovely character. He is smart and he is brave. His memories were lost and is desperately trying to find out who he is, who he was, who are his true friends, who is good and who is evil. He doesn’t take for granted on what people tell him. He is AMAZING. Kane was so much more than just gay. But the author kept trying so hard to put an #OwnVoices hashtag on this book, that is was quite aggressive and off-putting. I love books that feature #OwnVoices, but Ryan, please – a little bit of modesty would’ve been nice.
I keep feeling this pressure of trying to write a book review that will not offend anyone, and I don’t mean to offend anyone, but I need to say that sometimes, there can be such a thing as “too much OwnVoicing” in a book. And we shouldn’t be afraid to point it out!
I am really sad about this one, guys. Honestly, I expected it to love it so bad, and now I feel down. I wouldn’t recommend it, but if you think you will love it, please pick it up. You are valid!
Reverie has a wonderful cover that draws you in immediately. The plot mentions a boy and a fantasy world that revolves around dreams. Everything I hoped this book would be – it wasn’t.
Kane is a gay teenager who is trying to pick up the pieces of his life back together after an attack leaves him with no memories of the past. He is in the search of who he is and who he was, and he discovers an alternate reality that he was involved in.
Reveries are worlds born from a person’s private fantasies, and once they manifest they can only be unraveled by bringing their conflicts to a resolution. Reveries have rules and plots, magic and monsters – anything you could wish for. And one wrong step can twist the entire thing into a lethal nightmare maze.
Sounds complicated already?
What if I told you that this is only from the blurb and the book doesn’t really explain these things at all?
Kane is an unraveler, together with The Others. Or at least he was, until one of The Others purged Kane of his memories. And here we are now, with Kane trying to solve the mystery and fight against evil.
I jumped into this book very eagerly, and was disappointing immediately, within the first couple of pages. The reveries and their whole concept were quite confusing, to the point of me not knowing whether the characters are now in a reverie, or in their real world.
Reverie had an amazing concept and it could’ve been done way better than this. I am just disappointed. It all seemed a bit messy and felt like it wasn’t thought through…
I didn’t connect with any of the characters, except for Kane, for the below reasons. And that was it… I didn’t care about any of the others, and there were quite a few characters.
One thing that annoyed me about Reverie, was the exaggeration of the #OwnVoices.
I am not against it, on the contrary! I love equality and I love diversity, and I share love everywhere and to everyone, and if you know me in real life, you will know this about me. We are all equal and different at the same time, and that is the unique thing that connects us all.
However, this book keeps mentioning that Kane is gay. And Kane is a lovely character. He is smart and he is brave. His memories were lost and is desperately trying to find out who he is, who he was, who are his true friends, who is good and who is evil. He doesn’t take for granted on what people tell him. He is AMAZING. Kane was so much more than just gay. But the author kept trying so hard to put an #OwnVoices hashtag on this book, that is was quite aggressive and off-putting. I love books that feature #OwnVoices, but Ryan, please – a little bit of modesty would’ve been nice.
I keep feeling this pressure of trying to write a book review that will not offend anyone, and I don’t mean to offend anyone, but I need to say that sometimes, there can be such a thing as “too much OwnVoicing” in a book. And we shouldn’t be afraid to point it out!
I am really sad about this one, guys. Honestly, I expected it to love it so bad, and now I feel down. I wouldn’t recommend it, but if you think you will love it, please pick it up. You are valid!