Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated A Quiet Place (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Like many parents, Lee (John Krasinski), and Evelyn (Emily Blunt), have an overwhelming urge to keep their children safe in the world and protect them at all costs. In the new film “A Quiet Place”, that maternal drive is taken to extreme levels as the world has been attacked by vicious creatures who hunt by sound alone.
The slightest loud noise will bring a rapid moving creature in moments that will destroy whatever made the sound instantly. As such, Lee and Evelyn have gone to great lengths to live as quietly as possible and even have a system for their home and supply runs to be as safe as possible.
When tragedy strikes, it causes a division between Lee and their only daughter Regan (Millicent Simmonds), who although deaf herself believes she is being blamed for the tragedy and the guilt has only grown over time.
The family continues on and the film jumps forward in time to show that Lee is studying as much about the creatures as he can in an effort to find a weakness they can use as well as to provide more security for his family.
Of course even the best plans do not always work and what follows is a very intense and raw struggle for survival which shows just how far a person is willing to go for their family.
Krasinski not only stars in the film but also directed it and helped to write the screenplay. Working with his actual wife worked very well as they have a fantastic chemistry which helps them convey the emotions and thoughts of the film well which is amazing considering how little dialogue there is in the film as gestures and sign language are the most common form of communication.
The film is very intense in moments and a fantastic extended sequence with Blunt had my wife squeezing my hand tightly and afraid to utter a sound as it left her holding her breath.
The film is a very fresh take on the creature genre and the quality of the performances lifts the film to a level rarely seen in a suspense film. The film did play a bit fast and loose with some aspects such as the history of the creatures and the state of the world around them as it is largely conveyed through newspaper headlines left lying around. As such I found myself wondering why certain defensive options and offensive tactics were not used as to me they seemed to be common sense approaches. For a film with such a fresh premise and strong performances, the ending did seem to depend a bit too much on some of the usual Hollywood stereotypes but it did not keep the film from being highly entertaining and effective. As I watched the film I kept thinking that there could be a connection to “Cloverfield” especially based on aspects of the creatures. The film was made for a very small budget so hopefully we will be seeing a sequel in the near future as “A Quiet Place” was a very enjoyable film and one of the best surprises of the year.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/05/a-quiet-place/
The slightest loud noise will bring a rapid moving creature in moments that will destroy whatever made the sound instantly. As such, Lee and Evelyn have gone to great lengths to live as quietly as possible and even have a system for their home and supply runs to be as safe as possible.
When tragedy strikes, it causes a division between Lee and their only daughter Regan (Millicent Simmonds), who although deaf herself believes she is being blamed for the tragedy and the guilt has only grown over time.
The family continues on and the film jumps forward in time to show that Lee is studying as much about the creatures as he can in an effort to find a weakness they can use as well as to provide more security for his family.
Of course even the best plans do not always work and what follows is a very intense and raw struggle for survival which shows just how far a person is willing to go for their family.
Krasinski not only stars in the film but also directed it and helped to write the screenplay. Working with his actual wife worked very well as they have a fantastic chemistry which helps them convey the emotions and thoughts of the film well which is amazing considering how little dialogue there is in the film as gestures and sign language are the most common form of communication.
The film is very intense in moments and a fantastic extended sequence with Blunt had my wife squeezing my hand tightly and afraid to utter a sound as it left her holding her breath.
The film is a very fresh take on the creature genre and the quality of the performances lifts the film to a level rarely seen in a suspense film. The film did play a bit fast and loose with some aspects such as the history of the creatures and the state of the world around them as it is largely conveyed through newspaper headlines left lying around. As such I found myself wondering why certain defensive options and offensive tactics were not used as to me they seemed to be common sense approaches. For a film with such a fresh premise and strong performances, the ending did seem to depend a bit too much on some of the usual Hollywood stereotypes but it did not keep the film from being highly entertaining and effective. As I watched the film I kept thinking that there could be a connection to “Cloverfield” especially based on aspects of the creatures. The film was made for a very small budget so hopefully we will be seeing a sequel in the near future as “A Quiet Place” was a very enjoyable film and one of the best surprises of the year.
http://sknr.net/2018/04/05/a-quiet-place/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Ringu 2 (Ring 2) (2005) in Movies
Nov 7, 2019
Characters – Rachel has moved her child to a smaller town to start a new life away from the pain of the previous one. she gets a new job, only for the first day on the job, Samara takes her next victim. Wanting to stop the spread of the curse in this new town, Rachel destroys the video tape, only to see herself become the target once again of Samara. Rachel will need to continue the investigation into who Samara was and why she is still haunting the world. Max is one of the co-workers at the newspaper, he isn’t trying to hit on Rachel, but does become the only person that Rachel can turn too. Aidan is the son that has started to take after his father with his love of photography, he does become the target of Samara, we see two different sides to David in this film. Dr Temple is trying to figure out what has been happening to Aidan, first seeing that it could be child abuse, she needs to make sure the child is safe before anything else.
Performances – Naomi Watts is still strong in the leading role, we need her to show extra motherly emotions in the film this time around. Simon Baker doesn’t get a chance to get going in this film, while David Dorfman does make a big improvement because of the extra additions to his character. The supporting cast are not the strongest either with most getting left to limited screen time.
Story – The story here continues to see Rachel haunted by Samara needing to continue to unlock the truth about Samara to save her own son from her curse. Now this is a confusing as for a story because everything felt pretty wrapped up at the end of the film, this did end up just putting a forced sequel out there which tries to build more on the Samara legacy. Where this falls short in the story as by giving us weak supporting characters, having the events literally start the day Rachel arrives in the new town and going against certain things that happen in the first film.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in the film does give us basic moments of scares, though dream sequences a hoping the same jumps can worked in the first film. the mystery continues to look at the mystery about Samara and why she has continued to haunt people.
Settings – The film was moved to a smaller location, while returning to certain other locations with them being an extra clue involved in the film.
Special Effects – The effects in the film have dated already, you can see certain green screens being used, which were meant for uneasy scenes.
Scene of the Movie – The bath surprise.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The dated effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a weaker sequel that tries to build up on the original legacy, only to dive further into something we didn’t need to get more about what is happening.
Overall: Simple and weak sequel.
Performances – Naomi Watts is still strong in the leading role, we need her to show extra motherly emotions in the film this time around. Simon Baker doesn’t get a chance to get going in this film, while David Dorfman does make a big improvement because of the extra additions to his character. The supporting cast are not the strongest either with most getting left to limited screen time.
Story – The story here continues to see Rachel haunted by Samara needing to continue to unlock the truth about Samara to save her own son from her curse. Now this is a confusing as for a story because everything felt pretty wrapped up at the end of the film, this did end up just putting a forced sequel out there which tries to build more on the Samara legacy. Where this falls short in the story as by giving us weak supporting characters, having the events literally start the day Rachel arrives in the new town and going against certain things that happen in the first film.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in the film does give us basic moments of scares, though dream sequences a hoping the same jumps can worked in the first film. the mystery continues to look at the mystery about Samara and why she has continued to haunt people.
Settings – The film was moved to a smaller location, while returning to certain other locations with them being an extra clue involved in the film.
Special Effects – The effects in the film have dated already, you can see certain green screens being used, which were meant for uneasy scenes.
Scene of the Movie – The bath surprise.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The dated effects.
Final Thoughts – This is a weaker sequel that tries to build up on the original legacy, only to dive further into something we didn’t need to get more about what is happening.
Overall: Simple and weak sequel.
The Thinking Man's Soldier: The Life and Career of General Sir Henry Brackenbury 1837-1914
Book
Sir Henry Brackenbury is a now largely forgotten but extremely important soldier, writer, and...
Lose Weight by Glenn Harrold
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
Lose Weight easily and naturally with Glenn Harrold's amazingly powerful hypnosis weight loss App....
Punjab Kesari
News and Entertainment
App
Hind Samachar Ltd. & Punjab Kesari Group, a prominent Punjabi/ Hindi Print Media primarily based in...
Golf Coach by Dr Noel Rousseau
Sports and Education
App
Golf Coach is a ground breaking golf instruction app. Winner of both UK and US App Design Awards...
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Chronicles of Crime: 1900 in Tabletop Games
Apr 23, 2021
WARNING: Extremely minor spoilers ahead (in the photos)! Don’t say I didn’t warn you (they aren’t big spoilers).
If you have been following us for a while now you have probably noticed we have published another title from the Millennium Series – Chronicles of Crime: 1400. While that title takes place in the year, well, 1400, this new title is set 500 years later in Paris. How do these games compare? What about the link to the original Chronicles of Crime (review to be posted later)? Should one purchase copies of all Chronicles of Crime games?
Chronicles of Crime: 1900 (which I shall refer to as CoC1900 from here) is a cooperative campaign, deduction, storytelling, puzzle solving adventure game, but I prefer to play it, and its relatives, solo. In it, the player(s) take control of the journalist Victor Lavel, a descendent of the main character from CoC1400. Victor has a limited amount of time to complete his investigation and return the scoop to the local newspaper by which he is employed. Players will be tackling the investigations of our noble hero in attempts to solve the case that is presented.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, place the main card holder board on the table. Anywhere. I called it. Next, keep the card decks in order (or don’t) and place them near the board. Similarly, place the location boards on the table and ready the main newspaper board for play. Launch the Chronicles of Crime app on a device, choose 1900, and select the scenario you wish to play. The app will drive the remainder of the game, so hold onto your butts!
How do I explain this game succinctly? Well, each of the cases will involve players traveling to different Location Boards and meeting Characters at these locations. Many cases will be involving several Special Items and, new for the 1900 version, Puzzle Cards that players will need to solve or use in special ways in order to progress with certain leads. These Puzzle Cards do not really give the story away or anything, but are merely tools to be used to help solve the cases.
By using the app and scanning the QR codes on the boards and cards players will be learning about the case, viewing the scene of the crime(s), inspecting items, and chatting up locals for information. Play will continue not so much in “rounds” but until the players have enough evidence and a good handle on the situation enough to return to the paper’s office to report to their coworkers all the details of the crime(s) by scanning answers to their questions about the case. The app then assesses the accuracy of the answers and outputs a score. Based on the score achieved players can play again to pick up clues they missed along the way or try another scenario entirely.
Components. As with all CoC games I have played, the components are simply wonderful. Most of what is in the box is cardstock of varying thickness, but the art is what really stands out. This is a gorgeous game and when it is displayed on the table, people become fascinated by its presence. Then when the onlookers see an app driving the gameplay they are hooked. I have heard complaints from other reviewers that the Character cards in the game are lacking in variation, and I would have to agree. Yes, it is set in 1900 Paris, but all the Character cards feature white people, most of whom seem to be upper crust, and with most of the males sporting an awful mustache. So I get that complaint and agree. With inclusivity and diversity being major hot issues currently, you would expect to see more of it in our industry. I would have liked to have come across more diverse characters, and maybe a mini expansion can add many alternate art characters to the game.
All in all I loved this theme of Chronicles of Crime. Being set in Paris and following a young investigative journalist is a nice twist on the protagonists commonly featured in these games. The gameplay is the same as previous versions of CoC, save for the new Puzzle cards. I do enjoy their addition, and look to find more of these in future versions. I love the Chronicles of Crime system so I was bound to love this one as well.
Now, should you buy this version if you already have base Chronicles of Crime? Sure! Why? I like this one because it adds a different mechanic to the game with all-new scenarios, and I enjoy having more of a good thing. I think I personally prefer the theme in 1400 more, but 1900 is a great addition to the family. If you are someone who has and enjoys the base CoC, or any of its iterations, and are looking for more content to devour, then definitely grab a copy of 1900. If you are new to the system, I say go ahead and start with 1900. The Puzzle cards do not add enough complexity to take it out of reach for beginner gamers or those who enjoy lighter games, but certainly add a new and welcome layer to the series. Purple Phoenix Games certainly recommends this one to all our fans. Can’t get enough Chronicles of Crime? Grab 1900. Want to start in the series but London or Medieval times don’t do it for you? Grab 1900. Like tons of portraits of mustachioed white dudes and floofy ladies? Grab 1900. Whatever your motivation, play the game and let me know how you score. I am not advertising my first score here because I am mortified by my performance. (I did get better on subsequent plays.)
If you have been following us for a while now you have probably noticed we have published another title from the Millennium Series – Chronicles of Crime: 1400. While that title takes place in the year, well, 1400, this new title is set 500 years later in Paris. How do these games compare? What about the link to the original Chronicles of Crime (review to be posted later)? Should one purchase copies of all Chronicles of Crime games?
Chronicles of Crime: 1900 (which I shall refer to as CoC1900 from here) is a cooperative campaign, deduction, storytelling, puzzle solving adventure game, but I prefer to play it, and its relatives, solo. In it, the player(s) take control of the journalist Victor Lavel, a descendent of the main character from CoC1400. Victor has a limited amount of time to complete his investigation and return the scoop to the local newspaper by which he is employed. Players will be tackling the investigations of our noble hero in attempts to solve the case that is presented.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a copy of this game for the purposes of this review. This is a retail copy of the game, so what you see in these photos is exactly what would be received in your box. I do not intend to cover every single rule included in the rulebook, but will describe the overall game flow and major rule set so that our readers may get a sense of how the game plays. For more in depth rules, you may purchase a copy online or from your FLGS. -T
To setup, place the main card holder board on the table. Anywhere. I called it. Next, keep the card decks in order (or don’t) and place them near the board. Similarly, place the location boards on the table and ready the main newspaper board for play. Launch the Chronicles of Crime app on a device, choose 1900, and select the scenario you wish to play. The app will drive the remainder of the game, so hold onto your butts!
How do I explain this game succinctly? Well, each of the cases will involve players traveling to different Location Boards and meeting Characters at these locations. Many cases will be involving several Special Items and, new for the 1900 version, Puzzle Cards that players will need to solve or use in special ways in order to progress with certain leads. These Puzzle Cards do not really give the story away or anything, but are merely tools to be used to help solve the cases.
By using the app and scanning the QR codes on the boards and cards players will be learning about the case, viewing the scene of the crime(s), inspecting items, and chatting up locals for information. Play will continue not so much in “rounds” but until the players have enough evidence and a good handle on the situation enough to return to the paper’s office to report to their coworkers all the details of the crime(s) by scanning answers to their questions about the case. The app then assesses the accuracy of the answers and outputs a score. Based on the score achieved players can play again to pick up clues they missed along the way or try another scenario entirely.
Components. As with all CoC games I have played, the components are simply wonderful. Most of what is in the box is cardstock of varying thickness, but the art is what really stands out. This is a gorgeous game and when it is displayed on the table, people become fascinated by its presence. Then when the onlookers see an app driving the gameplay they are hooked. I have heard complaints from other reviewers that the Character cards in the game are lacking in variation, and I would have to agree. Yes, it is set in 1900 Paris, but all the Character cards feature white people, most of whom seem to be upper crust, and with most of the males sporting an awful mustache. So I get that complaint and agree. With inclusivity and diversity being major hot issues currently, you would expect to see more of it in our industry. I would have liked to have come across more diverse characters, and maybe a mini expansion can add many alternate art characters to the game.
All in all I loved this theme of Chronicles of Crime. Being set in Paris and following a young investigative journalist is a nice twist on the protagonists commonly featured in these games. The gameplay is the same as previous versions of CoC, save for the new Puzzle cards. I do enjoy their addition, and look to find more of these in future versions. I love the Chronicles of Crime system so I was bound to love this one as well.
Now, should you buy this version if you already have base Chronicles of Crime? Sure! Why? I like this one because it adds a different mechanic to the game with all-new scenarios, and I enjoy having more of a good thing. I think I personally prefer the theme in 1400 more, but 1900 is a great addition to the family. If you are someone who has and enjoys the base CoC, or any of its iterations, and are looking for more content to devour, then definitely grab a copy of 1900. If you are new to the system, I say go ahead and start with 1900. The Puzzle cards do not add enough complexity to take it out of reach for beginner gamers or those who enjoy lighter games, but certainly add a new and welcome layer to the series. Purple Phoenix Games certainly recommends this one to all our fans. Can’t get enough Chronicles of Crime? Grab 1900. Want to start in the series but London or Medieval times don’t do it for you? Grab 1900. Like tons of portraits of mustachioed white dudes and floofy ladies? Grab 1900. Whatever your motivation, play the game and let me know how you score. I am not advertising my first score here because I am mortified by my performance. (I did get better on subsequent plays.)
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Network (1976) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
“I’m mad as hell and I’m not gonna take it anymore!”
…the lasting legacy of Peter Finch’s rants, which began with a breakdown and became the ratings winner in the 1970’s Network driven news media. This is of course, fiction but the commentary on the changing and more corporate driven American media industry of the the time is not without merit.
Smartly scripted, on the ball cynicism and yet harking back to the rose tinted nostalgia common with American media movies in whcih the industry was supposedly filled with Walter Cronkites,
the notion that American press was once beyond reproach is clearly a fallacy, in contrast, the notion that American news media was becoming so ratings driven that the news gave way to outlandish editorialism, is not.
Howard Beale (Finch) has an on air breakdown and whilst his best friend and producer, Max Schumacher (William Holden) tries to pull him from the air waves, allowing him to bow out with some dignity, the new wave of corporate management lead by CEO Frank Hackett (Robert Duval) and Holden’s replacement and eventual lover, Diana, (Faye Dunaway), have other ideas.
She sees an opportunity in the ratings spike gained by Beale’s rants which speak to the peoples growing frustrations and takes advantage, only driven by ratings.
Though the screenplay and performances are nothing less than brilliant, there are two core problems with this movie.
The first being that it is too long. The plot seems to be dragged out and repetitive as we approach the almost inevitable conclusion and the second is the level of preaching. But this is a symptom of the first, opening with a good argument, with old school journalism versus the TV generation and as the film goes on, the arguments need to escalate but since this was covered in the first half an hour, the points become laboured and over started.
The notion that the TV generation is shallow and amoral is put at odds with the middle aged newspaper reader, where time and decency are standard. This is a point which I refuse to accept since some of the 20th centuries most amoral acts where committed either before 1936, the birth of television and in the first couple of decades there after, by the very generation whcih is being held up as the moral standard here.
large_network_blu-ray_3The press has always had its paymasters, always had to sell newspapers and whilst the medium and methods may have changed, this does feel like sour grapes by the end. Criticising the characters motivations is one thing, but this film seems to imply that the modern world of television is making sociopaths of us all, dumbing us down and numbing our emotions to the point of accepting nothing but pure spectacle.
In many ways this is true but is also a very flawed argument and comes across as bunch old men crying into there Scotch in some dimly lit bar, in a way not too dissimilar to the print or broadcast media of today, hitting out at the blogging and twitter generation.
The ending was amusing though with the quote “This was the story of Howard Beale, the only known case of a man killed because of poor ratings”.
Very droll.
Smartly scripted, on the ball cynicism and yet harking back to the rose tinted nostalgia common with American media movies in whcih the industry was supposedly filled with Walter Cronkites,
the notion that American press was once beyond reproach is clearly a fallacy, in contrast, the notion that American news media was becoming so ratings driven that the news gave way to outlandish editorialism, is not.
Howard Beale (Finch) has an on air breakdown and whilst his best friend and producer, Max Schumacher (William Holden) tries to pull him from the air waves, allowing him to bow out with some dignity, the new wave of corporate management lead by CEO Frank Hackett (Robert Duval) and Holden’s replacement and eventual lover, Diana, (Faye Dunaway), have other ideas.
She sees an opportunity in the ratings spike gained by Beale’s rants which speak to the peoples growing frustrations and takes advantage, only driven by ratings.
Though the screenplay and performances are nothing less than brilliant, there are two core problems with this movie.
The first being that it is too long. The plot seems to be dragged out and repetitive as we approach the almost inevitable conclusion and the second is the level of preaching. But this is a symptom of the first, opening with a good argument, with old school journalism versus the TV generation and as the film goes on, the arguments need to escalate but since this was covered in the first half an hour, the points become laboured and over started.
The notion that the TV generation is shallow and amoral is put at odds with the middle aged newspaper reader, where time and decency are standard. This is a point which I refuse to accept since some of the 20th centuries most amoral acts where committed either before 1936, the birth of television and in the first couple of decades there after, by the very generation whcih is being held up as the moral standard here.
large_network_blu-ray_3The press has always had its paymasters, always had to sell newspapers and whilst the medium and methods may have changed, this does feel like sour grapes by the end. Criticising the characters motivations is one thing, but this film seems to imply that the modern world of television is making sociopaths of us all, dumbing us down and numbing our emotions to the point of accepting nothing but pure spectacle.
In many ways this is true but is also a very flawed argument and comes across as bunch old men crying into there Scotch in some dimly lit bar, in a way not too dissimilar to the print or broadcast media of today, hitting out at the blogging and twitter generation.
The ending was amusing though with the quote “This was the story of Howard Beale, the only known case of a man killed because of poor ratings”.
Very droll.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Woman in Cabin 10 in Books
Feb 8, 2018
Laura (Lo) Blackstock is excited to finally get the opportunity of her travel journalism career: a chance to cover the launch of a luxury cruise ship, the Aurora. The ship is headed to Norway, and Lo has the ability to mingle with a set of wealthy passengers and make some connections to jump-start her writing career. But before she even sets foot on the boat, Lo is reeling from a break-in at her apartment, which leaves her anxious, exhausted, and--through a series of unfortunate events--on the outs with her boyfriend, Jonah. Still, at first the Aurora seems gorgeous and luxurious, if a bit small for Lo's claustrophobia. But her first evening on board, after an evening of dining and drinking, Lo is awoken to the sound of an argument in cabin 10 next door, and she's convinced she sees a woman tossed overboard. But no one on the ship believes her, and the woman she knows she met earlier in cabin 10, when asking to borrow mascara, is gone--nowhere on the boat. Lo knows realistically this isn't possible: it's a small boat and people can't just disappear. But she also knows who she saw and what she saw. Is she going crazy? And is someone on the boat now out to get her?
This was an interesting and suspenseful thriller. I agree with the comparisons to an Agatha Christie novel: with the setting of the novel being a ship, you have a limited cast of characters (and suspects), which heightens some of the intrigue. Ware does an excellent job of setting the scene, and you can practically feel yourself trapped in this opulent yet slightly claustrophobic, endlessly rocking luxury cruise-liner. Lo is set up rather quickly as unreliable narrator: she's clearly anxious after her break-in, prone to drinking, and reeling from a lack of sleep. Therefore, from the outset, we're not sure if we can trust what we're reading or what seems to be unfolding on this ship. One of my favorite things about this novel is that it certainly keeps you guessing -- I was constantly coming up with (and discarding) various theories as I read, placing blame on a new character every few chapters. And, of course, always harboring that seed of doubt that Lo just made the entire thing up. While we hear entirely from Lo, Ware places a few newspaper stories at the end of each chapter, which just add to your doubt and confusion.
As for Lo, she's not the most enjoyable of main characters and due to our limited set of characters, we don't have many others, so most of the tale hinges on her. She's a bit annoying and whiny and prone to overthinking and bad decisions. She can get frustrating at times, to say the least. The story itself isn't really creepy or spooky, but it's definitely interesting and, as I said, keeps you guessing until nearly the very end. A few of the plot points seem a bit haphazard, as if things were just jammed together randomly into the story, but I suppose they all work together at the end.
Overall, this is certainly an engaging and suspenseful thriller. If you enjoy a fast-paced whodunnit, this one is for you. 3.5 stars.
This was an interesting and suspenseful thriller. I agree with the comparisons to an Agatha Christie novel: with the setting of the novel being a ship, you have a limited cast of characters (and suspects), which heightens some of the intrigue. Ware does an excellent job of setting the scene, and you can practically feel yourself trapped in this opulent yet slightly claustrophobic, endlessly rocking luxury cruise-liner. Lo is set up rather quickly as unreliable narrator: she's clearly anxious after her break-in, prone to drinking, and reeling from a lack of sleep. Therefore, from the outset, we're not sure if we can trust what we're reading or what seems to be unfolding on this ship. One of my favorite things about this novel is that it certainly keeps you guessing -- I was constantly coming up with (and discarding) various theories as I read, placing blame on a new character every few chapters. And, of course, always harboring that seed of doubt that Lo just made the entire thing up. While we hear entirely from Lo, Ware places a few newspaper stories at the end of each chapter, which just add to your doubt and confusion.
As for Lo, she's not the most enjoyable of main characters and due to our limited set of characters, we don't have many others, so most of the tale hinges on her. She's a bit annoying and whiny and prone to overthinking and bad decisions. She can get frustrating at times, to say the least. The story itself isn't really creepy or spooky, but it's definitely interesting and, as I said, keeps you guessing until nearly the very end. A few of the plot points seem a bit haphazard, as if things were just jammed together randomly into the story, but I suppose they all work together at the end.
Overall, this is certainly an engaging and suspenseful thriller. If you enjoy a fast-paced whodunnit, this one is for you. 3.5 stars.