Search
Search results
Christine A. (965 KP) rated A Time to Die (Out of Time, #1) in Books
Nov 14, 2018
I was provided with a complimentary copy of this book so I could give an honest review. "A Time to Die" by Nadine Brandes started out as an interesting Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel. People know exactly when they are going to die. That is an interesting concept. We all know we're going to die but would we change how or what we do if we knew exactly when? The main character, Parvin, is a girl that hasn't done much with her life and her time is almost up. Great concept so far. It then changed and started discussing religion and God. I don't mind, and often enjoy, religious studies books but, because I was surprised to find religion such a strong theme throughout, I did not like it in this novel. The description on both Amazon and Goodreads does not mention God or religion. It appeared to be a Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel with an interesting premise. If it had continued in that vein, I would have most likely thoroughly enjoyed it. However, I had to rate it 2 out of 5. "A Time to Die" is the 1st novel in the "Out of Time" series. I will probably not continue reading the series.
Faris Badwan recommended Pilgrimage by Om in Music (curated)
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated The Dark Divine (The Dark Divine, #1) in Books
Jan 6, 2021
This has taken me a long time to read because it didn't grab my interest in the slightest. I can't be doing with any sort of religious people in books. They just drive me a little crazy. So with her having a pastor for a father and being all good with church related stuff, I just had to roll my eyes a little.
Nothing about this pulled me in, not the characters, not the plot...I was bored for all of it but considering the last few YA books I've read have been DNF's I decided to stick with it. I read books for the romance mainly and I had no idea where that bit came into it but by the end they loved each other.
There was a bit of a high point at the end where everything started to make sense which pushed my rating up an entire star, simply because the pace picked up finally ands something actually happened beside school and dates and dances.
Shapeshifters are not my favourite paranormal creatures to read about and although I have the next book in the series I dont think I'll be reading it.
Not for me at all.
Nothing about this pulled me in, not the characters, not the plot...I was bored for all of it but considering the last few YA books I've read have been DNF's I decided to stick with it. I read books for the romance mainly and I had no idea where that bit came into it but by the end they loved each other.
There was a bit of a high point at the end where everything started to make sense which pushed my rating up an entire star, simply because the pace picked up finally ands something actually happened beside school and dates and dances.
Shapeshifters are not my favourite paranormal creatures to read about and although I have the next book in the series I dont think I'll be reading it.
Not for me at all.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Wild Wild West (1999) in Movies
Nov 10, 2020
I hate the late 90s blockbuster, man... I really do. This era's tongue-in-cheek manufactured spectacle coated with pause-for-laughs cringe 'jokes' and standard-to-crappy action makes my skin crawl. This is actually much, much better than 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘋𝘢𝘺 but otherwise they're the exact same formula in tiring popcorn slogs though this one dared to actually have a bit of fun sometimes unlike ID so truthfully I have no idea why this one is more reviled - it just seems random to me. Yeah I have no idea why this source material was turned into confusingly sexual, boring one-note tripe but the last twenty minutes is actually kind of exciting and the effects are top-notch. Don't even lie, you think that giant steampunk spider is fucking cool too and the gadgets/costumes/sets/makeup are eye-catching too - I only wish they were all in a better movie. The two perfunctory performances from Smith and Kline are canceled out by the religious scenery-chewing of Ted Levine and this movie's MVP Kenneth Branagh but besides the title song that I'm tired of pretending doesn't slap -because it *does* - that's about where the positives end. Its only personality traits are being dumb, looking cool sometimes, and misogyny.
Shirley Manson recommended Head Over Heels by Cocteau Twins in Music (curated)
Eleanor (1463 KP) rated Faithless (Grant County, #5) in Books
Oct 13, 2019
Having struggled with the previous couple of books in this series this one seemed to up the game again; although still not back to the highs of the first two books in the series I did enjoy this one.
We are back in good old Grant County with Sara and Jeffery stumbling across a body whose last moments on earth were truly horrific. A difficult investigation follows with the girl belonging to a very religious family. It’s an interesting case if a bit of a slow burner of a book as a whole.
Sara and Jeffery carry on like Sara and Jeffery: bicker, argue, kiss rinse repeat but somehow Jeffery doesn't annoy me as much as he did in the last few books. Even Lena seems to be more of a character that I don’t need to just slap for making poor decisions, don’t get me wrong I’m still waiting to see any evidence of her being the “great cop” we keep getting told she is but she was a lot less of a car crash of annoying in this book.
Only one more book in this series to go and I’m really hoping it all ends on a return to the highs of the beginning of this series.
We are back in good old Grant County with Sara and Jeffery stumbling across a body whose last moments on earth were truly horrific. A difficult investigation follows with the girl belonging to a very religious family. It’s an interesting case if a bit of a slow burner of a book as a whole.
Sara and Jeffery carry on like Sara and Jeffery: bicker, argue, kiss rinse repeat but somehow Jeffery doesn't annoy me as much as he did in the last few books. Even Lena seems to be more of a character that I don’t need to just slap for making poor decisions, don’t get me wrong I’m still waiting to see any evidence of her being the “great cop” we keep getting told she is but she was a lot less of a car crash of annoying in this book.
Only one more book in this series to go and I’m really hoping it all ends on a return to the highs of the beginning of this series.
ClareR (5884 KP) rated The Persians in Books
Feb 3, 2025
On the face of it, The Persians is filled with vacuous, materialistic women, but as I read further, these women had been either torn from their homes in order to escape the new religious government in Iran, or were having to live there, having remained. Trauma has a large part to play in the make up of these women.
Both the women in Iran and those in the US are non-conformists, rule breakers - and some more than others. There’s the obvious Shirin, who’s arrested on prostitution charges at the beginning of the book, and Bita, who decides to break away from her family history and wealth, and make her own way. Then there’s the matriarch, Elizabeth, who remains in Iran and uses her age and family name to get away with not following the rules of Islamic law (to some degree), and her granddaughter Niaz, who is arrested and put in a Tehran jail.
A lot of secrets are revealed (there are some big secrets to be revealed!), and when mothers and daughters are honest and truthful with one another, relationships can be repaired. But will they?
A very enjoyable, somewhat escapist read - I mean, the wealth of these people is startling!
Both the women in Iran and those in the US are non-conformists, rule breakers - and some more than others. There’s the obvious Shirin, who’s arrested on prostitution charges at the beginning of the book, and Bita, who decides to break away from her family history and wealth, and make her own way. Then there’s the matriarch, Elizabeth, who remains in Iran and uses her age and family name to get away with not following the rules of Islamic law (to some degree), and her granddaughter Niaz, who is arrested and put in a Tehran jail.
A lot of secrets are revealed (there are some big secrets to be revealed!), and when mothers and daughters are honest and truthful with one another, relationships can be repaired. But will they?
A very enjoyable, somewhat escapist read - I mean, the wealth of these people is startling!
ClareR (5884 KP) rated Enlightenment in Books
Mar 29, 2025
I sank into Enlightenment, and I really didn’t want to resurface. The way Enlightenment is written could be described as Dickens-esque perhaps, but whatever it is, it’s rich in the type of description that I truly love about reading. I would lose myself for an hour or so (or more!) taking my time over the story of Thomas Hart, Grace Macauley, the Baptist church and a 19th century female astronomer.
My heart ached for these characters, especially for Thomas who felt that he couldn’t live an authentic, true life, because he would be rejected from his church. He’s a lovely man, who fills his time with the search for the astronomer, and his love for Grace Macauley.
Grace is a young girl, learning to live the life she wants to live and not that dictated by her father and her church. Faith plays a big role in this novel: both religious faith and the faith we have in others. Grace and Thomas have a disagreement and have to find their way back to one another. Despite the age difference, they are true friends.
I didn’t think I could find astronomy as interesting as I did, but the writing teamed with a ghostly astronomer and Thomas, certainly helped.
A beautiful book!
My heart ached for these characters, especially for Thomas who felt that he couldn’t live an authentic, true life, because he would be rejected from his church. He’s a lovely man, who fills his time with the search for the astronomer, and his love for Grace Macauley.
Grace is a young girl, learning to live the life she wants to live and not that dictated by her father and her church. Faith plays a big role in this novel: both religious faith and the faith we have in others. Grace and Thomas have a disagreement and have to find their way back to one another. Despite the age difference, they are true friends.
I didn’t think I could find astronomy as interesting as I did, but the writing teamed with a ghostly astronomer and Thomas, certainly helped.
A beautiful book!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Saint Maud (2020) in Movies
Oct 6, 2020
Morfydd Clark - astonishingly good as Maud (1 more)
Expert pacing from debut director Rose Glass
"My Little Saviour": Astonishing Saint Maud delivers psycho-religious chills
Saint Maud is the debut feature from writer/director Rose Glass, and it packs a punch. The film was first seen at last year's London Film Festival, but was due for broader nationwide release soon. What a crushing disappointment it must be for Ms Glass that so few people will likely get to see it in the current climate... at least, not for a while. Since it is an effective little chiller.
Maud (Morfydd Clark) is a palliative nurse looking after ex-choreographer Amanda (Jennifer Ehle). Maud is extremely religious and feels God move in her... regularly. Acting on His guidance, Maud sets out to save the soul of her ailing bohemian charge. But is Amanda beyond reach, and how will the zealot-like Maud react to that rejection?
Morfydd Clark appears so young in this film that you would think this was her debut film. But she's actually 30 years old and has quite an impressive filmography already. Although this is her movie-lead debut, she's had a substantial part alongside Kate Beckinsale in the excellent "Love and Friendship" and smaller parts in "Crawl", "The Personal History of David Copperfield" and the fun "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies". She's likely to get more worldwide exposure soon as a young Galadriel in Amazon's new version of "Lord of the Rings".
As Maud she is simply superb - expressing such a range of joy, hurt and despair that you must think a BAFTA Rising Star nomination should be on the cards.
Clark is ably supported in the leading role by the splendid Jennifer Ehle, still so memorable to me as Elizabeth Bennett from the BBC's "Pride and Prejudice".
Scarborough is also a star of "Saint Maud". The Yorkshire seaside town is another star of the movie. Clearly filmed before lockdown, the rainy and windswept resort looks bleak and unwelcoming. And that's before Covid! Many of those struggling bars and amusement centres, as in other resorts all around the UK, are now on their last legs.
Adam Janota Bzowski supplies the impressively claustrophobic music, which deserves recognition. A scene with Maud, flicking a lighter rhythmically in time with the sonorous beat, is a masterpiece in musical choreography and editing (by Mark Towns).
At the heart of this horror-thriller is whether, following a Dawkins-style argument, fervent religious followers are less insightfully correct and more mentally unstable and misguided. When is the voice of God just the voice in your head? And how would you tell the difference anyway? Piecing together the plot and motivations of Maud was intellectually challenging and rewarding.
I always get a little tense and nervous when I see the word "horror" on a movie bill. I am NOT a great horror fan! But for me, as a 'horror movie', "Saint Maud" is of the 'horror-lite' variety. Highly watchable, it builds more in the way of creeping dread than cheap shocks. There were only a couple of jump-scares (but for me, the one in the finale was a doozy!).
A BBC interview with Rose Glass I just saw says she relates Maud's relationship with God as like many people's relationship with social media. Always looking for support, guidance and affirmation. Interesting.
This is also an obviously female-led picture. All the men are complete tools. no, really, literally they are. It makes me feel ashamed to be among their number.
Overall, "Saint Maud" is a minor classic. I didn't go in with great expectations of this one, but I was pleasantly surprised. As a small British movie, it packs a punch significantly above its weight. When I came out I was at about a 7* rating. But this is one that really stayed with me, and I've subconsciously thought about little else all day. So for that reason I am going to escalate my rating to something more appropriate.
You might struggle now to see it on the big screen, but if you can do so, it comes with a recommendation from me. I think this one could REALLY be a "Marmite film".... so if you see it, let me know what you thought with a comment on One Mann's Movies here https://rb.gy/9k93ck . (Thanks).
Maud (Morfydd Clark) is a palliative nurse looking after ex-choreographer Amanda (Jennifer Ehle). Maud is extremely religious and feels God move in her... regularly. Acting on His guidance, Maud sets out to save the soul of her ailing bohemian charge. But is Amanda beyond reach, and how will the zealot-like Maud react to that rejection?
Morfydd Clark appears so young in this film that you would think this was her debut film. But she's actually 30 years old and has quite an impressive filmography already. Although this is her movie-lead debut, she's had a substantial part alongside Kate Beckinsale in the excellent "Love and Friendship" and smaller parts in "Crawl", "The Personal History of David Copperfield" and the fun "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies". She's likely to get more worldwide exposure soon as a young Galadriel in Amazon's new version of "Lord of the Rings".
As Maud she is simply superb - expressing such a range of joy, hurt and despair that you must think a BAFTA Rising Star nomination should be on the cards.
Clark is ably supported in the leading role by the splendid Jennifer Ehle, still so memorable to me as Elizabeth Bennett from the BBC's "Pride and Prejudice".
Scarborough is also a star of "Saint Maud". The Yorkshire seaside town is another star of the movie. Clearly filmed before lockdown, the rainy and windswept resort looks bleak and unwelcoming. And that's before Covid! Many of those struggling bars and amusement centres, as in other resorts all around the UK, are now on their last legs.
Adam Janota Bzowski supplies the impressively claustrophobic music, which deserves recognition. A scene with Maud, flicking a lighter rhythmically in time with the sonorous beat, is a masterpiece in musical choreography and editing (by Mark Towns).
At the heart of this horror-thriller is whether, following a Dawkins-style argument, fervent religious followers are less insightfully correct and more mentally unstable and misguided. When is the voice of God just the voice in your head? And how would you tell the difference anyway? Piecing together the plot and motivations of Maud was intellectually challenging and rewarding.
I always get a little tense and nervous when I see the word "horror" on a movie bill. I am NOT a great horror fan! But for me, as a 'horror movie', "Saint Maud" is of the 'horror-lite' variety. Highly watchable, it builds more in the way of creeping dread than cheap shocks. There were only a couple of jump-scares (but for me, the one in the finale was a doozy!).
A BBC interview with Rose Glass I just saw says she relates Maud's relationship with God as like many people's relationship with social media. Always looking for support, guidance and affirmation. Interesting.
This is also an obviously female-led picture. All the men are complete tools. no, really, literally they are. It makes me feel ashamed to be among their number.
Overall, "Saint Maud" is a minor classic. I didn't go in with great expectations of this one, but I was pleasantly surprised. As a small British movie, it packs a punch significantly above its weight. When I came out I was at about a 7* rating. But this is one that really stayed with me, and I've subconsciously thought about little else all day. So for that reason I am going to escalate my rating to something more appropriate.
You might struggle now to see it on the big screen, but if you can do so, it comes with a recommendation from me. I think this one could REALLY be a "Marmite film".... so if you see it, let me know what you thought with a comment on One Mann's Movies here https://rb.gy/9k93ck . (Thanks).
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Mother! (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Welcome to the Crystal Maze.
Darren Aronosfsky’s mother! is like no other film you’ll see this year: guaranteed. As a film lover, an Aronosfsky film is a bit like root canal at the dentist: you know you really need to go ahead and do it, but you know you’re not going to be very comfortable in the process.
Jennifer Lawrence (“Passengers“, “Joy“) plays “mother!” doing up a dilapidated old house in the middle of nowhere with her much older husband “Him” (Javier Bardem, “Skyfall”). he (sorry…. He) is a world-famous poet struggling to overcome a massive writing block. The situation is making things tense between the couple, and things get worse when He inexplicably invites a homeless couple “man” (Ed Harris, “Westworld”, “The Truman Show”) and “woman” (Michelle Pfeiffer, “Stardust”) to stay at the house. As things go progressively downhill, is mother losing her mind or is all the crazy stuff going on actually happening?
Jennifer Lawrence can do no wrong at the moment, and her complexion in the film is flawless: it needs to be, since she has the camera constantly about 3 inches from her face for large chunks of the movie: I sat in the very back row, and I still wasn’t far enough away! Her portrayal of a house-proud woman getting progressively more and more irritated by her guests’ inconsiderate acts – a glass? without a table mat??! – is a joy to watch. As her DIY ‘paradise’ is progressively sullied my ‘man’ and ‘woman’, so her distress grows exponentially.
Some of the supporting acting is also superb, with Ed Harris and particularly Michelle Pfeiffer enjoying themselves immensely. Also worthy of note are the brothers played by real-life brothers Brian Gleeson and Domhnall Gleeson: the latter must never sleep since he must be *constantly* on set at the moment. One of these guys in particular is very abel! (sic).
Whereas the trailer depicts this as a kind of normal haunted house spookfest, it is actually nothing of the sort: much of the action (although far-fetched) has a reasonably rational explanation (a continuation of my theme of the “physics of horror” from my last two reviews). The film is largely seen through mother!’s eyes, and the skillful cinematographer Matthew Libatique – an Aronosfsky-regular – oppressively and relentlessly delivers a uniquely tense cinematic experience. For me, for the first two thirds of the film at least, it succeeds brilliantly.
Aronosfsky is no shirker of film controversy: having Natalie Portman perform oral sex on Natalie Portman in “Black Swan” was enough to teach you that. But in the final reels of this film, Aronosfsky doesn’t just wind the dial past 10 to the Spinal Tap 11…. he keeps going right on up to 20. There are a few scenes in movies over the years that I wish I could go back and “unsee”, and this film has one of those: a truly upsetting slice of horror, playing to your worst nightmares of loss and despair. While the religious allegory in these scenes is splatted on as heavily as the splodges of mother!’s decorative plaster, they are nonetheless extremely disturbing and bound to massively divide the cinema audience. I think it’s fair to say that this DVD is not going to have “The Perfect Gift for Mother’s Day” as its marketing strapline.
Which all leaves me… where exactly? For the first time in a long time I actually have no idea! This is a film that I was willing to give an “FF” to while I was watching it, but as time has passed and I have thought more on the environmental and religious allegories, and the portrayal of the cult worship prevalent in popular X-factor celebrity, I am warming to it despite my best instincts not to. I’m not religious, but I would love to compare notes on this one with someone with strongly Christian views.
So, I’m actually going to break all the rules (a snake told me to) and not provide any rating below at this time. I might revisit it again at Christmas* to see if I can resolve it in my mind as either a movie masterpiece or over-indulgent codswallop.
* I have, and have decided to give it 4 Fads… its a film I’ve thought about a lot over the last few months.
Jennifer Lawrence (“Passengers“, “Joy“) plays “mother!” doing up a dilapidated old house in the middle of nowhere with her much older husband “Him” (Javier Bardem, “Skyfall”). he (sorry…. He) is a world-famous poet struggling to overcome a massive writing block. The situation is making things tense between the couple, and things get worse when He inexplicably invites a homeless couple “man” (Ed Harris, “Westworld”, “The Truman Show”) and “woman” (Michelle Pfeiffer, “Stardust”) to stay at the house. As things go progressively downhill, is mother losing her mind or is all the crazy stuff going on actually happening?
Jennifer Lawrence can do no wrong at the moment, and her complexion in the film is flawless: it needs to be, since she has the camera constantly about 3 inches from her face for large chunks of the movie: I sat in the very back row, and I still wasn’t far enough away! Her portrayal of a house-proud woman getting progressively more and more irritated by her guests’ inconsiderate acts – a glass? without a table mat??! – is a joy to watch. As her DIY ‘paradise’ is progressively sullied my ‘man’ and ‘woman’, so her distress grows exponentially.
Some of the supporting acting is also superb, with Ed Harris and particularly Michelle Pfeiffer enjoying themselves immensely. Also worthy of note are the brothers played by real-life brothers Brian Gleeson and Domhnall Gleeson: the latter must never sleep since he must be *constantly* on set at the moment. One of these guys in particular is very abel! (sic).
Whereas the trailer depicts this as a kind of normal haunted house spookfest, it is actually nothing of the sort: much of the action (although far-fetched) has a reasonably rational explanation (a continuation of my theme of the “physics of horror” from my last two reviews). The film is largely seen through mother!’s eyes, and the skillful cinematographer Matthew Libatique – an Aronosfsky-regular – oppressively and relentlessly delivers a uniquely tense cinematic experience. For me, for the first two thirds of the film at least, it succeeds brilliantly.
Aronosfsky is no shirker of film controversy: having Natalie Portman perform oral sex on Natalie Portman in “Black Swan” was enough to teach you that. But in the final reels of this film, Aronosfsky doesn’t just wind the dial past 10 to the Spinal Tap 11…. he keeps going right on up to 20. There are a few scenes in movies over the years that I wish I could go back and “unsee”, and this film has one of those: a truly upsetting slice of horror, playing to your worst nightmares of loss and despair. While the religious allegory in these scenes is splatted on as heavily as the splodges of mother!’s decorative plaster, they are nonetheless extremely disturbing and bound to massively divide the cinema audience. I think it’s fair to say that this DVD is not going to have “The Perfect Gift for Mother’s Day” as its marketing strapline.
Which all leaves me… where exactly? For the first time in a long time I actually have no idea! This is a film that I was willing to give an “FF” to while I was watching it, but as time has passed and I have thought more on the environmental and religious allegories, and the portrayal of the cult worship prevalent in popular X-factor celebrity, I am warming to it despite my best instincts not to. I’m not religious, but I would love to compare notes on this one with someone with strongly Christian views.
So, I’m actually going to break all the rules (a snake told me to) and not provide any rating below at this time. I might revisit it again at Christmas* to see if I can resolve it in my mind as either a movie masterpiece or over-indulgent codswallop.
* I have, and have decided to give it 4 Fads… its a film I’ve thought about a lot over the last few months.