Search
Search results
Rachel King (13 KP) rated Hush, Hush (Hush, Hush, #1) in Books
Feb 11, 2019
I'm still tingling from the ending of this wonderfully delicious book! I immediately went in search of a sequel and discovered that there is one set to release in November (thank the heavens!) titled Crescendo, phew! Sooooo, on with my review!
I decided to read this novel after reading multiple reviews of how fantastic this book is, especially since I have been looking for a good angel saga ever since I read Sharon Shinn's entire Samaria series in less than a week. (5 books) There is something refreshingly different about angels in the Fantasy genre of literature, instead of the almost-cliched use of vampires, werewolves, and witches. Not that I've had my fill of those, either, but change is good.
The lust-filled tension between Patch and Nora reminds me of a certain other famous couple in YA Fantasy, except Patch isn't nearly as secretive about what he wants. After stepping back and thinking about his character, I came to the conclusion that what attracts the fairer sex to the bad-boy type is not necessarily his "badness", but his confidence. The biggest clue that Patch was not normal was the amount of confidence he exuded around Nora. And I don't recall my sex ed. classes ever being as interesting as Coach McConaughy's class! Truly, I don't think I could say one bad thing about this book. The loose ends will obviously be answered in future books, such as Nora's father's death, Dabria's fate, and what Nora's mother will do about the farmhouse. The ending was almost a complete surprise to me, and unpredictable in many ways. I'm also curious as to how Nora Grey's parentage will play a part in future books and the massive potential that comes with it. I also like how Nora is not totally dependent on Patch and seeks to solve her own problems and fight her own battles - more strong woman than damsel in distress. Her best friend Vee provides a bit of comic relief, as well as adding a human element to balance the supernatural aspects of the book. I could go on and on. I'm also very curious if the topic of God will be addressed in any future books, since it would seem that acknowledging heaven, angels, the Book of Enoch, etc., means doing the same for God. I can't wait to get my hands on a copy of Crescendo!
I decided to read this novel after reading multiple reviews of how fantastic this book is, especially since I have been looking for a good angel saga ever since I read Sharon Shinn's entire Samaria series in less than a week. (5 books) There is something refreshingly different about angels in the Fantasy genre of literature, instead of the almost-cliched use of vampires, werewolves, and witches. Not that I've had my fill of those, either, but change is good.
The lust-filled tension between Patch and Nora reminds me of a certain other famous couple in YA Fantasy, except Patch isn't nearly as secretive about what he wants. After stepping back and thinking about his character, I came to the conclusion that what attracts the fairer sex to the bad-boy type is not necessarily his "badness", but his confidence. The biggest clue that Patch was not normal was the amount of confidence he exuded around Nora. And I don't recall my sex ed. classes ever being as interesting as Coach McConaughy's class! Truly, I don't think I could say one bad thing about this book. The loose ends will obviously be answered in future books, such as Nora's father's death, Dabria's fate, and what Nora's mother will do about the farmhouse. The ending was almost a complete surprise to me, and unpredictable in many ways. I'm also curious as to how Nora Grey's parentage will play a part in future books and the massive potential that comes with it. I also like how Nora is not totally dependent on Patch and seeks to solve her own problems and fight her own battles - more strong woman than damsel in distress. Her best friend Vee provides a bit of comic relief, as well as adding a human element to balance the supernatural aspects of the book. I could go on and on. I'm also very curious if the topic of God will be addressed in any future books, since it would seem that acknowledging heaven, angels, the Book of Enoch, etc., means doing the same for God. I can't wait to get my hands on a copy of Crescendo!
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated Wolf Who Rules (Elfhome, #2) in Books
Mar 1, 2018
What a tease! To come SO close to dealing with polyamory, then skip back!
I guess it's just been too long since I read <i>Tinker</i>, but I don't really remember any hints of polyamory there at all. In this book, though, it's made very clear that elven society has found monogamy to be an unreasonable model for people who normally live thousands of years. Anybody who hasn't read Tinker shouldn't read this review, because there are spoilers for that book - but hey, that's to be expected in the review for a sequel. Just knowing that certain characters live and marry is a spoiler!
Anyway, Tinker may be an elf now, but she was raised as a human, and apparently the half-elven quasi-nursemaid Tooloo who has always been part of her life either doesn't know about the difference in societal expectations, or never saw fit to mention it. That isn't so surprising, as Tooloo is depicted as several tacos short of a combo plate. But why, when some of the elves (especially Stormsong) are shown to be familiar with human culture, haven't any of them anticipated this as a source of trouble in Tinker and Wolf's marriage? Why doesn't anybody ever just sit down and say, "Look, honey, the rulers only choose guards with whom they get along well, and with opposite-sex guards, that can mean getting along with sexually. Your new husband has had sex with all of his female bodyguards in the past, and it's expected that you'll eventually take your own male Sekasha as lovers, too. Deal." (I'm not even starting on how very heteronormative everything is. You're telling me there's all that lucious pretty and thousands of years in which to experiment, and nobody ever crosses those streams, so to speak? Yeah, right.) There's a perfect opening for such a speech in the book, a point when the need for it is made very, very obvious--but I suppose having it all out in the open would remove a source of conflict.
Why are so many authors so bloody timid about laying things out like that, about showing healthy communication between people? Yes, we can imagine the most amazing advances in technology, and societies very different from our current ones, but by Goddess we must continue to show people screwing up their relationships in exactly the same way as in Shakespeare's day or nobody could relate to them!
I guess it's just been too long since I read <i>Tinker</i>, but I don't really remember any hints of polyamory there at all. In this book, though, it's made very clear that elven society has found monogamy to be an unreasonable model for people who normally live thousands of years. Anybody who hasn't read Tinker shouldn't read this review, because there are spoilers for that book - but hey, that's to be expected in the review for a sequel. Just knowing that certain characters live and marry is a spoiler!
Anyway, Tinker may be an elf now, but she was raised as a human, and apparently the half-elven quasi-nursemaid Tooloo who has always been part of her life either doesn't know about the difference in societal expectations, or never saw fit to mention it. That isn't so surprising, as Tooloo is depicted as several tacos short of a combo plate. But why, when some of the elves (especially Stormsong) are shown to be familiar with human culture, haven't any of them anticipated this as a source of trouble in Tinker and Wolf's marriage? Why doesn't anybody ever just sit down and say, "Look, honey, the rulers only choose guards with whom they get along well, and with opposite-sex guards, that can mean getting along with sexually. Your new husband has had sex with all of his female bodyguards in the past, and it's expected that you'll eventually take your own male Sekasha as lovers, too. Deal." (I'm not even starting on how very heteronormative everything is. You're telling me there's all that lucious pretty and thousands of years in which to experiment, and nobody ever crosses those streams, so to speak? Yeah, right.) There's a perfect opening for such a speech in the book, a point when the need for it is made very, very obvious--but I suppose having it all out in the open would remove a source of conflict.
Why are so many authors so bloody timid about laying things out like that, about showing healthy communication between people? Yes, we can imagine the most amazing advances in technology, and societies very different from our current ones, but by Goddess we must continue to show people screwing up their relationships in exactly the same way as in Shakespeare's day or nobody could relate to them!
WL
Women's Lives: A Psychological Exploration
Claire A. Etaugh and Judith S. Bridges
Book
This cutting-edge and comprehensive fourth edition of Women's Lives: A Psychological Perspective...
WL
Women's Lives: A Psychological Exploration
Claire A. Etaugh and Judith S. Bridges
Book
This cutting-edge and comprehensive fourth edition of Women's Lives: A Psychological Perspective...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated SuperFly (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
This is a remake of Super Fly from 1972, not one I've seen, after seeing this I don't think I'll bother.
I can't say that any of the acting really stood out over the rest. It's not really my genre/subject matter, but everything did feel rather stereotypical. It was an interesting story, but for me the negatives outweighed the positives.
The style of the first and only real fight scene of the whole film was very good, if a little cheesy. It hit the spot for action but it didn't feel like any of the rest of the movie and stuck out a little for me. Perhaps because it's one of the few times we see Priest express any violence? I'm not sure.
Superfly ticks one of my top film faux pas... tailing people so close that there's no way they're not going to see you. Especially in this instance where the job basically requires you to be excessively paranoid.
At about the half way point I honestly didn't really know what was going on. I was more confused by everything than engrossed.
I don't know the ins and outs of filming techniques, but it seemed like there were a lot of different things involved in this one. As well as the fight scene early on there's a short chase scene where the footage doesn't quite seem real, it's more like game play. Whatever it was (I know you're enjoying my super technical terminology here) it stuck out like a sore thumb.
My only other observation about Superfly is Priest's relationship. Not your usual main stream thing which made a nice change... but... it really felt like it was thrown in gratuitously. I'm not being prudish here, I honestly don't mind sex scenes in films, but this one wasn't needed for the story line. It was over the top and wholly unnecessary.
What should you do?
It's not one I'd go recommending to people, but if you like drug related movies then why not give it a go. If you're more intrigued by that sex scene then I'm sure there's plenty of porn you could watch online instead.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'll have that big pile of cash, please and thank you.
I can't say that any of the acting really stood out over the rest. It's not really my genre/subject matter, but everything did feel rather stereotypical. It was an interesting story, but for me the negatives outweighed the positives.
The style of the first and only real fight scene of the whole film was very good, if a little cheesy. It hit the spot for action but it didn't feel like any of the rest of the movie and stuck out a little for me. Perhaps because it's one of the few times we see Priest express any violence? I'm not sure.
Superfly ticks one of my top film faux pas... tailing people so close that there's no way they're not going to see you. Especially in this instance where the job basically requires you to be excessively paranoid.
At about the half way point I honestly didn't really know what was going on. I was more confused by everything than engrossed.
I don't know the ins and outs of filming techniques, but it seemed like there were a lot of different things involved in this one. As well as the fight scene early on there's a short chase scene where the footage doesn't quite seem real, it's more like game play. Whatever it was (I know you're enjoying my super technical terminology here) it stuck out like a sore thumb.
My only other observation about Superfly is Priest's relationship. Not your usual main stream thing which made a nice change... but... it really felt like it was thrown in gratuitously. I'm not being prudish here, I honestly don't mind sex scenes in films, but this one wasn't needed for the story line. It was over the top and wholly unnecessary.
What should you do?
It's not one I'd go recommending to people, but if you like drug related movies then why not give it a go. If you're more intrigued by that sex scene then I'm sure there's plenty of porn you could watch online instead.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'll have that big pile of cash, please and thank you.
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Barbarella (1968) in Movies
Aug 10, 2020
Vaguely Memorable
An outer space agent travels to another galaxy in search of a missing inventor.
Acting: 2
Good cast, none of whom are swinging for the fences in Barbarella. Honestly, I can compare the acting chops in this movie to the likes of a softcore porn. Science fiction or not, there is absolutely nothing believable about this movie in the slightest. The acting made the rest of the movie hard to watch.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Despite the terrible acting, I didn’t hate the characters, namely the woman of the hour Barbarella (Jane Fonda). She’s quirky and I loved all of her inuendo references to sex. The movie is very sex-oriented and it succeeds, albeit minutely, in Barbarella’s experience and everyone else’s lack thereof. If they had given the movie more of a solid story, the characters would have had a fighting chance at being a part of a solid movie.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Not terrible in the way of sci-fi. They tried a number of cool things that really are fairly impressive for a 1968 movie. From the weapons to the numerous space settings, I wasn’t disappointed by what was showing up on screen.
Conflict: 6
I think Barbarella cared more about being trippy than having a true conflict to drive the story. There are points where I cared about the outcome, but it seems more often than not that the movie is satisfied with being light-hearted and slowly paced. There was not enough going on for me to overly care.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 6
There are a handful of moments that stand out, but there isn’t a lot of replay value here. Even as I rewatch it as we speak, there are some spots that I forgot even happened. Definitely not a movie I need to see twice.
Pace: 5
Plot: 1
Never a good sign when I have to look the story up on Rotten Tomatoes. It was honestly that forgettable. I think the 800 screenwriters on this movie cared more about being funny than they did writing a good movie. Not impressed.
Resolution: 2
Overall: 61
I wanted to like Barbarella, but they gave me nothing to work with unfortunately. I wouldn’t even advise the Amazon Prime users (where the movie is available) to give it a shot. Steer clear.
Acting: 2
Good cast, none of whom are swinging for the fences in Barbarella. Honestly, I can compare the acting chops in this movie to the likes of a softcore porn. Science fiction or not, there is absolutely nothing believable about this movie in the slightest. The acting made the rest of the movie hard to watch.
Beginning: 10
Characters: 10
Despite the terrible acting, I didn’t hate the characters, namely the woman of the hour Barbarella (Jane Fonda). She’s quirky and I loved all of her inuendo references to sex. The movie is very sex-oriented and it succeeds, albeit minutely, in Barbarella’s experience and everyone else’s lack thereof. If they had given the movie more of a solid story, the characters would have had a fighting chance at being a part of a solid movie.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Not terrible in the way of sci-fi. They tried a number of cool things that really are fairly impressive for a 1968 movie. From the weapons to the numerous space settings, I wasn’t disappointed by what was showing up on screen.
Conflict: 6
I think Barbarella cared more about being trippy than having a true conflict to drive the story. There are points where I cared about the outcome, but it seems more often than not that the movie is satisfied with being light-hearted and slowly paced. There was not enough going on for me to overly care.
Entertainment Value: 9
Memorability: 6
There are a handful of moments that stand out, but there isn’t a lot of replay value here. Even as I rewatch it as we speak, there are some spots that I forgot even happened. Definitely not a movie I need to see twice.
Pace: 5
Plot: 1
Never a good sign when I have to look the story up on Rotten Tomatoes. It was honestly that forgettable. I think the 800 screenwriters on this movie cared more about being funny than they did writing a good movie. Not impressed.
Resolution: 2
Overall: 61
I wanted to like Barbarella, but they gave me nothing to work with unfortunately. I wouldn’t even advise the Amazon Prime users (where the movie is available) to give it a shot. Steer clear.
ClareR (5686 KP) rated The Hunting Moon in Books
Dec 12, 2023
When will I learn to check that books are a one off or the second in a series? I mean, it was a couple of chapters in before I realised something was off, but I have to admit that I quickly filled in the gaps, and it didn’t spoil my listening pleasure. I really enjoyed this.
The world of Hemlock Falls is an interesting one - shut off from the non-magical, they look down on them somewhat, but still feel compelled to keep them (and themselves) safe from the nightmares in the forest separating the two peoples.
We join Winnie Wednesday after she has passed the hunter trials, her family has been welcomed back into the Luminaries after being cast aside by them for some reason (in book 1, I believe!), and Winnie is now a local celebrity. Not that she’s enjoying it very much. She’s worried that everyone is passing her attacker off as a werewolf, and she’s pretty certain that it’s another creature called a Whisperer. And the Whisperer is still killing hunters every night.
There’s a bit of romance as well - Jay Friday, who seems to have his own problems that he doesn’t want anyone to know about, is making advances to Winnie, and she doesn’t mind one bit. He’s a nice boy (I sound like a mum here, I cannot deny I am one).
I listened to this on Bolinda Audio through NetGalley, and the narrator, Caitlin Davies reads the story so well. There’s nothing quite like a good narrator, adding value to a story and bringing a world to life. The feelings of the characters were conveyed so effectively that I felt fully involved.
I think this opens up a whole argument as to whether books should be sectioned off into age groups. I mean, this is YA, so aimed at 12-18, and I can’t for the life of me understand why? Perhaps I’m a simple soul. OK, there’s no sex, but I’ll be honest - I don’t want to read about sex all the time. It can get a bit boring (controversial, perhaps, but there’s my opinion!). And YA seems to do fantasy and science fiction SO WELL!!
So I’m off to read The Luminaries and fill in some gaps, because I loved this second in what I assume will be a trilogy.
The world of Hemlock Falls is an interesting one - shut off from the non-magical, they look down on them somewhat, but still feel compelled to keep them (and themselves) safe from the nightmares in the forest separating the two peoples.
We join Winnie Wednesday after she has passed the hunter trials, her family has been welcomed back into the Luminaries after being cast aside by them for some reason (in book 1, I believe!), and Winnie is now a local celebrity. Not that she’s enjoying it very much. She’s worried that everyone is passing her attacker off as a werewolf, and she’s pretty certain that it’s another creature called a Whisperer. And the Whisperer is still killing hunters every night.
There’s a bit of romance as well - Jay Friday, who seems to have his own problems that he doesn’t want anyone to know about, is making advances to Winnie, and she doesn’t mind one bit. He’s a nice boy (I sound like a mum here, I cannot deny I am one).
I listened to this on Bolinda Audio through NetGalley, and the narrator, Caitlin Davies reads the story so well. There’s nothing quite like a good narrator, adding value to a story and bringing a world to life. The feelings of the characters were conveyed so effectively that I felt fully involved.
I think this opens up a whole argument as to whether books should be sectioned off into age groups. I mean, this is YA, so aimed at 12-18, and I can’t for the life of me understand why? Perhaps I’m a simple soul. OK, there’s no sex, but I’ll be honest - I don’t want to read about sex all the time. It can get a bit boring (controversial, perhaps, but there’s my opinion!). And YA seems to do fantasy and science fiction SO WELL!!
So I’m off to read The Luminaries and fill in some gaps, because I loved this second in what I assume will be a trilogy.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Batman: The Killing Joke (2016) in Movies
Dec 27, 2017
Visuals on par with the comic (2 more)
True to the source material
Superb voice talent
Using R rating incorrectly (1 more)
Batgirl
Missed opportunity
Contains spoilers, click to show
I remember reading the source graphic novel when it was first released in 1988 thinking "this would make a cool movie". This was even before the 1989 Michael Keaton-Tim Burton film in 1989.
In the modern world of the R rated Logan and Deadpool, it's now possible to push the envelope; however, not sure about an animated film. The character of Batman certainly is very dark and some of his emotional issues and those of the Joker could venture into those realms, but the tone of this film seem wrong.
The character of Batgirl seemed to be a victim rather than the strong character she is normally, and the "sex" scene between them seemed a little unusual. The brutality inflicted upon her at the hands of the Joker also was a bit much.
The highlight of the experience was listening to Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill reprise their now infamous Batman and Joker characters once again.
Overall, the film may have been better off to take "inspiration" from the novel rather than trying to reproduce it 100%.
In the modern world of the R rated Logan and Deadpool, it's now possible to push the envelope; however, not sure about an animated film. The character of Batman certainly is very dark and some of his emotional issues and those of the Joker could venture into those realms, but the tone of this film seem wrong.
The character of Batgirl seemed to be a victim rather than the strong character she is normally, and the "sex" scene between them seemed a little unusual. The brutality inflicted upon her at the hands of the Joker also was a bit much.
The highlight of the experience was listening to Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill reprise their now infamous Batman and Joker characters once again.
Overall, the film may have been better off to take "inspiration" from the novel rather than trying to reproduce it 100%.
BobbiesDustyPages (1259 KP) rated Flatliners (2017) in Movies
Dec 29, 2017
Nearly bored me to flatline.
Okay first off I'm pretty sure I never saw the original flatliners so I went into this like it was a newish concept for a movie.
Flatliners at its bare bones has a really interesting take on what happens to us after we die and what could happen to us if we manage to come back, I really wished they would have focused more on that aspect of the story and showed a little more of what each person went through when they "crossed over" instead of adding unnecessary love plotlines and even more unnecessary sex scenes that just ended up boring me nearly to death.
The other thing I was really hoping for was for this to venture a little more into the horror genre but sadly they wasted a really good opportunity with a few crappy jump scares that you could see coming from a mile away.
I recommend watching this if you literally have nothing else to watch or if you were a fan of the original and want to see how they updated it.
Flatliners at its bare bones has a really interesting take on what happens to us after we die and what could happen to us if we manage to come back, I really wished they would have focused more on that aspect of the story and showed a little more of what each person went through when they "crossed over" instead of adding unnecessary love plotlines and even more unnecessary sex scenes that just ended up boring me nearly to death.
The other thing I was really hoping for was for this to venture a little more into the horror genre but sadly they wasted a really good opportunity with a few crappy jump scares that you could see coming from a mile away.
I recommend watching this if you literally have nothing else to watch or if you were a fan of the original and want to see how they updated it.
Li Hughes (285 KP) rated Retribution (C.J. Townsend #1) in Books
Aug 6, 2017
The pros: This is a quick read that has some interesting legal theory and fairly smooth writing. Little of what's written would likely fly in the real world, but it's still interesting.
Cons: The plot is a mess of serial killer, legal eagle, Cuban, and rape case cliches. The rapist is a mysogonistic caricature who has so little control over himself that any personal setback should have landed him in jail years ago. ASA Townsend is strong and well-respected to the point of Mary Sue status, yet falling apart inside and seems to be discovering that having sex with the right man can help heal her trauma. (Blech.) No rape or murder is ever 'run of the mill', but these are Hannibal Lecter-esque in their brutality. There are multiple Hispanic/Latin characters and they are cocky, rude, gross, and have hilariously terrible fashion sense: none are likable. And there is a 'twist ending' out of nowhere just when you think the case is wrapped up.
In conclusion: If you're stuck without anything else to read, this isn't horrific. But I personally wouldn't recommend searching it out.
Cons: The plot is a mess of serial killer, legal eagle, Cuban, and rape case cliches. The rapist is a mysogonistic caricature who has so little control over himself that any personal setback should have landed him in jail years ago. ASA Townsend is strong and well-respected to the point of Mary Sue status, yet falling apart inside and seems to be discovering that having sex with the right man can help heal her trauma. (Blech.) No rape or murder is ever 'run of the mill', but these are Hannibal Lecter-esque in their brutality. There are multiple Hispanic/Latin characters and they are cocky, rude, gross, and have hilariously terrible fashion sense: none are likable. And there is a 'twist ending' out of nowhere just when you think the case is wrapped up.
In conclusion: If you're stuck without anything else to read, this isn't horrific. But I personally wouldn't recommend searching it out.