Search
Search results
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated New Girl in Books
May 3, 2018
Like a reality show you can't turn away from
Contains spoilers, click to show
This is one of the few times where I enjoyed the book however the characters were so unlikable I was amazed that I stuck through and finished the novel. It was well written enough that I was super curious as to what happened to Becca and whether she was really around or if she had a horrible outcome. The mystery element was well done to keep you guessing. The point of views changes between Becca and Callie’s. There’s a good easy flow between the two perspectives so it makes the reading easy to follow and quick.
That being said, the characters were just awful in a sense not that they were unreadable (almost) but they were just horrible awful people. Even our main character wasn’t that likable. However I digress. Let’s break them down:
Becca; Oh darling. You horrible awful attention seeking harpy. Not only do you have issues of your own but because you aren’t happy you feel the need to destroy others and to make sure you drag them down into the mud and follow you through your misery. I had no sympathies. Even when it was revealed what happened. Except for ...well you know.
Max: Another horrible creature and he’s pretty much meant for Becca anyway as they’re both rather terrible people. The “I like you but I don’t want to be together” spiel is ugh. On top of that after you say that you go and do the pursuing. You’re the emotional manipulative type just like Becca and it’s hard to figure out which one is worse. You emotionally play with the main character and give her the yo-yo treatment then get mad when she’s talking with your best friend..oh wait sorry let’s re-write that: “Best Friend”. Dude, you’re like a horrible Tinder date gone wrong.
Dana: You’re a psychotic twit and holy mother mary do you have issues. I get what happened and you stood there and was an observer but you lashing out and being Queen Horrible to Callie (main character) was inexcusable. This behavior can’t even be blamed on grief, you’re just pure malice. Your obsession with Becca is creepy it makes you look like the type of fangirl nobody ever wants.
Madison and Julia: You have no spines and you follow Becca like she’s a Goddess. Stop being sheep and your condescension towards Callie was uncalled for. You each deserve a swift kick for treating her like that.
Johnny: You broke the Bro-Code. You should be banned for life.
Callie: Where do I start with you? You started off as a great main character and a lot of sympathies to you because you started off on the wrong foot and in a precarious situation. However then you did this yo-yo game with Max saying “Yeah I like you but I never said I was going to be with you” sure, that was a savage burn on your part but you keep *whining* about how you like Max so much and he’s not returning the favor because of Becca but he keeps coming back to you like you’re the side piece and you don’t seem to mind that treatment. You try to stick up for yourself with Dana (which was admirable) but then you shrink back into your turtle shell and you just *walk* into these situations even though YOU KNOW it’s going to turn out with potentially bad consequences. You’re like the friend that complains about how horrible your significant other is treating you but you’re still with that person but you don’t listen to advice. You have got to be one of the most frustrating characters I have ever read so far.
Well now! That sums up my opinions of the characters. I say go for reading this one. It’s almost like you’re watching reality TV and it’s such a guilty pleasure but you can’t help but not look away. Maybe because the characters were just so hateful you had to keep on reading. You just wanted to know what was going to happen next.
That being said, the characters were just awful in a sense not that they were unreadable (almost) but they were just horrible awful people. Even our main character wasn’t that likable. However I digress. Let’s break them down:
Becca; Oh darling. You horrible awful attention seeking harpy. Not only do you have issues of your own but because you aren’t happy you feel the need to destroy others and to make sure you drag them down into the mud and follow you through your misery. I had no sympathies. Even when it was revealed what happened. Except for ...well you know.
Max: Another horrible creature and he’s pretty much meant for Becca anyway as they’re both rather terrible people. The “I like you but I don’t want to be together” spiel is ugh. On top of that after you say that you go and do the pursuing. You’re the emotional manipulative type just like Becca and it’s hard to figure out which one is worse. You emotionally play with the main character and give her the yo-yo treatment then get mad when she’s talking with your best friend..oh wait sorry let’s re-write that: “Best Friend”. Dude, you’re like a horrible Tinder date gone wrong.
Dana: You’re a psychotic twit and holy mother mary do you have issues. I get what happened and you stood there and was an observer but you lashing out and being Queen Horrible to Callie (main character) was inexcusable. This behavior can’t even be blamed on grief, you’re just pure malice. Your obsession with Becca is creepy it makes you look like the type of fangirl nobody ever wants.
Madison and Julia: You have no spines and you follow Becca like she’s a Goddess. Stop being sheep and your condescension towards Callie was uncalled for. You each deserve a swift kick for treating her like that.
Johnny: You broke the Bro-Code. You should be banned for life.
Callie: Where do I start with you? You started off as a great main character and a lot of sympathies to you because you started off on the wrong foot and in a precarious situation. However then you did this yo-yo game with Max saying “Yeah I like you but I never said I was going to be with you” sure, that was a savage burn on your part but you keep *whining* about how you like Max so much and he’s not returning the favor because of Becca but he keeps coming back to you like you’re the side piece and you don’t seem to mind that treatment. You try to stick up for yourself with Dana (which was admirable) but then you shrink back into your turtle shell and you just *walk* into these situations even though YOU KNOW it’s going to turn out with potentially bad consequences. You’re like the friend that complains about how horrible your significant other is treating you but you’re still with that person but you don’t listen to advice. You have got to be one of the most frustrating characters I have ever read so far.
Well now! That sums up my opinions of the characters. I say go for reading this one. It’s almost like you’re watching reality TV and it’s such a guilty pleasure but you can’t help but not look away. Maybe because the characters were just so hateful you had to keep on reading. You just wanted to know what was going to happen next.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated God: A Human History in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
</i>
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, <i>God: A Human History.</i> To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.
Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.
Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.
Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.
As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.
Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.
Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.
<i>God: A Human History </i>is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.
Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, <i>God: A Human History </i>leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
</i>
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, <i>God: A Human History.</i> To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.
Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.
Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.
Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.
As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.
Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.
Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.
<i>God: A Human History </i>is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.
Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, <i>God: A Human History </i>leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
Darren (1599 KP) rated 5 Flights Up (2015) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 5 Flights Up starts by introducing our elderly couple Alex (Freeman) and Ruth (Keaton) that have spent their whole life living in Brooklyn but it is finally time for them to move out. Ruth’s niece Lilly (Nixon) is the one trying to sell the house and doing everything she can to make sure they get as much as they can for it. Alex has witnessed how the area has changed over the years and along with his dog Dorothy really is struggling to make it up the 5 flights.
The couple have to deal with the idea that Dorothy needs major surgery to fix a ruptured disc in her back, this means that Alex has to go along with selling the apartment to help fund the operation. The attempts to sell the apartment get put in jeopardy when a terrorist attack happens on the Williamsburg Bridge where a tanker gets abandoned on the bridge and the suspect flees.
The first interested parties turn up before the open house where Alex & Ruth get to meet a collection on colourful characters that all have different opinions on the apartment. Alex & Ruth decide to try and find their own replacement apartment as they continue to battle the idea of trying to pick who to sell the apartment too.couple
5 Flights Up tells such a simple story of a couple trying to move apartments, while dealing with their sick dog. This is putting everything down to the simplest way, the flashbacks show how in love the couple have been through the years but for the most part the film takes place over a couple of days. I will say not everyone will find this appealing and I do think the light hearted comedy makes the film a lot more enjoyable. The performances are all important and the character our couple meet add to the story. This will go under many people’s radar but it is well worth a watch. (7/10)
Actor Review
Morgan Freeman: Alex is our elderly man reluctantly selling his apartment with his wife. We watch how the relationship has blossomed over the years and the love for their dog helped keep them happy. Morgan gives us a charming performance that shows he age without taking away any of his acting credentials. (7/10)
Diane Keaton: Ruth is Alex’s wife who is willing to sell their apartment and falls for another apartment, she tries to convince Alex into buy the new apartment as they both continue to want to buy the new apartment alone. Diane does give a good performance showing she still has what it takes to lead a film. (7/10)
Support Cast: 5 Flights Up has a supporting cast that each have their own colourful take on the situation as we see Alex & Ruth react to them all.
Director Review: Richard Loncraine – Richard gives us a charming drama that keeps our attention from start to finish. (7/10)
Drama: 5 Flights Up puts us into a very real situation off an elderly couple considering moving but as the story unfolds we see how difficult it is to make that decision. (8/10)
Settings: 5 Flights Up keeps the settings easy to identify and gives them all a very homely feel to our couple. (9/10)
Suggestion: 5 Flights Up is one to try I do believe it will be enjoyed but there is part of me that thinks some people will not enjoy this one too much. (Try It)
Best Part: Open house.
Worst Part: The characters the couple meet are slightly generic.
Believability: The moving idea is a very real idea that people will find themselves in and the indecision about it too. (8/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Unlikely
Runtime: 1 Hour 32 Minutes
Tagline: A coming of age story
Overall: Charmingly enjoyable film about life and the difficulties with change.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/05/18/5-flights-up-2015/
The couple have to deal with the idea that Dorothy needs major surgery to fix a ruptured disc in her back, this means that Alex has to go along with selling the apartment to help fund the operation. The attempts to sell the apartment get put in jeopardy when a terrorist attack happens on the Williamsburg Bridge where a tanker gets abandoned on the bridge and the suspect flees.
The first interested parties turn up before the open house where Alex & Ruth get to meet a collection on colourful characters that all have different opinions on the apartment. Alex & Ruth decide to try and find their own replacement apartment as they continue to battle the idea of trying to pick who to sell the apartment too.couple
5 Flights Up tells such a simple story of a couple trying to move apartments, while dealing with their sick dog. This is putting everything down to the simplest way, the flashbacks show how in love the couple have been through the years but for the most part the film takes place over a couple of days. I will say not everyone will find this appealing and I do think the light hearted comedy makes the film a lot more enjoyable. The performances are all important and the character our couple meet add to the story. This will go under many people’s radar but it is well worth a watch. (7/10)
Actor Review
Morgan Freeman: Alex is our elderly man reluctantly selling his apartment with his wife. We watch how the relationship has blossomed over the years and the love for their dog helped keep them happy. Morgan gives us a charming performance that shows he age without taking away any of his acting credentials. (7/10)
Diane Keaton: Ruth is Alex’s wife who is willing to sell their apartment and falls for another apartment, she tries to convince Alex into buy the new apartment as they both continue to want to buy the new apartment alone. Diane does give a good performance showing she still has what it takes to lead a film. (7/10)
Support Cast: 5 Flights Up has a supporting cast that each have their own colourful take on the situation as we see Alex & Ruth react to them all.
Director Review: Richard Loncraine – Richard gives us a charming drama that keeps our attention from start to finish. (7/10)
Drama: 5 Flights Up puts us into a very real situation off an elderly couple considering moving but as the story unfolds we see how difficult it is to make that decision. (8/10)
Settings: 5 Flights Up keeps the settings easy to identify and gives them all a very homely feel to our couple. (9/10)
Suggestion: 5 Flights Up is one to try I do believe it will be enjoyed but there is part of me that thinks some people will not enjoy this one too much. (Try It)
Best Part: Open house.
Worst Part: The characters the couple meet are slightly generic.
Believability: The moving idea is a very real idea that people will find themselves in and the indecision about it too. (8/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: No
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: Unlikely
Runtime: 1 Hour 32 Minutes
Tagline: A coming of age story
Overall: Charmingly enjoyable film about life and the difficulties with change.
https://moviesreview101.com/2015/05/18/5-flights-up-2015/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alone in the Dark (2005) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: I am going to first look at this only as a story, no opinions on the CGI or casting choices. If you were to look at the story as a solo idea you get a solid action horror. Now I hear people going ‘no its just crap’ so let’s look at the details. First off we have an idea of scientific experiment on children to create sleepers, but something goes wrong so we don’t see why it happened until more discoveries in the future. Then we have a search for hidden treasures of a lost ancient people. Add in a paranormal investigator, a secret government paranormal investigating team and the search for a truth. Now looking at those factors we should have a good story not special but enjoyable. Now with terrible casting decisions, awful CGI and a script that could have been written but a child everything goes south fast. As an idea for a story this is good, but as an execution of a story it’s bad. (5/10)
Actor Review
Christian Slater: Edward Carnby a paranormal investigator who has been trying to uncover the truth about his childhood, this puts him in danger as this time he has got closer than ever before. He must team up with his old organisation to final uncover the truth that has lost him the memories of his childhood. Slater strolls for this role without showing any of the skills that made him a star in the early 90s. (5/10)
slater
Tara Reid: Aline Cedrac assistant curator at the museum who also happens to be Edward’s girlfriend, she gets caught up in the middle of the battle after she uncover the location of the door. Going to take a deep breath before going for this one, just no how did this happen? Try your luck in romantic comedies. (2/10)
reid
Stephen Dorff: Commander Burke leader of a military team trying to keep the monsters away from the public, old partner of Edward but after seeing the truth he teams up with them to uncover the truth. Stephen can act and has proven it many times, just need to give him something to work with. (4/10)
dorff
Frank C Turner: Sam an old connection within the organisation that still communicates with Edward, he fills in the science gaps and you can guess what happens to him by the end. Basic supporting performance. (4/10)
fisher
Matthew Walker: Professor Hudgens scientist trying to open the door to the truth about the ancient people, he will do anything to get his answers including sacrificing anybody who gets in his way. As villains go this is generic one that doesn’t need too much to make them special. (4/10)
profes
Director Review: Uwe Boll – He not only managed to mess up a relatively easy story with awful CGI and lack of directing ideas. (2/10)
Action: Plenty of guns being fired, not sure if they ever hit anything as everything is in the pitch black. (3/10)
Horror: Doesn’t give you any scares, frights, well made with the acting. (1/10)
Settings: The settings used for the gun fights are used well, because they would make real settings for such a discover if someone wanted to keep it quiet. (6/10)
Special Effects: Terrible special effects that I only saw one good one and that was a soldier’s head split in two. (1/10)
Suggestion: I think if you are bored one night and this is on it would be acceptable to watch it as it slips close to the line of so bad you have to see. (Late Night TV)
Best Part: The idea
Worst Part: The CGI, Acting and Execution of the idea.
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Actually has one sequel
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $10 Million
Budget: $20 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Tagline: Can mankind defeat the army of darkness unleashed by an ancient evil cult?
Overall: Not only did this film destroy the source material, it ruined any chance the video game had of returning.
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/11/09/alone-in-the-dark-2005/
Actor Review
Christian Slater: Edward Carnby a paranormal investigator who has been trying to uncover the truth about his childhood, this puts him in danger as this time he has got closer than ever before. He must team up with his old organisation to final uncover the truth that has lost him the memories of his childhood. Slater strolls for this role without showing any of the skills that made him a star in the early 90s. (5/10)
slater
Tara Reid: Aline Cedrac assistant curator at the museum who also happens to be Edward’s girlfriend, she gets caught up in the middle of the battle after she uncover the location of the door. Going to take a deep breath before going for this one, just no how did this happen? Try your luck in romantic comedies. (2/10)
reid
Stephen Dorff: Commander Burke leader of a military team trying to keep the monsters away from the public, old partner of Edward but after seeing the truth he teams up with them to uncover the truth. Stephen can act and has proven it many times, just need to give him something to work with. (4/10)
dorff
Frank C Turner: Sam an old connection within the organisation that still communicates with Edward, he fills in the science gaps and you can guess what happens to him by the end. Basic supporting performance. (4/10)
fisher
Matthew Walker: Professor Hudgens scientist trying to open the door to the truth about the ancient people, he will do anything to get his answers including sacrificing anybody who gets in his way. As villains go this is generic one that doesn’t need too much to make them special. (4/10)
profes
Director Review: Uwe Boll – He not only managed to mess up a relatively easy story with awful CGI and lack of directing ideas. (2/10)
Action: Plenty of guns being fired, not sure if they ever hit anything as everything is in the pitch black. (3/10)
Horror: Doesn’t give you any scares, frights, well made with the acting. (1/10)
Settings: The settings used for the gun fights are used well, because they would make real settings for such a discover if someone wanted to keep it quiet. (6/10)
Special Effects: Terrible special effects that I only saw one good one and that was a soldier’s head split in two. (1/10)
Suggestion: I think if you are bored one night and this is on it would be acceptable to watch it as it slips close to the line of so bad you have to see. (Late Night TV)
Best Part: The idea
Worst Part: The CGI, Acting and Execution of the idea.
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Actually has one sequel
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $10 Million
Budget: $20 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Tagline: Can mankind defeat the army of darkness unleashed by an ancient evil cult?
Overall: Not only did this film destroy the source material, it ruined any chance the video game had of returning.
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/11/09/alone-in-the-dark-2005/
TravelersWife4Life (31 KP) rated The Kissing Tree: Four Novellas Rooted in Timeless Love in Books
Feb 24, 2021
<a href="https://travelingwife4life.wordpress.com/2020/10/26/the-kissing-tree-lonestar-lit/">Travelers Wife 4 Life</a>
From 1880 to present day, Regina Jennings, Karen Witemeyer, Amanda Dykes, and Nicole Deese create a world so inviting and relatable you will wish you were right there with characters. This four-story anthology is weaved together seamlessly and has hints of the previous story in each successive one. It has definitely been one of my favorite 2020 reads.
<b>Broken Limbs, Mended Hearts </b> by Regina Jennings was a beautiful story of love, second chances, and the innocence of first your first kiss. I loved the way Bella Eden and Adam interacted with each other, it was a does he like me/does she like me type of feeling to their relationship that I found very realistic as I think everyone goes through those emotions when falling in love. They were a beautiful couple that just needed a nudge in the right direction. Regina Jennings ends the story with how the Kissing Tree came to be in 1871, in a cute way we see reflected in the stories to come
<b>Inn For A Surprise </b> by Karen Witemeyer is the second book and continues 20 years later in 1891. In this book we see Karen Witemeyer’s signature sense of humor interwoven beautifully with Phoebe and Barnabas’s story of opposites attract. Karen Witemeyer shows the beauty of working together for a common goal and the give and take needed to make any relationship work by using each other’s strengths and weaknesses to work together. I think I loved it more because of it. Beautifully written. I also enjoyed the cameo that tied in from the first book as well, plus Phoebe and Barnabas’s journey to finding the perfect romantic spots was rather cute too!
<b>From Roots to Sky </b>by Amanda Dykes sees the Kissing Tree again 54 years later (roughly) in 1945 right after WWII. Much has changed around the Kissing Tree Inn and the town of Oak Springs, TX. In this story, we learn about Hannah and Luke’s story and their story is probably the hardest to describe. It is thought provoking, deep, and full of a sense of wonder. I loved this sweet, sweet love story with real life conversations, emotions, and yearnings mixed in. I thought Hannah was a close reflection of who I am as a person, and I loved that Luke kept up and loved her even more for it.
<b>Heartwood</b> by Nicole Deese in the fourth and final book in the series, and while no date is given, I am given to believe that it is a present-day setting. Again, change has come to Oak Springs, TX, and threatened the Kissing Tree. Abby feels responsible while Griffin her ‘former’ love comes back into the picture to add to her confusion. I loved the second chance at love theme in this book and I thought Nicole Deese did a great job with the ebb and flow of the storyline building it up from the beginning. I loved how Nicole Deese wrapped up the story and really brought home the moral for the whole story. <i>“Without the heartwood, there would be no tree in any town that could outlive a single generation, much less multiple.”</i>
Overall, this book was touching, compelling and the best anthology I have read to date. I LOVED how the authors interwove all their stories together to create the beautiful legacy of The Kissing Tree and I hope that everyone who reads it takes away the lessons that each of the authors presented in their stories. 5 out of 5 stars. Thank you, Regina Jennings, Karen Witemeyer, Amanda Dykes, Nicole Deese, and Bethany House, for thinking up and seeing this idea though I am truly blessed to have had the opportunity to read it.
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
From 1880 to present day, Regina Jennings, Karen Witemeyer, Amanda Dykes, and Nicole Deese create a world so inviting and relatable you will wish you were right there with characters. This four-story anthology is weaved together seamlessly and has hints of the previous story in each successive one. It has definitely been one of my favorite 2020 reads.
<b>Broken Limbs, Mended Hearts </b> by Regina Jennings was a beautiful story of love, second chances, and the innocence of first your first kiss. I loved the way Bella Eden and Adam interacted with each other, it was a does he like me/does she like me type of feeling to their relationship that I found very realistic as I think everyone goes through those emotions when falling in love. They were a beautiful couple that just needed a nudge in the right direction. Regina Jennings ends the story with how the Kissing Tree came to be in 1871, in a cute way we see reflected in the stories to come
<b>Inn For A Surprise </b> by Karen Witemeyer is the second book and continues 20 years later in 1891. In this book we see Karen Witemeyer’s signature sense of humor interwoven beautifully with Phoebe and Barnabas’s story of opposites attract. Karen Witemeyer shows the beauty of working together for a common goal and the give and take needed to make any relationship work by using each other’s strengths and weaknesses to work together. I think I loved it more because of it. Beautifully written. I also enjoyed the cameo that tied in from the first book as well, plus Phoebe and Barnabas’s journey to finding the perfect romantic spots was rather cute too!
<b>From Roots to Sky </b>by Amanda Dykes sees the Kissing Tree again 54 years later (roughly) in 1945 right after WWII. Much has changed around the Kissing Tree Inn and the town of Oak Springs, TX. In this story, we learn about Hannah and Luke’s story and their story is probably the hardest to describe. It is thought provoking, deep, and full of a sense of wonder. I loved this sweet, sweet love story with real life conversations, emotions, and yearnings mixed in. I thought Hannah was a close reflection of who I am as a person, and I loved that Luke kept up and loved her even more for it.
<b>Heartwood</b> by Nicole Deese in the fourth and final book in the series, and while no date is given, I am given to believe that it is a present-day setting. Again, change has come to Oak Springs, TX, and threatened the Kissing Tree. Abby feels responsible while Griffin her ‘former’ love comes back into the picture to add to her confusion. I loved the second chance at love theme in this book and I thought Nicole Deese did a great job with the ebb and flow of the storyline building it up from the beginning. I loved how Nicole Deese wrapped up the story and really brought home the moral for the whole story. <i>“Without the heartwood, there would be no tree in any town that could outlive a single generation, much less multiple.”</i>
Overall, this book was touching, compelling and the best anthology I have read to date. I LOVED how the authors interwove all their stories together to create the beautiful legacy of The Kissing Tree and I hope that everyone who reads it takes away the lessons that each of the authors presented in their stories. 5 out of 5 stars. Thank you, Regina Jennings, Karen Witemeyer, Amanda Dykes, Nicole Deese, and Bethany House, for thinking up and seeing this idea though I am truly blessed to have had the opportunity to read it.
*I volunteered to read this book in return for my honest feedback. The thoughts and opinions expressed within are my own.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Swearmints in Tabletop Games
Feb 5, 2021
You know how sometimes you happen to make up a new slang for something and maybe even once or twice it has caught on? At least locally. Well I do not think many of mine have gone anywhere, but now is my chance to make a name for myself as the slang-king in this little mint tin game.
Swearmints is a small card game of voting for the best explanations of silly combination new-slang. The gameplay is familiar but the hilarity is all new.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign launching March 9, 2021, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup choose a Mint Master (the first dealer) and give them the mint tin with the mint cubes inside. Shuffle the cards to create a draw pile. The Mint Master will then deal each player two cards and the game may begin!
During a round each player will consult their two cards, choosing a word from each, and combining the words to make a new phrase. The cards have four words printed on each side so players will have access to 16 total words. Once all players have chosen their new term they will go around the table introducing and explaining their new slang term to the Mint Master. As all players have finished the Mint Master will choose their favorite new term by awarding one mint cube to the winning player. Players may also earn bonus mint cubes for using two alliterative words, and another mint cube for using two rhyming words. A new Mint Master is then crowned around the table and they thusly deal two cards to the players to begin a new round.
Play continues in this fashion until the tin runs out of mint cubes. The player with the most mint cubes is the winner!
Components. This game is a bunch of cards and green translucent cubes in a mint tin. The cards are fine and double-sided. The cubes are also fine. There is no art to speak of in the game, and no theme. So from me, even if this were the final version (which again, I am not sure) the components are all fine and no complaints from me.
The game is obviously a new variation of the Apples to Apples mechanic where one player is the judge and awards the winner with their opinions. This is tried and true and works for so many games. I feel it also works here. This is not at all a difficult game to learn, teach, or play. In fact, I played a very G-rated game of it with my 4-year-old son and he absolutely loved it. Of course, I had to choose appropriate words for him to use, but he technically played the game and played it well.
Swearmints is a small game that can easily fit in a pocket or backpack and be enjoyed by almost all people in all scenarios. Need something to play with Gramps and Grammie over the weekend? Swearmints. Need something to warmup game night with new players to open them up some? Swearmints. Need an icebreaker at work (once work resumes in-person)? Swearmints. There are so many scenarios I can see this being very successful to have on hand and it can be played very innocently or very inappropriately, depending on present company. That’s what makes this a great new spin on the A2A gameplay: its adaptability and portability.
If you are like me, you could always use a little package of excitement in your pocket. Wait. I mean, you could appreciate toting around a small and unassuming little game that can fit many gaming opportunities as they arise. Should you be looking for that little firecracker, then consider backing Swearmints on Kickstarter when the campaign launches in March. You never know when you might need to break it out to ease the tension in the room or to initiate a muggle into the gaming world.
Swearmints is a small card game of voting for the best explanations of silly combination new-slang. The gameplay is familiar but the hilarity is all new.
DISCLAIMER: We were provided a prototype copy of this game for the purposes of this review. These are preview copy components, and I do not know for sure if the final components will be any different from these shown. You are invited to download the rulebook, back the game through the Kickstarter campaign launching March 9, 2021, or through any retailers stocking it after fulfillment. -T
To setup choose a Mint Master (the first dealer) and give them the mint tin with the mint cubes inside. Shuffle the cards to create a draw pile. The Mint Master will then deal each player two cards and the game may begin!
During a round each player will consult their two cards, choosing a word from each, and combining the words to make a new phrase. The cards have four words printed on each side so players will have access to 16 total words. Once all players have chosen their new term they will go around the table introducing and explaining their new slang term to the Mint Master. As all players have finished the Mint Master will choose their favorite new term by awarding one mint cube to the winning player. Players may also earn bonus mint cubes for using two alliterative words, and another mint cube for using two rhyming words. A new Mint Master is then crowned around the table and they thusly deal two cards to the players to begin a new round.
Play continues in this fashion until the tin runs out of mint cubes. The player with the most mint cubes is the winner!
Components. This game is a bunch of cards and green translucent cubes in a mint tin. The cards are fine and double-sided. The cubes are also fine. There is no art to speak of in the game, and no theme. So from me, even if this were the final version (which again, I am not sure) the components are all fine and no complaints from me.
The game is obviously a new variation of the Apples to Apples mechanic where one player is the judge and awards the winner with their opinions. This is tried and true and works for so many games. I feel it also works here. This is not at all a difficult game to learn, teach, or play. In fact, I played a very G-rated game of it with my 4-year-old son and he absolutely loved it. Of course, I had to choose appropriate words for him to use, but he technically played the game and played it well.
Swearmints is a small game that can easily fit in a pocket or backpack and be enjoyed by almost all people in all scenarios. Need something to play with Gramps and Grammie over the weekend? Swearmints. Need something to warmup game night with new players to open them up some? Swearmints. Need an icebreaker at work (once work resumes in-person)? Swearmints. There are so many scenarios I can see this being very successful to have on hand and it can be played very innocently or very inappropriately, depending on present company. That’s what makes this a great new spin on the A2A gameplay: its adaptability and portability.
If you are like me, you could always use a little package of excitement in your pocket. Wait. I mean, you could appreciate toting around a small and unassuming little game that can fit many gaming opportunities as they arise. Should you be looking for that little firecracker, then consider backing Swearmints on Kickstarter when the campaign launches in March. You never know when you might need to break it out to ease the tension in the room or to initiate a muggle into the gaming world.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated Precious You in Books
Aug 3, 2020
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Book-Review-Banner-69.png"/>;
I am extremely happy and excited to be part of the blog tour for Precious You by Helen Monks Takhar. Thank you to the team at HQ - for sending me a copy in exchange for an honest review. Check out the other book bloggers that are part of the tour as well:
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/PreciousYou-btb.jpg"/>;
<b><i>Synopsis:</i></b>
When Lily is hired as the new intern at Leadership magazine, where Katherine is editor-in-chief, her arrival threatens the very foundations of the self-serving little world that Katherine has built. But before long, she finds herself obsessively drawn to Lily, who seems to be a cruel reminder of the beauty and potential Katherine once had, things she senses Lily plans to use against her.
Is Katherine simply paranoid, jealous of Lily's youth as she struggles with encroaching middle age? Is Lily just trying to get ahead in the cutthroat world of publishing? Or is there a more sinister motivation at play, fueled by the dark secrets they're both hiding? As their rivalry deepens, a disturbing picture emerges of two women pitted against each other across a toxic generational divide--and who are desperate enough to do anything to come out on top.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
Wow - what an experience this book was. I haven’t read a book this fucked-up (in the best possible way) since I read Anonymous Girl and The Silent Patient. Just wow.
Okay, now that I have gathered my thoughts, let’s begin this review properly.
Precious You is a very exciting book, looking from a psychological aspect. We witness the battle between a “Snowflake” and a Generation-X. The battle of two women; one trying to conquer the world, the other one trying to stay relevant.
Both Katherine and Lily were very realistic characters. Both with opposing opinions on the world. And both with two completely different goals. Both fighting over power in every possible field that they share in common. But what I love the most is that I was able to understand both points of view. I found myself feeling for both of them, even though sometimes I couldn’t in my right mind understand their choices and their actions.
<b><i>But they both spoke to me.</i></b>
Each in their different way, for a different thing. And this is something I haven’t encountered in a long time. To be able to connect with both the victim and the villain. Despite us not knowing which is which until the very end of the book.
The other aspect I loved was the cat and mouse game they were playing. I haven’t seen a book so upsetting and twisted in a very long time. And I really loved it. Some things those women did are properly twisted. Really fucked-up. But I enjoyed reading it. It took me to another world, another reality where dark and twisted was the new normal.
It was interesting to witness such a vivid battle between two generations. The fear of new young people invading people’s space. The fight to get to the top, because of the people that have been at your workplace longer and have more knowledge. The wicked ways of how HR handled their issues. How your interns and your team can quickly turn on you if you stop delivering. It was interesting to read how the magazine worked as a company. I think the author did a great job at describing how one reality works.
I definitely recommend it - it is fast paced and very dark and twisty. If you love psychological thrillers, this one will be the right book for you!
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Book-Review-Banner-69.png"/>;
I am extremely happy and excited to be part of the blog tour for Precious You by Helen Monks Takhar. Thank you to the team at HQ - for sending me a copy in exchange for an honest review. Check out the other book bloggers that are part of the tour as well:
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/PreciousYou-btb.jpg"/>;
<b><i>Synopsis:</i></b>
When Lily is hired as the new intern at Leadership magazine, where Katherine is editor-in-chief, her arrival threatens the very foundations of the self-serving little world that Katherine has built. But before long, she finds herself obsessively drawn to Lily, who seems to be a cruel reminder of the beauty and potential Katherine once had, things she senses Lily plans to use against her.
Is Katherine simply paranoid, jealous of Lily's youth as she struggles with encroaching middle age? Is Lily just trying to get ahead in the cutthroat world of publishing? Or is there a more sinister motivation at play, fueled by the dark secrets they're both hiding? As their rivalry deepens, a disturbing picture emerges of two women pitted against each other across a toxic generational divide--and who are desperate enough to do anything to come out on top.
<b><i>My Thoughts:</i></b>
Wow - what an experience this book was. I haven’t read a book this fucked-up (in the best possible way) since I read Anonymous Girl and The Silent Patient. Just wow.
Okay, now that I have gathered my thoughts, let’s begin this review properly.
Precious You is a very exciting book, looking from a psychological aspect. We witness the battle between a “Snowflake” and a Generation-X. The battle of two women; one trying to conquer the world, the other one trying to stay relevant.
Both Katherine and Lily were very realistic characters. Both with opposing opinions on the world. And both with two completely different goals. Both fighting over power in every possible field that they share in common. But what I love the most is that I was able to understand both points of view. I found myself feeling for both of them, even though sometimes I couldn’t in my right mind understand their choices and their actions.
<b><i>But they both spoke to me.</i></b>
Each in their different way, for a different thing. And this is something I haven’t encountered in a long time. To be able to connect with both the victim and the villain. Despite us not knowing which is which until the very end of the book.
The other aspect I loved was the cat and mouse game they were playing. I haven’t seen a book so upsetting and twisted in a very long time. And I really loved it. Some things those women did are properly twisted. Really fucked-up. But I enjoyed reading it. It took me to another world, another reality where dark and twisted was the new normal.
It was interesting to witness such a vivid battle between two generations. The fear of new young people invading people’s space. The fight to get to the top, because of the people that have been at your workplace longer and have more knowledge. The wicked ways of how HR handled their issues. How your interns and your team can quickly turn on you if you stop delivering. It was interesting to read how the magazine worked as a company. I think the author did a great job at describing how one reality works.
I definitely recommend it - it is fast paced and very dark and twisty. If you love psychological thrillers, this one will be the right book for you!
<a href="https://amzn.to/2Wi7amb">Wishlist</a>; | <a
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
The Act Of Killing (2012)
6.7
Rate It
Movie Watch
Anwar Congo and his friends have been dancing their way through musical numbers, twisting arms in...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Inception (2010) in Movies
May 20, 2018
A Modern Classic
I have a confession to make - INCEPTION is one of my favorite Christopher Nolan films - and, perhaps, it is in my list of TOP 10 ALL TIME FAVORITE films, so this might not be a fair and impartial review of the film. To be fair to me, I did make a conscience effort whilst watching this movie to scrape away my previous preconceptions and opinions of this film and just let it wash over me in this "new light" of my blog to see what my reaction is.
My reaction: I LOVE THIS FILM!!!
I was asked how far back do you have to go before you can consider a film a "classic" and, I guess, I'd have to say 2010, for this film - to me - is a classic.
In INCEPTION, Nolan, and his co-writer brother Jonathan Nolan, go into the dreamworld with the premise that we can join in "shared dreams" to extract information from people that are locked away deep in their conscious (or in some cases unconscious) minds. This film deals with the idea of "Inception", planting an idea into someone's mind. This is, in essence, a "heist" film where our team of heroes is constantly at war with the minds they are inhabiting (since they are seen as parasites). The clock is ticking and they must get in and get out before they get lost.
Speaking of time, Nolan - once again - plays with the idea of time in this film. Once you go into a dream, 1 minute is like 1 hour and when you go into a dream of a dream, then 1 minute is like 60 hours and when you go into a dream within a dream within a dream, then...well...you get the idea.
If someone loses their way in this film, it's because they are trying to make logical sense of a dream world that defies physics - and time. My suggestion to you is to let go and let the movie take you to some fantastical places - with some fantastical imagery and plot machinations - that I enjoyed the heck out of.
Helping out this film is that it is impeccably cast. Leonardo DiCaprio is Cobb the head of this group that enters the dream realm. He is perfectly cast and Nolan, and this film, relies on his likeableness, his charm and the feeling that something just isn't quite right with him. All to very good effect. Ellen Page is strong as Ariadne, the rookie of the team that is our eyes and ears into this world. Ken Watanabe brings his typically strong game to the role of Saito - the man that gives the team the job and goes along for the ride. Nolan regular Cillian Murphy is a welcome addition as the person who they are trying to "Incept" and even small parts are filled with wonderful character actors like the late great, Pete Postlethwaite, Tom Berenger and good ol' Michael Caine.
But it is the emergence of two of the co-stars that, up until this film I thought were "fair actors but not great" that really elevates this film for me. Joseph Gordon-Levitt was always the "long haired kid from 3RD ROCK FROM THE SUN", but in this - as Cobb's right-hand man Arthur - he excels and really jumps out of the film as a screen presence. Of course, it really helps him that he has one of the best action sequences - for the most part practically shot - that I have ever scene. And, of course, there's TOM HARDY. He is a movie star and really shows it in the supporting role of Eames. This guy will win an Oscar one day, probably for a film that Nolan Directs him in.
My only quibble - and it is a QUIBBLE - is that I didn't really feel any strong chemistry between Marion Cotillard's Mal and DiCaprio's Cobb. She was supposed to be the big "love of his life" and I just didn't sense that. She was very good - and imposing - as she infiltrated Cobb's mind (which is, I think, the purpose of her character), but I could have used a little more between her and DiCaprio. But...as I say...a quibble.
All in all, a terrific - different - film. One that I am calling a "classic".
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
My reaction: I LOVE THIS FILM!!!
I was asked how far back do you have to go before you can consider a film a "classic" and, I guess, I'd have to say 2010, for this film - to me - is a classic.
In INCEPTION, Nolan, and his co-writer brother Jonathan Nolan, go into the dreamworld with the premise that we can join in "shared dreams" to extract information from people that are locked away deep in their conscious (or in some cases unconscious) minds. This film deals with the idea of "Inception", planting an idea into someone's mind. This is, in essence, a "heist" film where our team of heroes is constantly at war with the minds they are inhabiting (since they are seen as parasites). The clock is ticking and they must get in and get out before they get lost.
Speaking of time, Nolan - once again - plays with the idea of time in this film. Once you go into a dream, 1 minute is like 1 hour and when you go into a dream of a dream, then 1 minute is like 60 hours and when you go into a dream within a dream within a dream, then...well...you get the idea.
If someone loses their way in this film, it's because they are trying to make logical sense of a dream world that defies physics - and time. My suggestion to you is to let go and let the movie take you to some fantastical places - with some fantastical imagery and plot machinations - that I enjoyed the heck out of.
Helping out this film is that it is impeccably cast. Leonardo DiCaprio is Cobb the head of this group that enters the dream realm. He is perfectly cast and Nolan, and this film, relies on his likeableness, his charm and the feeling that something just isn't quite right with him. All to very good effect. Ellen Page is strong as Ariadne, the rookie of the team that is our eyes and ears into this world. Ken Watanabe brings his typically strong game to the role of Saito - the man that gives the team the job and goes along for the ride. Nolan regular Cillian Murphy is a welcome addition as the person who they are trying to "Incept" and even small parts are filled with wonderful character actors like the late great, Pete Postlethwaite, Tom Berenger and good ol' Michael Caine.
But it is the emergence of two of the co-stars that, up until this film I thought were "fair actors but not great" that really elevates this film for me. Joseph Gordon-Levitt was always the "long haired kid from 3RD ROCK FROM THE SUN", but in this - as Cobb's right-hand man Arthur - he excels and really jumps out of the film as a screen presence. Of course, it really helps him that he has one of the best action sequences - for the most part practically shot - that I have ever scene. And, of course, there's TOM HARDY. He is a movie star and really shows it in the supporting role of Eames. This guy will win an Oscar one day, probably for a film that Nolan Directs him in.
My only quibble - and it is a QUIBBLE - is that I didn't really feel any strong chemistry between Marion Cotillard's Mal and DiCaprio's Cobb. She was supposed to be the big "love of his life" and I just didn't sense that. She was very good - and imposing - as she infiltrated Cobb's mind (which is, I think, the purpose of her character), but I could have used a little more between her and DiCaprio. But...as I say...a quibble.
All in all, a terrific - different - film. One that I am calling a "classic".
Letter Grade: A+
10 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Cold Pursuit (2019) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Neeson's best film in years
Yes, we all know the jokes. Liam Neeson’s spiral into revenge thriller territory is one of the most meme-worthy things in film, except maybe John Travolta and Battlefield Earth. Starting with Taken and its, let’s be honest, dreadful sequels, the Irish actor has made a name for himself as the go-to guy to rough someone up after a spate of bad-luck.
He’s had kids killed, kidnapped and spouses murdered in cold blood, he’s even been framed for hijacking a jumbo jet – if anyone deserves a break, it’s Liam Neeson. Unfortunately, his films have ranged from great (Taken, Non-Stop), to middling (Run All Night, The Commuter), to downright dreadful (Taken 2, Taken 3) and that’s how the meme-worthiness was born. Nevertheless, Neeson is back for yet another revenge thriller in Cold Pursuit. But how does it stack up?
Nels Coxman’s (Neeson) quiet life as a snowplough driver comes crashing down when his beloved son (Micheál Richardson) dies under mysterious circumstances. His search for the truth soon becomes a quest for revenge against a psychotic drug lord named Viking (Tom Bateman) and his sleazy henchmen. Transformed from upstanding citizen to cold-blooded vigilante, Coxman unwittingly sets off a chain of events that includes a kidnapping, a series of deadly misunderstandings and a turf war between Viking and a rival boss called White Bull.
Let’s get the elephant in the room out of the way first. This is not a review biased by Neeson’s, shall we say, ill-worded rant on his former life. We all have our own opinions on the matter, but that should not detract from individuals going to see a movie in the cinema. In fact, Cold Pursuit is Neeson’s most accomplished film in years, helped by stylish directing from Swedish director Hans Petter Moland. It’s worth noting that Cold Pursuit is in fact a US remake of Swedish film, In Order of Disappearance and there’s a tasteful nod to the film’s roots in the end-credits.
With a dark, comedic edge, Cold Pursuit is as funny as much as it is gory and it is this hybridity of genres that remains the film’s trump card. The script, penned by Moland himself, is witty and sharp, filled with fantastic line-delivery by the entire cast who look like they’re having a cracking time. There are twists and turns and even a gay-romantic subplot – how very contemporary.
Apart from Neeson, Tom Bateman is an absolute stand-out as the film’s primary antagonist. Allowing him to be a presence in the film from the outset allows the audience to fully feel his character and there’s no doubt that he is a despicable human-being. Neeson performs in typical Liam Neeson fashion. He snarls and growls his way through the film but allows a softer side to creep in than we’re used to, helped in part by that comedic script.
Revenge thrillers rarely have the budget for flashy CGI or top-notch practical effects but Cold Pursuit is one of the better in the genre
It’s not perfect however. Laura Dern is a massively underused presence throughout and disappears completely from the film about 1-hour in with no other references to her character. This is a real shame as her chemistry with Neeson is good and they make a believable couple, especially when they’re dealing with the ramifications of their son’s death.
Dern continues to prove her acting prowess and it would have been nice to see her continue to be a feature throughout the film. The pacing is a little off too. At 118 minutes long, the film plods a little as it gets going and then doesn’t stop until the fun and entirely ridiculous finale.
However, it’s good to see the special effects are up to scratch for the genre. Revenge thrillers rarely have the budget for flashy CGI or top-notch practical effects but Cold Pursuit is one of the better in the genre. With a relatively modest budget of $60million, it appears that was well spent with clever editing and cinematography masking any less-than-stellar visuals.
Overall, Cold Pursuit is a fun, if forgettable revenge thriller that features some delicious dark comedy mixed with an intriguing story. It’s certainly Neeson’s best film since Non-Stopand marks a return to form for the Irish actor. Unfortunately, these type of flicks are ten-a-penny nowadays and I’m unsure whether snappy one-liners and beautiful snow-capped peaks are enough to differentiate it in a crowded marketplace.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/03/01/cold-pursuit-review-neesons-best-film-in-years/
He’s had kids killed, kidnapped and spouses murdered in cold blood, he’s even been framed for hijacking a jumbo jet – if anyone deserves a break, it’s Liam Neeson. Unfortunately, his films have ranged from great (Taken, Non-Stop), to middling (Run All Night, The Commuter), to downright dreadful (Taken 2, Taken 3) and that’s how the meme-worthiness was born. Nevertheless, Neeson is back for yet another revenge thriller in Cold Pursuit. But how does it stack up?
Nels Coxman’s (Neeson) quiet life as a snowplough driver comes crashing down when his beloved son (Micheál Richardson) dies under mysterious circumstances. His search for the truth soon becomes a quest for revenge against a psychotic drug lord named Viking (Tom Bateman) and his sleazy henchmen. Transformed from upstanding citizen to cold-blooded vigilante, Coxman unwittingly sets off a chain of events that includes a kidnapping, a series of deadly misunderstandings and a turf war between Viking and a rival boss called White Bull.
Let’s get the elephant in the room out of the way first. This is not a review biased by Neeson’s, shall we say, ill-worded rant on his former life. We all have our own opinions on the matter, but that should not detract from individuals going to see a movie in the cinema. In fact, Cold Pursuit is Neeson’s most accomplished film in years, helped by stylish directing from Swedish director Hans Petter Moland. It’s worth noting that Cold Pursuit is in fact a US remake of Swedish film, In Order of Disappearance and there’s a tasteful nod to the film’s roots in the end-credits.
With a dark, comedic edge, Cold Pursuit is as funny as much as it is gory and it is this hybridity of genres that remains the film’s trump card. The script, penned by Moland himself, is witty and sharp, filled with fantastic line-delivery by the entire cast who look like they’re having a cracking time. There are twists and turns and even a gay-romantic subplot – how very contemporary.
Apart from Neeson, Tom Bateman is an absolute stand-out as the film’s primary antagonist. Allowing him to be a presence in the film from the outset allows the audience to fully feel his character and there’s no doubt that he is a despicable human-being. Neeson performs in typical Liam Neeson fashion. He snarls and growls his way through the film but allows a softer side to creep in than we’re used to, helped in part by that comedic script.
Revenge thrillers rarely have the budget for flashy CGI or top-notch practical effects but Cold Pursuit is one of the better in the genre
It’s not perfect however. Laura Dern is a massively underused presence throughout and disappears completely from the film about 1-hour in with no other references to her character. This is a real shame as her chemistry with Neeson is good and they make a believable couple, especially when they’re dealing with the ramifications of their son’s death.
Dern continues to prove her acting prowess and it would have been nice to see her continue to be a feature throughout the film. The pacing is a little off too. At 118 minutes long, the film plods a little as it gets going and then doesn’t stop until the fun and entirely ridiculous finale.
However, it’s good to see the special effects are up to scratch for the genre. Revenge thrillers rarely have the budget for flashy CGI or top-notch practical effects but Cold Pursuit is one of the better in the genre. With a relatively modest budget of $60million, it appears that was well spent with clever editing and cinematography masking any less-than-stellar visuals.
Overall, Cold Pursuit is a fun, if forgettable revenge thriller that features some delicious dark comedy mixed with an intriguing story. It’s certainly Neeson’s best film since Non-Stopand marks a return to form for the Irish actor. Unfortunately, these type of flicks are ten-a-penny nowadays and I’m unsure whether snappy one-liners and beautiful snow-capped peaks are enough to differentiate it in a crowded marketplace.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2019/03/01/cold-pursuit-review-neesons-best-film-in-years/