Search
The Modern Woman's Guide to Finding a Knight
8.0
Rate It
Book
Connie leads a double life. During the week, she is an up-and-coming designer and dressmaker,...
LW
Liquidation World: On the Art of Living Absently
Book
In Liquidation World, Alexi Kukuljevic examines a distinctive form of subjectivity animating the...
Margaret the First
Book
'I am as Ambitious as ever any of my Sex was, is, or can be; though I cannot be Henry the Fifth, or...
One Direction: Where We are (100% Official): Our Band, Our Story
Book
Calling all One Direction fans! This is the only official book from 1D, charting their journey over...
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon in Books
Dec 29, 2020
I'd never heard of this Stephen King novel before but that's the joys of charity shops. The blurb on the back book didn't give much away and going into any King book blind can be a bit of a gamble, will it be horror, dark tower related, Shining related or some kind of hybrid. Oddly 'The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon' doesn't necessarily fit into any of these category's.
Set in Mane (Like a lot of Kings works.) 'The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon' follows 9 year old Trisha McFarland as she gets lost in the wood whilst on a hike with her mother and brother. The story is more about coping with horror than an actual horror story as Trisha tries to find her way out of the woods whilst having to contend with the changing landscape, dead animals, hunger, thirst and exposure. Oh and there may or may not be something stalking her and that's the real extent of the horror, the 'not knowing' what's out there. There is no 'Dark man' or plague and no one has any shine, the story is just a little girl trying to find her way home. King mix's the real threats with those of Trisha's imagination , blurring the line so that, by the end the reader is not sure what really happened. Pushed to her limits Trisha is forced to dwell on the nature of god(s) and whether she should wait for a miracle or try to save her self .
Overall a good book that is slightly different to Kings other works and, at just over 200 pages (the copy I read) it's a refreshingly quick read
Set in Mane (Like a lot of Kings works.) 'The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon' follows 9 year old Trisha McFarland as she gets lost in the wood whilst on a hike with her mother and brother. The story is more about coping with horror than an actual horror story as Trisha tries to find her way out of the woods whilst having to contend with the changing landscape, dead animals, hunger, thirst and exposure. Oh and there may or may not be something stalking her and that's the real extent of the horror, the 'not knowing' what's out there. There is no 'Dark man' or plague and no one has any shine, the story is just a little girl trying to find her way home. King mix's the real threats with those of Trisha's imagination , blurring the line so that, by the end the reader is not sure what really happened. Pushed to her limits Trisha is forced to dwell on the nature of god(s) and whether she should wait for a miracle or try to save her self .
Overall a good book that is slightly different to Kings other works and, at just over 200 pages (the copy I read) it's a refreshingly quick read
Kristina (502 KP) rated Consequences (Consequences, #1) in Books
Dec 7, 2020
My main thought when I finished Consequences: WTF?!?
At the beginning, I was a little weary of continuing to read it. I initially hoped Aleatha planned to introduce some knight-in-shining-armor to save Claire from the monster that is Anthony. When I got far enough to realize that wasn't happening, I actually debated whether or not I should keep reading or come to a stop. It was a bit depressing and I hated (still do) Anthony with a passion. I didn't understand what the storyline could do for me. Luckily, I'm stubborn and I refused to quit reading. I'm really glad I did, because Consequences was totally worth reading all the way through. Despite a kind of lengthy, boring middle, the rest kept me intrigued and, sometimes, disgusted. Throughout the whole book, I kept saying, "I should stop reading. I'm definitely not reading the rest of this series." Of course, I did keep reading, and I definitely WANT to read the rest of this series. The ending was a complete shocker and I'm more than ready to figure out what happens in the second book.
That all being said, I've rated Consequences a 3, because there's not a 1/2 star option and I feel like 4 stars might be too much. I mainly rated it a 3 1/2, instead of a 4, because the book had my feelings stretched out beyond my normal limit. Normally, this would be a good thing, but some of the content is what officially determined my final rating. Despite only giving it a 3 1/2, I am very interested in finishing this series!
At the beginning, I was a little weary of continuing to read it. I initially hoped Aleatha planned to introduce some knight-in-shining-armor to save Claire from the monster that is Anthony. When I got far enough to realize that wasn't happening, I actually debated whether or not I should keep reading or come to a stop. It was a bit depressing and I hated (still do) Anthony with a passion. I didn't understand what the storyline could do for me. Luckily, I'm stubborn and I refused to quit reading. I'm really glad I did, because Consequences was totally worth reading all the way through. Despite a kind of lengthy, boring middle, the rest kept me intrigued and, sometimes, disgusted. Throughout the whole book, I kept saying, "I should stop reading. I'm definitely not reading the rest of this series." Of course, I did keep reading, and I definitely WANT to read the rest of this series. The ending was a complete shocker and I'm more than ready to figure out what happens in the second book.
That all being said, I've rated Consequences a 3, because there's not a 1/2 star option and I feel like 4 stars might be too much. I mainly rated it a 3 1/2, instead of a 4, because the book had my feelings stretched out beyond my normal limit. Normally, this would be a good thing, but some of the content is what officially determined my final rating. Despite only giving it a 3 1/2, I am very interested in finishing this series!
Sarah (7800 KP) rated A Few Good Men (1992) in Movies
Aug 1, 2020
Brilliantly done
I'm ashamed to say that until tonight, I'd never seen this film. I had thought it was just another monotonous and dull courtroom drama (despite knowing most people refer to it as a classic), however had I known this was written by Aaron Sorkin I would've watched it a long time ago!
The star of this film is by far Sorkin's script and writing. It isn't just a dreary by the bools legal drama, the script is spot on - it's whip sharp, witty and surprisingly funny at parts. This film keeps you hanging on every minute and guessing about the outcome. This paired with a truly phenomenal cast makes the movie a must see. I'm not the biggest fan of Tom Cruise, but he's an absolute star in this and displays a range I never thought possible from him. And then of course there's Jack Nicholson who manages to almost steal the show with his iconic line and speech, despite it really only being a minor part. And the rest of the cast too are really great, even Demi Moore who I've never thought much of either.
My only criticism of this film is that it may be overly long. Not massively, but at 2h15 I feel like it could've been cut down a little to around 2 hours without any real detriment to the story. But that said, this did pretty much hold my attention throughout and this is mainly due to Tom Cruise's performance and Sorkin's unbelievably brilliant script. If you're looking for a shining example of a courtroom drama, you can do no better than this.
The star of this film is by far Sorkin's script and writing. It isn't just a dreary by the bools legal drama, the script is spot on - it's whip sharp, witty and surprisingly funny at parts. This film keeps you hanging on every minute and guessing about the outcome. This paired with a truly phenomenal cast makes the movie a must see. I'm not the biggest fan of Tom Cruise, but he's an absolute star in this and displays a range I never thought possible from him. And then of course there's Jack Nicholson who manages to almost steal the show with his iconic line and speech, despite it really only being a minor part. And the rest of the cast too are really great, even Demi Moore who I've never thought much of either.
My only criticism of this film is that it may be overly long. Not massively, but at 2h15 I feel like it could've been cut down a little to around 2 hours without any real detriment to the story. But that said, this did pretty much hold my attention throughout and this is mainly due to Tom Cruise's performance and Sorkin's unbelievably brilliant script. If you're looking for a shining example of a courtroom drama, you can do no better than this.
On the Edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness
10.0
Rate It
Book
Once, in a cottage above the cliffs on the Dark Sea of Darkness, there lived three children and...
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Bronson (2009) in Movies
Nov 14, 2017
Beautifully Brutal
I saw this movie years ago and recently re-watched it. Tom Hardy has given some great performances over the years, but an argument could be made for this being his best. He is in almost every scene in the movie and he commands the screen masterfully. He is domineering yet endearing, in other words you can't take your eyes off of this guy, but you wouldn't want to be left in a room alone with him either. You really do get a sense of him being extremely dangerous and highly unpredictable.
The movie was directed by Nicolas Winding Refn and his unique directorial style works well in the context of this insane story. Refn clearly took influence from other stories of violent insanity, such as A Clockwork Orange and Natural Born Killers, but the movie wears this on its sleeve and never feels derivative for it. The cinematography and lighting are also well implanted in the film, shot by Larry Smith, who has previously worked with Kubrick on Eyes Wide Shut and The Shining. The addition of Smith's eerily pretty camera work adds to the off kilter tone that the movie maintains throughout.
I also like the way that this movie is structured. It comes across as erratic and unconventional, but this is intentional and serves the bizarre narrative perfectly. You have to remember that this is an insane person recalling his deranged memories to an audience inside his own head, it is going to be sporadic and manic at times.
Overall, I think Bronson is a fantastic view into a severely fractured psyche. It is a disturbing and intense watch, so it may not be for everyone, especially if aggressive violence bothers you, but I think it is a masterful film, with one of the greatest lead performances I have ever seen.
The movie was directed by Nicolas Winding Refn and his unique directorial style works well in the context of this insane story. Refn clearly took influence from other stories of violent insanity, such as A Clockwork Orange and Natural Born Killers, but the movie wears this on its sleeve and never feels derivative for it. The cinematography and lighting are also well implanted in the film, shot by Larry Smith, who has previously worked with Kubrick on Eyes Wide Shut and The Shining. The addition of Smith's eerily pretty camera work adds to the off kilter tone that the movie maintains throughout.
I also like the way that this movie is structured. It comes across as erratic and unconventional, but this is intentional and serves the bizarre narrative perfectly. You have to remember that this is an insane person recalling his deranged memories to an audience inside his own head, it is going to be sporadic and manic at times.
Overall, I think Bronson is a fantastic view into a severely fractured psyche. It is a disturbing and intense watch, so it may not be for everyone, especially if aggressive violence bothers you, but I think it is a masterful film, with one of the greatest lead performances I have ever seen.
Ross (3284 KP) rated Ready Player One (2018) in Movies
May 9, 2018
Visually stunning (1 more)
Definite improvements over the book (more accessible references)
Decent story, improvements over the book
I personally found this an improvement over the book. The John Hughes film references have been totally toned down and replaced by much better known references, and the D&D and ancient video game references have been almost totally removed. For me this was an improvement but that is because I had no connection to those games/films/D&D from the book. I'm not sure if this was to make the film more accessible or to simply make it a better film (I don't fancy watching geeks acting out Monty Python sketches).
Some major changes to characters irked me a little though - I-R0k goes from being an annoying wannabe fan-boy to a mercenary (albeit played brilliantly by TJ Miller) and Aech is much less Halliday-obsessed than in the book (where he trades obscure facts back and forth with Parzival) and hasn't even seen the Shining.
The puzzle solving aspects mirrored the book - it starts off being everything and over time, the solving of the riddles becomes a minor plot point that is just mentioned rather than any exposition. And similarly to the book, there are red herrings, however clumsy and unintentional - Parzival only gets the quarter because of following the wrong lead, the same as in the book (which annoyed me then too).
The scene in the nightclub was a total waste of time and effort, though the CGI was incredible (but then that was the only point of the scene).
I am glad the 80s references were toned down quite a lot otherwise it would have been incredibly annoying. Similarly, the tasks and missions were made much more movie-friendly.
All in all, a very good film
Some major changes to characters irked me a little though - I-R0k goes from being an annoying wannabe fan-boy to a mercenary (albeit played brilliantly by TJ Miller) and Aech is much less Halliday-obsessed than in the book (where he trades obscure facts back and forth with Parzival) and hasn't even seen the Shining.
The puzzle solving aspects mirrored the book - it starts off being everything and over time, the solving of the riddles becomes a minor plot point that is just mentioned rather than any exposition. And similarly to the book, there are red herrings, however clumsy and unintentional - Parzival only gets the quarter because of following the wrong lead, the same as in the book (which annoyed me then too).
The scene in the nightclub was a total waste of time and effort, though the CGI was incredible (but then that was the only point of the scene).
I am glad the 80s references were toned down quite a lot otherwise it would have been incredibly annoying. Similarly, the tasks and missions were made much more movie-friendly.
All in all, a very good film