Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Official Secrets (2019) in Movies
Mar 13, 2020
Cracking British all star cast (1 more)
Reminds you just how crazy politics was in 2003
The best little UK film you've never seen
A film about whistle-blowing against the backdrop of the Iraq War of 2003 doesn't sound like a very appealing watch, but "Official Secrets" defies all those fears. It's a cracking little UK movie.
Two years after 9/11, and the West has its sights set on Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. Tony Blair and George "Dubya" Bush (together with that behind-the-scenes pit-bull Don Cheney - as featured in "Vice") are determined to persuade the United Nations that WMD - Weapons of Mass Destruction - are in place, whether they are or not. London is threatened with being a nuclear wasteland within 45 minutes. Of course, while certain areas of the press (including the leadership of "The Guardian") support the war, the majority of the British people think this is total b*llocks! Two journalists - the irascible and volatile Ed Vulliamy (Rhys Ifans) and the head-down but relentless Martin Bright (Matt Smith) - are determined to uncover the truth behind the two government's machinations.
Enter Katharine Gun (Keira Knightley), an interpreter at GCHQ in Cheltenham who, when brought into a loop of the dirty government dealing, takes great exception to it. Unfortunately, she has signed the Official Secret's Act, a document incompatible with a conscience, and with a Kurdish husband Yasar (Adam Bakri) seeking British residence, she is in no position to throw stones.
Can Katharine's legal team, led by human rights lawyer Ben Emmerson (Ralph Fiennes), keep her away from a long prison sentence?
We've seen lots of fictional movies about the little guy up against the immovable mass and sunglass-wearing creepiness of the state: Will Smith's excellent "Enemy of the State" is a great example. Here the frisson in the script by Gregory Bernstein, Sara Bernstein and director Gavin Hood, based on the book by Marsha and Thomas Mitchell, is that it is all based on fact, brought brilliantly to life with interspersed news footage.
It's easy to forget, with nearly 20 years having passed, just how completely f****d up the world was after 9/11. Sabre-rattling became a US obsession, and the news-reel shots of Bush and Blair trying to justify their actions is really quite vomit-inducing.
Keira Knightley gives one of her best performances in years as the rather naive every-woman for appreciates she's digging a hole but has only dawning realisation as to how deep it goes.
But the supporting cast is also outstanding with Smith and Ifans being enormously entertaining as the journos, supported by their supportive boss - Downton's Matthew Goode. Ralph Fiennes delivers a typically underplayed and powerful performance as the legal beagle. Other well known faces popping up include Tamsin Greig and W1A's Monica Dolan.
How gripped you will be will depend on your memory! Mine is officially useless... so the denouement when it came was a surprise to me! But this is a little British film that really packs a punch. Extremely watchable and with a star cast, this ones a keeper. Highly recommended.
(For the full graphical review, check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/12/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-official-secrets-2019/ Thanks).
Two years after 9/11, and the West has its sights set on Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. Tony Blair and George "Dubya" Bush (together with that behind-the-scenes pit-bull Don Cheney - as featured in "Vice") are determined to persuade the United Nations that WMD - Weapons of Mass Destruction - are in place, whether they are or not. London is threatened with being a nuclear wasteland within 45 minutes. Of course, while certain areas of the press (including the leadership of "The Guardian") support the war, the majority of the British people think this is total b*llocks! Two journalists - the irascible and volatile Ed Vulliamy (Rhys Ifans) and the head-down but relentless Martin Bright (Matt Smith) - are determined to uncover the truth behind the two government's machinations.
Enter Katharine Gun (Keira Knightley), an interpreter at GCHQ in Cheltenham who, when brought into a loop of the dirty government dealing, takes great exception to it. Unfortunately, she has signed the Official Secret's Act, a document incompatible with a conscience, and with a Kurdish husband Yasar (Adam Bakri) seeking British residence, she is in no position to throw stones.
Can Katharine's legal team, led by human rights lawyer Ben Emmerson (Ralph Fiennes), keep her away from a long prison sentence?
We've seen lots of fictional movies about the little guy up against the immovable mass and sunglass-wearing creepiness of the state: Will Smith's excellent "Enemy of the State" is a great example. Here the frisson in the script by Gregory Bernstein, Sara Bernstein and director Gavin Hood, based on the book by Marsha and Thomas Mitchell, is that it is all based on fact, brought brilliantly to life with interspersed news footage.
It's easy to forget, with nearly 20 years having passed, just how completely f****d up the world was after 9/11. Sabre-rattling became a US obsession, and the news-reel shots of Bush and Blair trying to justify their actions is really quite vomit-inducing.
Keira Knightley gives one of her best performances in years as the rather naive every-woman for appreciates she's digging a hole but has only dawning realisation as to how deep it goes.
But the supporting cast is also outstanding with Smith and Ifans being enormously entertaining as the journos, supported by their supportive boss - Downton's Matthew Goode. Ralph Fiennes delivers a typically underplayed and powerful performance as the legal beagle. Other well known faces popping up include Tamsin Greig and W1A's Monica Dolan.
How gripped you will be will depend on your memory! Mine is officially useless... so the denouement when it came was a surprise to me! But this is a little British film that really packs a punch. Extremely watchable and with a star cast, this ones a keeper. Highly recommended.
(For the full graphical review, check out One Mann's Movies here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/03/12/one-manns-movies-dvd-review-official-secrets-2019/ Thanks).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Snitch (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
I’m a huge fan of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. His wrestling persona is
extremely entertaining and he’s a pretty decent actor. He did good with this movie but it wasn’t enough.
The premise of the movie is based on ‘true events’ (whatever that
means), it’s more about a law that’s real in our country right now, I’ll get in to that later.
There are a lot of characters so stick with me. The Rock plays John
Matthews, he owns his own construction business. He has an ex-wife, Sylvie Collins played by Melina Kanakaredes, and a current wife, Analisa played by Nadine Velazquez.
Johnand Analisa
have a daughter Isabella and he has a son with Sylvie, Jason Collins played by Rafi Gavron. The other major players are Barry Pepper who plays undercover DEA agent Cooper; Susan Sarandon who plays Joanne Keeghan a US Attorney; Jon Bernthal
who plays Daniel James an ex-con trying to get his life back together; Michael Kenneth Williams who plays Malik, a drug dealer; and Benjamin Bratt who plays Cartel leader Juan Carlos. Out of all of these, I liked Daniel, Agent Cooper, John Matthews, Malik and
Joanne Keeghan, in that order.
The law the movie is based on is about mandatory minimums. If you are
holding and it’s enough to distribute then you go to jail. The length of your jail time is based on how
much you are holding when you’re caught. In this case, Jason, who is 18 and still in high
school, is set up by his ‘best friend’. This friend sends him a huge bag of ecstasy against Jason’s wishes.
When the package arrives Jason gets caught because it’s a
sting. His jail time based on the amount of ecstasy is ten years in a prison that holds murderers, rapist and violent criminals.
The movie starts excruciatingly slow, the real action doesn’t start until
almost halfway through, or at least it felt like it. It’s good once you get there but I wasn’t really into
the people in it/living it. I kept thinking of the actors as themselves not the characters
they were playing, even the ones I liked. There were too many close ups and‘in action’ scenes that involved someone with a camera running or walking next to the actor.
I getthat it was to try and build apprehension and anxiety but it was more annoying and kept pulling me out of the story so I couldn’t connect emotionally with the characters.
I didn’t believe the union between John and Analisa or that there had been one with Sylvie, there was no familiarity and I didn’t believe the love or tension between them.
John was a business man who’s never seen action so he’s kind of a wuss, but it’s the Rock, a huge tall muscle-y intense looking guy. Whenever he flinched I kept waiting for him to kick ass but he never does.
Then in another scene he’s magically badass, shooting
a shotgun one handed out of the window of a semi-truck he’s driving.
The movie was more about showing people this heinous law then entertainingus. I don’t like that, it’s not why I go to movies. The only saving grace would have been if it had been really entertaining but it was only mildly entertaining at best.
I’d say rent it if you like the Rock or if you’re curious, it wouldn’t be too much of a waste of your time but
definitely don’t waste your money in a theatre.
extremely entertaining and he’s a pretty decent actor. He did good with this movie but it wasn’t enough.
The premise of the movie is based on ‘true events’ (whatever that
means), it’s more about a law that’s real in our country right now, I’ll get in to that later.
There are a lot of characters so stick with me. The Rock plays John
Matthews, he owns his own construction business. He has an ex-wife, Sylvie Collins played by Melina Kanakaredes, and a current wife, Analisa played by Nadine Velazquez.
Johnand Analisa
have a daughter Isabella and he has a son with Sylvie, Jason Collins played by Rafi Gavron. The other major players are Barry Pepper who plays undercover DEA agent Cooper; Susan Sarandon who plays Joanne Keeghan a US Attorney; Jon Bernthal
who plays Daniel James an ex-con trying to get his life back together; Michael Kenneth Williams who plays Malik, a drug dealer; and Benjamin Bratt who plays Cartel leader Juan Carlos. Out of all of these, I liked Daniel, Agent Cooper, John Matthews, Malik and
Joanne Keeghan, in that order.
The law the movie is based on is about mandatory minimums. If you are
holding and it’s enough to distribute then you go to jail. The length of your jail time is based on how
much you are holding when you’re caught. In this case, Jason, who is 18 and still in high
school, is set up by his ‘best friend’. This friend sends him a huge bag of ecstasy against Jason’s wishes.
When the package arrives Jason gets caught because it’s a
sting. His jail time based on the amount of ecstasy is ten years in a prison that holds murderers, rapist and violent criminals.
The movie starts excruciatingly slow, the real action doesn’t start until
almost halfway through, or at least it felt like it. It’s good once you get there but I wasn’t really into
the people in it/living it. I kept thinking of the actors as themselves not the characters
they were playing, even the ones I liked. There were too many close ups and‘in action’ scenes that involved someone with a camera running or walking next to the actor.
I getthat it was to try and build apprehension and anxiety but it was more annoying and kept pulling me out of the story so I couldn’t connect emotionally with the characters.
I didn’t believe the union between John and Analisa or that there had been one with Sylvie, there was no familiarity and I didn’t believe the love or tension between them.
John was a business man who’s never seen action so he’s kind of a wuss, but it’s the Rock, a huge tall muscle-y intense looking guy. Whenever he flinched I kept waiting for him to kick ass but he never does.
Then in another scene he’s magically badass, shooting
a shotgun one handed out of the window of a semi-truck he’s driving.
The movie was more about showing people this heinous law then entertainingus. I don’t like that, it’s not why I go to movies. The only saving grace would have been if it had been really entertaining but it was only mildly entertaining at best.
I’d say rent it if you like the Rock or if you’re curious, it wouldn’t be too much of a waste of your time but
definitely don’t waste your money in a theatre.
Mississippi Blood
9.1
Rate It
Book
#1 New York Times Bestselling Author The endgame is at hand for Penn Cage, his family, and the...
Black-Eyed Susans
8.6
Rate It
Book
**THE TOP 5 SUNDAY TIMES BESTSELLER** 'My book of the year so far. Breathtakingly, heart-stoppingly...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Becky (2020) in Movies
Jan 1, 2021
Mindless violence and Kevin James in a dramatic role? Colour me intrigued.
Becky's life hasn't been the smoothest ride, but when her dad brings her up to their cabin things start to look up... briefly. The excitement is short-lived when his girlfriend turns up with her son and they reveal they have some wonderful news to share. Unfortunately that's not the worst thing that's going to happen this trip.
I don't want to say that Becky deserved everything that happened to her in the film... but I wasn't mad when it did happen. It was an interesting film, I felt little to nothing for her as a character and I had a real desire for the bad guys to win (to some degree).
This desire built quite quickly in the beginning, I was having serious misgivings about choosing to buy it. The whole lead up was a challenge, Becky was obnoxious and nothing seemed to be happening. But thankfully it did pick up.
Becky has a relatively small cast and they're well selected. Kevin James is a pleasant surprise in this dramatic role. I love seeing people take on something out of character, and I thought his performance as Dominick was impressive. There may have been a couple of points that seemed a little out of place, but on the whole the part was well scripted and James' depiction was very convincing. There was a slightly odd dynamic between Dominick and his minions, I liked the variety of personalities though, and Robert Maillet was definitely my favourite as Apex.
Lulu Wilson as Becky kept causing me problems. As I mentioned above, I didn't really like her as a character... I'm not sure quite where I fell out with her along the way. The beginning felt insanely unrealistic with regards to her behaviour, and while I found her to be less frustrating when the action started there was still something missing. I wonder if that might be to do with age. She's a 13-year-old girl, just a nudge into the higher teens might have made it more engaging.
I had to tap some expert knowledge when it came to the cinematography (thank you, Clare), after some investigation I'm going to say that there are a lot of transitions that lay somewhere between a match cut and an invisible cut. At the beginning of the film it's used to show the comparison of Becky at school and the convicts in prison, and that worked, I liked it. But it happens more, and that novelty value wore off quickly and I was expecting more of it, which became distracting.
There's a lot of gore on-screen throughout, with the accompaniment of some slightly dubious effects on occasions. On the whole the gratuitous violence amused me for its sheer outrageousness. One scene will get you a bit (well, it did me), you'll know it when you see it. Was all this violence needed? Probably not. Was it entertaining in the action of it all? Yes... probably.
Even with my conflicted feelings at the beginning of the film, I did come out enjoying myself. There are hints of a spicy Home Alone at work, somewhere just shy of Better Watch Out.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/01/becky-movie-review.html
Becky's life hasn't been the smoothest ride, but when her dad brings her up to their cabin things start to look up... briefly. The excitement is short-lived when his girlfriend turns up with her son and they reveal they have some wonderful news to share. Unfortunately that's not the worst thing that's going to happen this trip.
I don't want to say that Becky deserved everything that happened to her in the film... but I wasn't mad when it did happen. It was an interesting film, I felt little to nothing for her as a character and I had a real desire for the bad guys to win (to some degree).
This desire built quite quickly in the beginning, I was having serious misgivings about choosing to buy it. The whole lead up was a challenge, Becky was obnoxious and nothing seemed to be happening. But thankfully it did pick up.
Becky has a relatively small cast and they're well selected. Kevin James is a pleasant surprise in this dramatic role. I love seeing people take on something out of character, and I thought his performance as Dominick was impressive. There may have been a couple of points that seemed a little out of place, but on the whole the part was well scripted and James' depiction was very convincing. There was a slightly odd dynamic between Dominick and his minions, I liked the variety of personalities though, and Robert Maillet was definitely my favourite as Apex.
Lulu Wilson as Becky kept causing me problems. As I mentioned above, I didn't really like her as a character... I'm not sure quite where I fell out with her along the way. The beginning felt insanely unrealistic with regards to her behaviour, and while I found her to be less frustrating when the action started there was still something missing. I wonder if that might be to do with age. She's a 13-year-old girl, just a nudge into the higher teens might have made it more engaging.
I had to tap some expert knowledge when it came to the cinematography (thank you, Clare), after some investigation I'm going to say that there are a lot of transitions that lay somewhere between a match cut and an invisible cut. At the beginning of the film it's used to show the comparison of Becky at school and the convicts in prison, and that worked, I liked it. But it happens more, and that novelty value wore off quickly and I was expecting more of it, which became distracting.
There's a lot of gore on-screen throughout, with the accompaniment of some slightly dubious effects on occasions. On the whole the gratuitous violence amused me for its sheer outrageousness. One scene will get you a bit (well, it did me), you'll know it when you see it. Was all this violence needed? Probably not. Was it entertaining in the action of it all? Yes... probably.
Even with my conflicted feelings at the beginning of the film, I did come out enjoying myself. There are hints of a spicy Home Alone at work, somewhere just shy of Better Watch Out.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/01/becky-movie-review.html
James P. Sumner (65 KP) rated The Informer (2019) in Movies
Sep 10, 2019
A real hidden gem.
I went into this film knowing very little about it, other than the two-line blurb on my local cinema's website. Released to a muted fanfare, this twisty-turny crime drama is a surprisingly gripping and taut thriller, with some stand-out performances from the cast.
Joel Kinnaman plays Pete Koslow, an ex-con that we soon discover is working undercover for the FBI to help take down a mob boss in New York City. Not much is known (or, frustratingly, revealed) about Koslow's backstory, but Kinnaman plays the part very well. It's not as in-depth as maybe it could've been, but his personal arc is a fresh and original spin on a tried-and-tested formula, and it is, at times, compelling to watch.
Needless to say, Koslow's arrangement with the FBI goes sour before too long, and he's left alone in prison with multiple groups of enemies with their own agendas trying to kill him. The second half of the film, where the twists and turns and clever plotting flows more freely, reminded me of Will Smith's "Enemy of the State" and Liam Neeson's "A Walk Among The Tombstones", in terms of the complex approach and execution to resolving a seemingly inescapable situation.
The story was told to great effect, with the gritty tone and the deliberate pacing perfectly suiting this competent thriller.
Ana de Armas is terrific as Koslow's long-suffering and admiringly-loyal partner, Sofia. She has a look of naivety and innocence throughout, with her perma-watering wide eyes and youthful good looks, yet she is as tough as they come and the perfect match for Kinnaman's lead.
Clive Owen also deserves a mention for another consistent performance, despite him being woefully underused here. He steals every scene he's in, playing a menacing background antagonist incredibly well.
For me, this movie was let down by two things. First, its ending, which felt sudden and rushed, as if it stopped mid-sentence. It's not the kind of film that warrants a sequel, nor was it, I imagine, made with the intention of one. So to leave so many questions unanswered serves little purpose and ultimately leaves you disappointed after what was otherwise a very, very clever film.
Secondly, Rosamund Pike's performance left a lot to be desired. Because of her outstanding lack of on-screen charisma, you never truly connect with her character, Agent Wilcox. Her handling of Koslow's operation felt hollow. She showed no emotional range whatsoever, and wore the same expression throughout the entire film. Consequently, the journey of her character and the impact her decisions have on both other people, and the movie's eventual outcome, felt empty and pointless.
Despite that, this is a real hidden gem. As I noted earlier, this wasn't what you would call a "big" release. It came out under the radar and, as a result, was the subject of very few expectations. But what you have here is an intelligent thriller that provides an original take on a typical storyline that delivers in almost every way it intended to.
This is the film you stream off Netflix on a Friday night while eating a takeaway after a hard week at work.
Joel Kinnaman plays Pete Koslow, an ex-con that we soon discover is working undercover for the FBI to help take down a mob boss in New York City. Not much is known (or, frustratingly, revealed) about Koslow's backstory, but Kinnaman plays the part very well. It's not as in-depth as maybe it could've been, but his personal arc is a fresh and original spin on a tried-and-tested formula, and it is, at times, compelling to watch.
Needless to say, Koslow's arrangement with the FBI goes sour before too long, and he's left alone in prison with multiple groups of enemies with their own agendas trying to kill him. The second half of the film, where the twists and turns and clever plotting flows more freely, reminded me of Will Smith's "Enemy of the State" and Liam Neeson's "A Walk Among The Tombstones", in terms of the complex approach and execution to resolving a seemingly inescapable situation.
The story was told to great effect, with the gritty tone and the deliberate pacing perfectly suiting this competent thriller.
Ana de Armas is terrific as Koslow's long-suffering and admiringly-loyal partner, Sofia. She has a look of naivety and innocence throughout, with her perma-watering wide eyes and youthful good looks, yet she is as tough as they come and the perfect match for Kinnaman's lead.
Clive Owen also deserves a mention for another consistent performance, despite him being woefully underused here. He steals every scene he's in, playing a menacing background antagonist incredibly well.
For me, this movie was let down by two things. First, its ending, which felt sudden and rushed, as if it stopped mid-sentence. It's not the kind of film that warrants a sequel, nor was it, I imagine, made with the intention of one. So to leave so many questions unanswered serves little purpose and ultimately leaves you disappointed after what was otherwise a very, very clever film.
Secondly, Rosamund Pike's performance left a lot to be desired. Because of her outstanding lack of on-screen charisma, you never truly connect with her character, Agent Wilcox. Her handling of Koslow's operation felt hollow. She showed no emotional range whatsoever, and wore the same expression throughout the entire film. Consequently, the journey of her character and the impact her decisions have on both other people, and the movie's eventual outcome, felt empty and pointless.
Despite that, this is a real hidden gem. As I noted earlier, this wasn't what you would call a "big" release. It came out under the radar and, as a result, was the subject of very few expectations. But what you have here is an intelligent thriller that provides an original take on a typical storyline that delivers in almost every way it intended to.
This is the film you stream off Netflix on a Friday night while eating a takeaway after a hard week at work.
Find Forgiveness! Verzeihen lernen mit Hypnose
Health & Fitness and Lifestyle
App
FIND FORGIVENESS! LEARN TO FORGIVE BY HYPNOSIS • Learn how to forgive and forget • Make peace...
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated I Am David 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/2020/05/Book-Review-Banner-49.png"/>;
<b><i>"You can't change others, but you can do something about a fault in yourself."</i></b>
I Am David by Anne Holm is a very interesting and emotionally powerful story about a young boy. David was born and raised in a prison when one day, he is given a backpack and a few instructions to escape and find his way to Denmark.
During this time, we follow David's adventure and his thoughts. He is programmed to not trust anyone and to escape as soon as he smells any danger coming his way. Throughout his journey, we can see that David goes through a lot of hardship and he meets many people, even though he fails to connect with them or entrust them with anything. Good people are somehow always there to help him, and I have to be honest and mention that I found this to be incredibly convenient to the story and in no way believable.
Besides this fact, we get to see David be his true self at all times, which is something I enjoyed about this book. There are instances where he has to make choices that require him to pretend and be something he is not, and he chooses to stay true to himself. Some times, these choices mean he has to give up the comforts of his new-found life, a bed to sleep in and food that is always on the table.
<b><i>"And if you never allow other people to influence what you're really like, then you've something no one can take from you - not even they."</i></b>
David's adventure will teach him many things.
Some of these traits he already knew of by seeing them in others, but now he will learn to possess them himself. Honesty, bravery, kindness. But there is one thing David never knew before: true happiness.
<b><i>"Joy passed, but happiness never completely disappeared: a touch of it remain to remind one it had been there."</i></b>
Even though I loved this book for all the right reasons, I couldn't help but notice the red flags. The parents in this book seemed to believe David's ridiculous story about the circus. They also invited him into his home without any doubts. And the most important part - David was a manipulator. Getting close to the little girl, as well as he showed open hatred towards one of the boys. And the parents were aware of all this, and still didn't seem that concerned. I understand where David came from - the way he behaved was all he's ever known. What I cannot understand was how the parents were portrayed in the book.
The ending seemed quite fast paced, even rushed. The outcome was predictable. I still manage to find the whole story unbelievable though. I recommend it to children, for the lesson of being yourself. However, I don't think that as an adult you would enjoy it.
<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/2020/05/Book-Review-Banner-49.png"/>;
<b><i>"You can't change others, but you can do something about a fault in yourself."</i></b>
I Am David by Anne Holm is a very interesting and emotionally powerful story about a young boy. David was born and raised in a prison when one day, he is given a backpack and a few instructions to escape and find his way to Denmark.
During this time, we follow David's adventure and his thoughts. He is programmed to not trust anyone and to escape as soon as he smells any danger coming his way. Throughout his journey, we can see that David goes through a lot of hardship and he meets many people, even though he fails to connect with them or entrust them with anything. Good people are somehow always there to help him, and I have to be honest and mention that I found this to be incredibly convenient to the story and in no way believable.
Besides this fact, we get to see David be his true self at all times, which is something I enjoyed about this book. There are instances where he has to make choices that require him to pretend and be something he is not, and he chooses to stay true to himself. Some times, these choices mean he has to give up the comforts of his new-found life, a bed to sleep in and food that is always on the table.
<b><i>"And if you never allow other people to influence what you're really like, then you've something no one can take from you - not even they."</i></b>
David's adventure will teach him many things.
Some of these traits he already knew of by seeing them in others, but now he will learn to possess them himself. Honesty, bravery, kindness. But there is one thing David never knew before: true happiness.
<b><i>"Joy passed, but happiness never completely disappeared: a touch of it remain to remind one it had been there."</i></b>
Even though I loved this book for all the right reasons, I couldn't help but notice the red flags. The parents in this book seemed to believe David's ridiculous story about the circus. They also invited him into his home without any doubts. And the most important part - David was a manipulator. Getting close to the little girl, as well as he showed open hatred towards one of the boys. And the parents were aware of all this, and still didn't seem that concerned. I understand where David came from - the way he behaved was all he's ever known. What I cannot understand was how the parents were portrayed in the book.
The ending seemed quite fast paced, even rushed. The outcome was predictable. I still manage to find the whole story unbelievable though. I recommend it to children, for the lesson of being yourself. However, I don't think that as an adult you would enjoy it.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Never Saw You Coming in Books
Sep 30, 2021
An insightful look at love and religion
Meg Hennessey grew up finding comfort in her faith. But her conservative parents also kept her sheltered based on their interpretation of the rules of the church. But at age eighteen, Meg learns her entire life was a lie. Instead of going to work at a church camp for a year, she heads to Marquette, Michigan to learn more about the family she never knew she had. There, she meets Micah Allen. Micah's dad is a former pastor who is now in prison. Micah adored and believed in his father, who let the church, his congregation, and his family down famously--the press still hounds Micah years later. With his father's probation hearing coming up, his mother wants him to forgive him, but Micah isn't sure he can. Meg and Micah meet and find themselves drawn to each other. But each struggle with what they've been taught about love, along with the pasts they may need to leave behind to move forward.
"Because the uncomfortable truth is, while the church loves sinners in their pews, they don't want them in front of a crowd. It's the difference between acceptance and tolerance, and it might catch on. God forbid."
This is a really lovely and moving story. While it includes a lot of religious themes and discussion, it never felt like too much--religion and forgiveness informs the story, rather than detracts from it. Meg is a side character in Hahn's excellent book, MORE THAN MAYBE, and we see glimpses of Vada and Luke from that tale (which is really fun). It's wonderful to see Meg fully explored here--Hahn writes her sections in a snappy and smart way, capturing Meg perfectly. She's so sweet, yet smart and tough. Her entire life has been upended, and Meg truly must rethink her whole faith and foundation. I think a weaker person would crumple at such a situation. Watching her grow is really fun; you cannot help but root for her.
And Micah is a great character, too. He too, has had his faith tested, as his father destroyed his church and Micah's belief in the church. Micah and Meg's romance is cute, honest, and real. Hahn's book explores how shamed these two feel by falling in love and how the church has conditioned them to feel that love, happiness, and romance can be wrong and even sinful. It tackles the pain of loving a Jesus/God who then censures you for loving. It's so adept at this and skilled at portraying their struggles. How can the love of these two sweet, earnest kids be wrong? And as they explore why bad things happen--especially as they believe so fully--the book makes you think and examine deeply. It deftly exposes the church's focus on female purity only, while often ignoring the males. Honestly, whether you're religious or not, this is a must-read, especially in these times, when so much of the control of a women's body seems not be our own.
Overall, I loved this book. It offers a charming romance, along with a timely look at religion and how it can affect young people as they make their way in the world. The side characters are excellent (I'm looking at you, Duke, and Cash the dog!). Hahn's writing is as excellent as ever. 4.5 stars. Please note the author's own note for a trigger warning for self-harm and suicide.
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press / Wednesday Books and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
"Because the uncomfortable truth is, while the church loves sinners in their pews, they don't want them in front of a crowd. It's the difference between acceptance and tolerance, and it might catch on. God forbid."
This is a really lovely and moving story. While it includes a lot of religious themes and discussion, it never felt like too much--religion and forgiveness informs the story, rather than detracts from it. Meg is a side character in Hahn's excellent book, MORE THAN MAYBE, and we see glimpses of Vada and Luke from that tale (which is really fun). It's wonderful to see Meg fully explored here--Hahn writes her sections in a snappy and smart way, capturing Meg perfectly. She's so sweet, yet smart and tough. Her entire life has been upended, and Meg truly must rethink her whole faith and foundation. I think a weaker person would crumple at such a situation. Watching her grow is really fun; you cannot help but root for her.
And Micah is a great character, too. He too, has had his faith tested, as his father destroyed his church and Micah's belief in the church. Micah and Meg's romance is cute, honest, and real. Hahn's book explores how shamed these two feel by falling in love and how the church has conditioned them to feel that love, happiness, and romance can be wrong and even sinful. It tackles the pain of loving a Jesus/God who then censures you for loving. It's so adept at this and skilled at portraying their struggles. How can the love of these two sweet, earnest kids be wrong? And as they explore why bad things happen--especially as they believe so fully--the book makes you think and examine deeply. It deftly exposes the church's focus on female purity only, while often ignoring the males. Honestly, whether you're religious or not, this is a must-read, especially in these times, when so much of the control of a women's body seems not be our own.
Overall, I loved this book. It offers a charming romance, along with a timely look at religion and how it can affect young people as they make their way in the world. The side characters are excellent (I'm looking at you, Duke, and Cash the dog!). Hahn's writing is as excellent as ever. 4.5 stars. Please note the author's own note for a trigger warning for self-harm and suicide.
I received a copy of this book from St. Martin's Press / Wednesday Books and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review.
Mandy and G.D. Burkhead (26 KP) rated Poison Study (Study, #1) in Books
May 20, 2018
Shelf Life – The Chronicles of Ixia merits closer study
Contains spoilers, click to show
This review is for the entire Chronicles of Ixia series.
The first trilogy, comprised of Poison Study, Fire Study, and Magic Study, follows Yelena Zaltana. The second series, also called the Glass series, follows her friend Opal Cowan in Storm Glass, Sea Glass, and Spy Glass. The final trilogy, Shadow Study, Night Study, and Dawn Study, is where things get a bit odd. Maria V. Snyder had thrown in a few short stories/novellas throughout from different characters’ points of view. Perhaps she got bored of just sticking to one POV, or maybe fans wanted more from the other characters, so the third trilogy is from Yelena’s POV in first person and the POV’s of multiple characters (mainly Valek, Leif, and Janco, with a few others popping in from time to time) in third person.
I’m not sure which editor thought it would be a good idea to have POV switch from first person to third person in the same novel, but—yikes—is it jarring. Even with the wonky POV stuff in the third trilogy, these books are amazing and absolutely worth your time to read. Snyder’s world-building is compelling, detailed, and original. The books take place mostly between two pre-industrial countries: Ixia and Sitia. Ixia is a post-revolution country ruled by Commander Ambrose. His personal body guard and assassin is Valek. In the first novel Yelena is in prison for murder and is offered the choice to be the Commander’s food taster in exchange for her life. She agrees, and throughout the first book she and Valek begin to fall in love.
Ixia reminded me a lot of Communist Russia or China. In its attempts to throw away the corrupt government and society that came before, it has also thrown out all culture in the process. The country has been re-divided into districts with numbers instead of names, everyone is forced to wear a uniform, all art and extravagance has been destroyed, people have to have passes to travel between districts, and magic is forbidden. Anyone born with it is killed (or so the reader is led to believe). But Maria V. Snyder does a wonderful job of showing the good with the bad in this totalitarian dictatorship. Everyone has a job and nobody goes hungry, women are now equal to men, and violence and sexual assault are intolerable. This is why Yelena ends up in prison in the first place: she murdered the man that raped her. Now, this is probably my first major gripe with the series. We learn that Commander Ambrose loathes sexual assault and will execute anyone found guilty of it, but apparently killing a rapist in self-defense is also an executable offense. And all of that being said, Ambrose still has his own personal assassin. It all feels a bit contradictory, but again, that’s what I like about this series: it does an excellent job of peeling back the layers of her fictional societies and pointing out that governments and people in power tend to be hypocritical.
Now, the series name (or rather one of them) is Chronicles of Ixia, but honestly, it should have been called Chronicles of Sitia, because that is where most of the story takes place and is by far the more interesting and vibrant country. Sitia is part jungle, part desert, and full of magic. The peoples are divided into multiple clans or tribes that are all unique and compelling. In the second book, Yelena flees to Sitia after the Commander learns she has magic, and there she finds the family she was kidnapped from as a small child. They are part of the Zaltana clan, a group of people that live high in the trees in the jungle. Whenever I read about them, I would have to remind myself that they were not wood elves or dryads, because while there is magic in these books, there are no fantastical creatures: all characters are human or animal.
Another fascinating tribe is the Sandseeds, a group of nomads in the desert known for two major things: breeding super smart horses and having Storyweavers. The Storyweavers are people who have the magical ability to see the future and guide others, but who have to do it really cryptically because reasons (I appreciate that this gets pointed out by an annoyed Yelena multiple times). And of course, the Sandseed horses are fantastic; they choose their rider and able to mentally communicate with magical people. They even have their own horse names for people that they like.
Besides the different clans throughout Sitia, there is also the capitol, the Citadel, which is home to the magic school and the Sitian Council. While very different from Ixia, Sitia is by no means perfect. Its Council epitomizes everything annoying and dysfunctional about a bureaucracy. While the council members are elected and come from every clan in Sitia, they are at best useless and at worst actively impede the main characters.
The magic school is interesting, though the story doesn’t actually spend much time there. I like how magic was done in this series: it usually runs in families, most people with it have control over one or two things (ie. fire, mind-control, telepathy, etc.), but those who have the ability to master more can become Master Magicians after enduring a daunting trial. Magic is bound in people’s blood, so blood magic is a thing and is obviously bad, and magic (and a person’s soul) can be stolen using an intricate and gruesome blood ritual that involves prolonged torture, rape, and then murder.
The power blanket is another interesting concept used in this series. Essentially is resides over the entire world and is the essence of magic, so magicians can pull from it to augment their own magic. However, if they pull too much and lose control, they can flame out, killing themselves and temporarily damaging the blanket in the process. I thought this was a good literary tool to prevent magical characters from being too OP (at least most of the time).
I especially like the romantic relationships in this series. Valek and Yelena are of course the main couple. In the first book they fall in love, in the second book they get separated, and throughout the series they regularly cross paths and save one another. Yelena and Valek are heartmates, and as the series progresses they both have to mature and learn how to trust one another. My biggest complaint about the romance is that all sex scenes are just fade to black, which I personally find a bit boring.
The other major romantic relationship is between Opal and Devlen. This one was a bit awkward. Opal actually goes through a couple of guys first: a stormdancer named Kade and another glassmaker named Ulrick. And I really liked that the author included this. Many people have multiple partners before finding their soulmate, and a woman who does is not a slut. Her relationship with Devlen, however . . . Well, she’s a more forgiving person than me.
You see, it turns out that Devlen is the man who kidnapped Opal a few years earlier and tortured her because he was trying to steal her magic. But he didn’t actually enjoy torturing her and never raped her, which I guess makes it better? Well, he manages to switch bodies with Ulrick and, as Ulrick, tricks Opal into dating him, then, when he’s discovered, kidnaps and tortures her (again) to gain more power. But then she steals his magic, he spends some time in prison, and the combination of the two miraculously turn him into a good guy, claiming that magic is what made him evil in the first place.
I’m going to be honest, I didn’t completely buy his redemption arc even at the end of the third book in the Glass series, but by the ninth book they’re still together and he’s on the good guys’ side, so I guess it was real. And I have definitely watched/read much worse evil asshole to boyfriend stories. At least Devlen genuinely feels guilty for the horrible things he did in the past and attempts to make up for them, and in her defense, Opal has to do a lot of soul-searching before she can find it in her to forgive and trust him, and even more before she can develop romantic feelings for him (that aren’t based on deception, anyway). Also, Ulrick becomes a huge jerk because of his newfound magical abilities, tries to kill Opal, and later gets assassinated by Valek. I appreciate what Maria V. Snyder is trying to do here, which is to teach through her storytelling how good people can become evil, and evil people can redeem themselves and be good. Their romance was uncomfortable to read, but it was supposed to be uncomfortable, because that’s how all parties involved felt.
Now, let’s talk about Commander Ambrose. Towards the end of the first book, Yelena discovers that Ambrose is a female to male trans person. This is revealed to be why Ambrose hates magicians so much: he is afraid that one of them will read his mind and then reveal his secret (which is how Yelena discovers it). After I read the first book, I was really pleased that Snyder did such a good job of depicting a trans person, as that’s really only a small part of his character, and those who know (mainly Valek and Yelena) don’t make a big deal out of it.
And then . . . I really wish that the author would have just left the issue of the Commander being trans alone. Yelena discovers it in the first book, she keeps it to herself because it’s nobody else’s business, the end. But by creating this weird intricate background to explain why Ambrose is trans, Snyder just kind of shoots herself in the foot.
Throughout the rest of the series, I kept hoping for some other LGBTQ+ characters to show up to redeem the blunder with Ambrose. I actually believed that Ari and Janco were a gay couple for the longest time, what with their banter and often being referred to as partners. However, if this was the author’s intention, it was never really explicitly stated, and the partner thing just seems to refer to them being partners in combat and nothing else.
The first trilogy, comprised of Poison Study, Fire Study, and Magic Study, follows Yelena Zaltana. The second series, also called the Glass series, follows her friend Opal Cowan in Storm Glass, Sea Glass, and Spy Glass. The final trilogy, Shadow Study, Night Study, and Dawn Study, is where things get a bit odd. Maria V. Snyder had thrown in a few short stories/novellas throughout from different characters’ points of view. Perhaps she got bored of just sticking to one POV, or maybe fans wanted more from the other characters, so the third trilogy is from Yelena’s POV in first person and the POV’s of multiple characters (mainly Valek, Leif, and Janco, with a few others popping in from time to time) in third person.
I’m not sure which editor thought it would be a good idea to have POV switch from first person to third person in the same novel, but—yikes—is it jarring. Even with the wonky POV stuff in the third trilogy, these books are amazing and absolutely worth your time to read. Snyder’s world-building is compelling, detailed, and original. The books take place mostly between two pre-industrial countries: Ixia and Sitia. Ixia is a post-revolution country ruled by Commander Ambrose. His personal body guard and assassin is Valek. In the first novel Yelena is in prison for murder and is offered the choice to be the Commander’s food taster in exchange for her life. She agrees, and throughout the first book she and Valek begin to fall in love.
Ixia reminded me a lot of Communist Russia or China. In its attempts to throw away the corrupt government and society that came before, it has also thrown out all culture in the process. The country has been re-divided into districts with numbers instead of names, everyone is forced to wear a uniform, all art and extravagance has been destroyed, people have to have passes to travel between districts, and magic is forbidden. Anyone born with it is killed (or so the reader is led to believe). But Maria V. Snyder does a wonderful job of showing the good with the bad in this totalitarian dictatorship. Everyone has a job and nobody goes hungry, women are now equal to men, and violence and sexual assault are intolerable. This is why Yelena ends up in prison in the first place: she murdered the man that raped her. Now, this is probably my first major gripe with the series. We learn that Commander Ambrose loathes sexual assault and will execute anyone found guilty of it, but apparently killing a rapist in self-defense is also an executable offense. And all of that being said, Ambrose still has his own personal assassin. It all feels a bit contradictory, but again, that’s what I like about this series: it does an excellent job of peeling back the layers of her fictional societies and pointing out that governments and people in power tend to be hypocritical.
Now, the series name (or rather one of them) is Chronicles of Ixia, but honestly, it should have been called Chronicles of Sitia, because that is where most of the story takes place and is by far the more interesting and vibrant country. Sitia is part jungle, part desert, and full of magic. The peoples are divided into multiple clans or tribes that are all unique and compelling. In the second book, Yelena flees to Sitia after the Commander learns she has magic, and there she finds the family she was kidnapped from as a small child. They are part of the Zaltana clan, a group of people that live high in the trees in the jungle. Whenever I read about them, I would have to remind myself that they were not wood elves or dryads, because while there is magic in these books, there are no fantastical creatures: all characters are human or animal.
Another fascinating tribe is the Sandseeds, a group of nomads in the desert known for two major things: breeding super smart horses and having Storyweavers. The Storyweavers are people who have the magical ability to see the future and guide others, but who have to do it really cryptically because reasons (I appreciate that this gets pointed out by an annoyed Yelena multiple times). And of course, the Sandseed horses are fantastic; they choose their rider and able to mentally communicate with magical people. They even have their own horse names for people that they like.
Besides the different clans throughout Sitia, there is also the capitol, the Citadel, which is home to the magic school and the Sitian Council. While very different from Ixia, Sitia is by no means perfect. Its Council epitomizes everything annoying and dysfunctional about a bureaucracy. While the council members are elected and come from every clan in Sitia, they are at best useless and at worst actively impede the main characters.
The magic school is interesting, though the story doesn’t actually spend much time there. I like how magic was done in this series: it usually runs in families, most people with it have control over one or two things (ie. fire, mind-control, telepathy, etc.), but those who have the ability to master more can become Master Magicians after enduring a daunting trial. Magic is bound in people’s blood, so blood magic is a thing and is obviously bad, and magic (and a person’s soul) can be stolen using an intricate and gruesome blood ritual that involves prolonged torture, rape, and then murder.
The power blanket is another interesting concept used in this series. Essentially is resides over the entire world and is the essence of magic, so magicians can pull from it to augment their own magic. However, if they pull too much and lose control, they can flame out, killing themselves and temporarily damaging the blanket in the process. I thought this was a good literary tool to prevent magical characters from being too OP (at least most of the time).
I especially like the romantic relationships in this series. Valek and Yelena are of course the main couple. In the first book they fall in love, in the second book they get separated, and throughout the series they regularly cross paths and save one another. Yelena and Valek are heartmates, and as the series progresses they both have to mature and learn how to trust one another. My biggest complaint about the romance is that all sex scenes are just fade to black, which I personally find a bit boring.
The other major romantic relationship is between Opal and Devlen. This one was a bit awkward. Opal actually goes through a couple of guys first: a stormdancer named Kade and another glassmaker named Ulrick. And I really liked that the author included this. Many people have multiple partners before finding their soulmate, and a woman who does is not a slut. Her relationship with Devlen, however . . . Well, she’s a more forgiving person than me.
You see, it turns out that Devlen is the man who kidnapped Opal a few years earlier and tortured her because he was trying to steal her magic. But he didn’t actually enjoy torturing her and never raped her, which I guess makes it better? Well, he manages to switch bodies with Ulrick and, as Ulrick, tricks Opal into dating him, then, when he’s discovered, kidnaps and tortures her (again) to gain more power. But then she steals his magic, he spends some time in prison, and the combination of the two miraculously turn him into a good guy, claiming that magic is what made him evil in the first place.
I’m going to be honest, I didn’t completely buy his redemption arc even at the end of the third book in the Glass series, but by the ninth book they’re still together and he’s on the good guys’ side, so I guess it was real. And I have definitely watched/read much worse evil asshole to boyfriend stories. At least Devlen genuinely feels guilty for the horrible things he did in the past and attempts to make up for them, and in her defense, Opal has to do a lot of soul-searching before she can find it in her to forgive and trust him, and even more before she can develop romantic feelings for him (that aren’t based on deception, anyway). Also, Ulrick becomes a huge jerk because of his newfound magical abilities, tries to kill Opal, and later gets assassinated by Valek. I appreciate what Maria V. Snyder is trying to do here, which is to teach through her storytelling how good people can become evil, and evil people can redeem themselves and be good. Their romance was uncomfortable to read, but it was supposed to be uncomfortable, because that’s how all parties involved felt.
Now, let’s talk about Commander Ambrose. Towards the end of the first book, Yelena discovers that Ambrose is a female to male trans person. This is revealed to be why Ambrose hates magicians so much: he is afraid that one of them will read his mind and then reveal his secret (which is how Yelena discovers it). After I read the first book, I was really pleased that Snyder did such a good job of depicting a trans person, as that’s really only a small part of his character, and those who know (mainly Valek and Yelena) don’t make a big deal out of it.
And then . . . I really wish that the author would have just left the issue of the Commander being trans alone. Yelena discovers it in the first book, she keeps it to herself because it’s nobody else’s business, the end. But by creating this weird intricate background to explain why Ambrose is trans, Snyder just kind of shoots herself in the foot.
Throughout the rest of the series, I kept hoping for some other LGBTQ+ characters to show up to redeem the blunder with Ambrose. I actually believed that Ari and Janco were a gay couple for the longest time, what with their banter and often being referred to as partners. However, if this was the author’s intention, it was never really explicitly stated, and the partner thing just seems to refer to them being partners in combat and nothing else.