Search
Audrey Miller moves from New York City to Washington, DC after receiving a dream job offer at a museum--running their social media accounts. She rents an apartment sight unseen and finds herself in a creepy English basement unit, with a faulty lock and watched constantly by her landlord's sketchy nephew. She feels isolated, as she only knows two people in the city--her old college friend, Cat, now a busy lawyer, and her former boyfriend, Nick, whom she broke up with when she moved to New York. But on Audrey's Instagram, she presents a bright and perfect life. For that, she's rewarded with over a million followers, constant comments, and free items from brands. She shares everything with her fans--pictures, her locations, her thoughts, and more. Little does she know that there's someone out there who has been soaking up those thoughts for years, since Audrey started her first blog. And now that Audrey has moved to his city, he's determined it is fate. He's going to use advice garnered on the dark web to make Audrey his--no matter what.
The first word I can think of to describe this book is "menacing." It's definitely creepy at times, but it mostly projects a sinister feel, as Audrey's stalker--who tells bits and pieces of his side in a POV entitled "Him"--moves closer and closer into her private world. Our other two POVs are Audrey herself and her friend Cat, her socially inept lawyer friend, who begs Audrey to move in with her as Audrey's own apartment becomes increasingly unsafe.
"But the internet can reveal just as much as it can obfuscate."
It's hard not to compare this book to Caroline Kepnes' YOU. But the portions from "Him" are slim, and I just didn't find the narration as creepy and engaging as Joe's. When I read YOU, I literally felt watched, the book was so convincing. This book feels more like a cautionary tale about oversharing on social media.
And in that facet, it does a great job. Our friend Audrey: she shares it all. Instagram stories, photos, and more. Audrey getting her daily coffee? On insta. Her latest exercise class? Shared. And, of course, her move from New York City to Washington, DC is carefully catalogued. It's easy, we realize, to track Audrey's precise location and schedules. But Audrey seems blissfully unaware, living for the adoration the internet provides her. And it gets you thinking, wondering how much we all share across social media. And why...
"Comments from my followers were hands down my favorite part of living my life on the internet... With a million friends at the palm of your hand, how could anyone ever feel truly alone?"
Audrey goes through a lot in this book, but she's not always easy to like. There are no real likeable characters here. The power is in the escalating narrative. As incidents pile up against Audrey (remember: menacing!), you are kept guessing. There's a handful of characters who could be "Him," and Barber does a good job of letting you wonder who it could be. I would settle on someone and then something would happen, and I'd start to waver, changing my mind.
I really liked the commentary on social media and oversharing, combined with the need to be liked, even if virtually. And while the character of "Him" didn't have the personality I really wanted in his sections, they did capture his desperation and his seeming lack of understanding that what he was doing was wrong.
The ending for this one was rather bizarre and bit tough to swallow. I saw some of it coming and it all happened a little quickly after all the buildup. It was definitely twisty, though! Overall, this was a very captivating thriller--perhaps not as deep as I had hoped, but definitely worth a read. 3.5 stars, rounded up here.
The first word I can think of to describe this book is "menacing." It's definitely creepy at times, but it mostly projects a sinister feel, as Audrey's stalker--who tells bits and pieces of his side in a POV entitled "Him"--moves closer and closer into her private world. Our other two POVs are Audrey herself and her friend Cat, her socially inept lawyer friend, who begs Audrey to move in with her as Audrey's own apartment becomes increasingly unsafe.
"But the internet can reveal just as much as it can obfuscate."
It's hard not to compare this book to Caroline Kepnes' YOU. But the portions from "Him" are slim, and I just didn't find the narration as creepy and engaging as Joe's. When I read YOU, I literally felt watched, the book was so convincing. This book feels more like a cautionary tale about oversharing on social media.
And in that facet, it does a great job. Our friend Audrey: she shares it all. Instagram stories, photos, and more. Audrey getting her daily coffee? On insta. Her latest exercise class? Shared. And, of course, her move from New York City to Washington, DC is carefully catalogued. It's easy, we realize, to track Audrey's precise location and schedules. But Audrey seems blissfully unaware, living for the adoration the internet provides her. And it gets you thinking, wondering how much we all share across social media. And why...
"Comments from my followers were hands down my favorite part of living my life on the internet... With a million friends at the palm of your hand, how could anyone ever feel truly alone?"
Audrey goes through a lot in this book, but she's not always easy to like. There are no real likeable characters here. The power is in the escalating narrative. As incidents pile up against Audrey (remember: menacing!), you are kept guessing. There's a handful of characters who could be "Him," and Barber does a good job of letting you wonder who it could be. I would settle on someone and then something would happen, and I'd start to waver, changing my mind.
I really liked the commentary on social media and oversharing, combined with the need to be liked, even if virtually. And while the character of "Him" didn't have the personality I really wanted in his sections, they did capture his desperation and his seeming lack of understanding that what he was doing was wrong.
The ending for this one was rather bizarre and bit tough to swallow. I saw some of it coming and it all happened a little quickly after all the buildup. It was definitely twisty, though! Overall, this was a very captivating thriller--perhaps not as deep as I had hoped, but definitely worth a read. 3.5 stars, rounded up here.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Edible Woman in Books
May 24, 2017
An honest exploration of the roles of women, marriage, and entering adulthood
Marian is an average college-educated woman who lives with a roommate in a decent apartment, works for a survey company, is moderately good looking, and has a handsome fiancé who is on his way to being a big shot lawyer. It sounds like life altogether is going pretty well for Marian. Yet for some reason she feels empty, why?
The Edible Woman explores the themes of losing a sense of self with maturity. At work she is pushed around, her roommate Ainsley is inconsiderate, the landlady is judgmental, and her boyfriend Peter is self centered and makes snide comments at Marian’s expense, acting like he can barely tolerate her. With each encounter Marian puts aside her pride for the sake of avoiding conflict. Marian expresses her problems through eating, or the lack thereof, hinting at a potential eating disorder. Just as she feels inhibited in life, she suddenly feels inhibited with the kinds of food that she can eat.
As the story continues she begins to dread marriage and question the direction her life is going—becoming just as listless as her friend and former classmate Clara, who after marriage and three pregnancies just seems beaten down. Marian’s fiancé Peter is the stereotypical perfect bachelor: a man’s man that looks down on women and views marriage as a ball and chain. Peter pushes Marian around in order to mold her into a subservient woman. There is no longer any room for her thoughts, her feelings, or her desires from under his shadow.
But what about work? What are women’s roles in society and the work force? Throughout the story there are several women including Marian with college educations, yet none of them really have a stable career. Women are expected to be wives and mothers, there’s simply no time for an education or a job. In this case, their educations are ultimately viewed as their downfall due to the crushing reality of how little opportunity they would have. This was the very sad truth at the time the book was written and thankfully is not exactly the case now in most parts of the world.
Atwood tackles a large number of social issues throughout the book that I think would be important for any young woman. Adulthood, relationships, marriage, the choice between work and education versus starting a family, and lastly feminism—both good and bad. (Hint: Ainsely is a perfect example of a bad feminist.)
There are certain elements of the book that are becoming quite dated. Namely the typewriters, the social expectation that all women can be are housewives, and the limited ways that women can dress; These things might make it difficult for young women to look past and relate to the main character. Despite this the book is still incredibly relevant in the message that it brings about maintaining one’s individuality. I absolutely love this book and found a lot of my former self in it’s pages.
The Edible Woman explores the themes of losing a sense of self with maturity. At work she is pushed around, her roommate Ainsley is inconsiderate, the landlady is judgmental, and her boyfriend Peter is self centered and makes snide comments at Marian’s expense, acting like he can barely tolerate her. With each encounter Marian puts aside her pride for the sake of avoiding conflict. Marian expresses her problems through eating, or the lack thereof, hinting at a potential eating disorder. Just as she feels inhibited in life, she suddenly feels inhibited with the kinds of food that she can eat.
As the story continues she begins to dread marriage and question the direction her life is going—becoming just as listless as her friend and former classmate Clara, who after marriage and three pregnancies just seems beaten down. Marian’s fiancé Peter is the stereotypical perfect bachelor: a man’s man that looks down on women and views marriage as a ball and chain. Peter pushes Marian around in order to mold her into a subservient woman. There is no longer any room for her thoughts, her feelings, or her desires from under his shadow.
But what about work? What are women’s roles in society and the work force? Throughout the story there are several women including Marian with college educations, yet none of them really have a stable career. Women are expected to be wives and mothers, there’s simply no time for an education or a job. In this case, their educations are ultimately viewed as their downfall due to the crushing reality of how little opportunity they would have. This was the very sad truth at the time the book was written and thankfully is not exactly the case now in most parts of the world.
Atwood tackles a large number of social issues throughout the book that I think would be important for any young woman. Adulthood, relationships, marriage, the choice between work and education versus starting a family, and lastly feminism—both good and bad. (Hint: Ainsely is a perfect example of a bad feminist.)
There are certain elements of the book that are becoming quite dated. Namely the typewriters, the social expectation that all women can be are housewives, and the limited ways that women can dress; These things might make it difficult for young women to look past and relate to the main character. Despite this the book is still incredibly relevant in the message that it brings about maintaining one’s individuality. I absolutely love this book and found a lot of my former self in it’s pages.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated The DUFF (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Disappointingly Generic
The school-set comedy genre has been done to death over the last two decades. From body swap comedies like 17 Again that hang on the pulling power of their stars, to films that now have a cult following like 10 Things I Hate About You, each of them has little to offer once the end credits roll.
With the brilliant Mean Girls being one of the only exceptions to the trend, the latest film to tackle the genre is The DUFF, but is Ari Sandel’s directorial debut worthy of a recommendation?
The DUFF follows daily life at a typical American high-school with typical US teens separated into categories depending on their social standing.
Enter Bianca Piper, played by the brilliant Mae Whitman, a vastly intelligent girl who is unaware of her place in the rankings as the DUFF – Designated Ugly Fat Friend – that is until her hunky next door neighbour Wesley (Robbie Amell) informs her of that fact.
What ensues is a selection of mildly amusing scenes interspersed with some touching social commentary about what it means to be normal in an ever-changing world as Bianca tries to come to terms with her place in the school hierarchy.
Despite the obvious focus on looks and beauty, the film does have a deeper message of self-worth and it’s a shame this is rarely touched upon outside of the finale.
Perhaps The DUFF’s strongest suit is in its unique filming style. The use of technology and social media helps distinguish it from its rivals and what it lacks in story is made up for with clever uses of animation and an engaging soundtrack.
Just when you think the film has decided to settle in a rut and remain there for the duration, it throws you off course with a clever cut-scene or use of technology and there are two moments in particular that had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, the rest of the film isn’t that funny. The story is predictable and the will-they-won’t-they romantic subplot is massively clichéd and dull because the characters, apart from Bianca, simply don’t register – there is no reason to care for them.
Mae Whitman is a force to be reckoned with as Bianca and is by far the most intriguing member of a disappointingly bland cast. Elsewhere, Ken Jeong (Community, The Hangover) and Allison Janney (Hairspray) pop up as a concerned teacher and Bianca’s mother, but they are both wasted in ultimately thankless roles.
Overall, it’s easy to feel sorry for films like The DUFF. The school-set genre has fizzled out in recent years and hasn’t got its mojo back despite numerous efforts from movies much less accomplished than this one.
Mae Whitman and the use of Family Guy-esque cut-scenes are the main plus points here, but despite its best intentions, it’s hard to give it too much of a recommendation and is probably best reserved for a late-night DVD viewing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/12/disappointingly-generic-the-duff-review/
With the brilliant Mean Girls being one of the only exceptions to the trend, the latest film to tackle the genre is The DUFF, but is Ari Sandel’s directorial debut worthy of a recommendation?
The DUFF follows daily life at a typical American high-school with typical US teens separated into categories depending on their social standing.
Enter Bianca Piper, played by the brilliant Mae Whitman, a vastly intelligent girl who is unaware of her place in the rankings as the DUFF – Designated Ugly Fat Friend – that is until her hunky next door neighbour Wesley (Robbie Amell) informs her of that fact.
What ensues is a selection of mildly amusing scenes interspersed with some touching social commentary about what it means to be normal in an ever-changing world as Bianca tries to come to terms with her place in the school hierarchy.
Despite the obvious focus on looks and beauty, the film does have a deeper message of self-worth and it’s a shame this is rarely touched upon outside of the finale.
Perhaps The DUFF’s strongest suit is in its unique filming style. The use of technology and social media helps distinguish it from its rivals and what it lacks in story is made up for with clever uses of animation and an engaging soundtrack.
Just when you think the film has decided to settle in a rut and remain there for the duration, it throws you off course with a clever cut-scene or use of technology and there are two moments in particular that had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, the rest of the film isn’t that funny. The story is predictable and the will-they-won’t-they romantic subplot is massively clichéd and dull because the characters, apart from Bianca, simply don’t register – there is no reason to care for them.
Mae Whitman is a force to be reckoned with as Bianca and is by far the most intriguing member of a disappointingly bland cast. Elsewhere, Ken Jeong (Community, The Hangover) and Allison Janney (Hairspray) pop up as a concerned teacher and Bianca’s mother, but they are both wasted in ultimately thankless roles.
Overall, it’s easy to feel sorry for films like The DUFF. The school-set genre has fizzled out in recent years and hasn’t got its mojo back despite numerous efforts from movies much less accomplished than this one.
Mae Whitman and the use of Family Guy-esque cut-scenes are the main plus points here, but despite its best intentions, it’s hard to give it too much of a recommendation and is probably best reserved for a late-night DVD viewing.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/04/12/disappointingly-generic-the-duff-review/
Fighter Verses - memorize bible verses
Reference and Education
App
The Fighter Verses Bible memory system was created to help believers persevere in the fight of faith...
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated God's Rough Drafts in Books
Nov 29, 2019
Set around 100 years from now, this book considers a future where body part transplantation has become widespread, routine and big business. Big business for the pharmaceutical firms, those that can afford to pay for it and also for anyone who can make money by donating their good eyes or hands.
And so society has divided into those who change body parts at a whim, and those who provide them. The gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' becomes even wider and even more literal. But a few, a very very tiny few, discover that if they have just the right combination of parts then something happens, some sort of synchronicity, and they gain some sort of new ability.
Fallon is one such special person who finds her world turned upside down when she is framed for a crime and sent to a juvenile prison. Escaping with new found friends Danny and Emma, they soon find that being pursued by the law is the least of their problems.
This novel covers a lot of ground. At its heart is a thrilling chase but around this Scott has woven threads of social commentary, friendship, self-discovery and the dangers of treating people as commodities. These are characters you will care about as they struggle to overcome every obstacle and make some disturbing discoveries along the way. The vision of the future that is painted is all too real and possible but not one that seems very palatable, except to the people at the very top.
One last notable feature is that each chapter starts with a character narrating and filling in some of the gaps. This exposition is wonderfully self-aware, tongue in cheek and fourth wall breaking. I found it was perfectly juxtaposed to the main narrative.
This is a really good book. Dark, charming, forboding, sharp, witty and suspenseful in equal measure. Is it a must read? It most certainly is
And so society has divided into those who change body parts at a whim, and those who provide them. The gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' becomes even wider and even more literal. But a few, a very very tiny few, discover that if they have just the right combination of parts then something happens, some sort of synchronicity, and they gain some sort of new ability.
Fallon is one such special person who finds her world turned upside down when she is framed for a crime and sent to a juvenile prison. Escaping with new found friends Danny and Emma, they soon find that being pursued by the law is the least of their problems.
This novel covers a lot of ground. At its heart is a thrilling chase but around this Scott has woven threads of social commentary, friendship, self-discovery and the dangers of treating people as commodities. These are characters you will care about as they struggle to overcome every obstacle and make some disturbing discoveries along the way. The vision of the future that is painted is all too real and possible but not one that seems very palatable, except to the people at the very top.
One last notable feature is that each chapter starts with a character narrating and filling in some of the gaps. This exposition is wonderfully self-aware, tongue in cheek and fourth wall breaking. I found it was perfectly juxtaposed to the main narrative.
This is a really good book. Dark, charming, forboding, sharp, witty and suspenseful in equal measure. Is it a must read? It most certainly is
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Straw Dogs (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Successful actress Amy Sumner (Kate Bosworth) is returning from her big city life to her southern hometown of Blackwater. Along with Amy is her well-educated and wealthy husband, David Sumner (James Marsdon). David quickly finds this vacation is filled with tension, particularly when it comes to Amy’s ex-boyfriend, Charlie (Alexander Skarsgård), who is not ready to be out of her life. So it is up to the weakling Harvard hero to protect his relationship, home, and way of life in a town he doesn’t quite understand.
A remake of the 1971 thriller classic of the same name, “Straw Dogs” has lost a lot of its appeal and logic with time. It still has gory moments and the plot is very similar to the original but many of the base thrills have been lost in the move to a present day setting.
This film asks the viewers to suspend disbelief, ignore a number of unfinished back-stories, and stand behind characters who are not engaging or believable. Details, both big and small miss the mark. James Marsdon is incorrectly suited as the shy bumbling academic. The house is a seeming fortress for no apparent reason. The side stories, interesting detractions from the overly built tension between the two leading males, are left unresolved.
Additionally, the themes are awkward and incomplete. There are literary throwbacks and some blatant social commentary but all of the film’s depth is lost on an audience who has no reason to care. Viewers will be preoccupied wondering what the point of the film is.
Sure, the story is engrossing and it does force self-analysis, but the modern adaptation would have benefitted from serious editorial cuts. Had the film been completed in a quarter of the time it might have actually managed to be thrilling!
Unbalanced, vapid, and pointless as a thriller “Straw Dogs” falls prey to the unnecessary remake trap. For a real psychological thrill it would be better to opt for the original.
A remake of the 1971 thriller classic of the same name, “Straw Dogs” has lost a lot of its appeal and logic with time. It still has gory moments and the plot is very similar to the original but many of the base thrills have been lost in the move to a present day setting.
This film asks the viewers to suspend disbelief, ignore a number of unfinished back-stories, and stand behind characters who are not engaging or believable. Details, both big and small miss the mark. James Marsdon is incorrectly suited as the shy bumbling academic. The house is a seeming fortress for no apparent reason. The side stories, interesting detractions from the overly built tension between the two leading males, are left unresolved.
Additionally, the themes are awkward and incomplete. There are literary throwbacks and some blatant social commentary but all of the film’s depth is lost on an audience who has no reason to care. Viewers will be preoccupied wondering what the point of the film is.
Sure, the story is engrossing and it does force self-analysis, but the modern adaptation would have benefitted from serious editorial cuts. Had the film been completed in a quarter of the time it might have actually managed to be thrilling!
Unbalanced, vapid, and pointless as a thriller “Straw Dogs” falls prey to the unnecessary remake trap. For a real psychological thrill it would be better to opt for the original.
The Holy Quran - English
Book and Education
App
Read, listen to and explore the Holy Qur'an with this free, comprehensive and easy-to-use Holy Quran...
The Polo Magazine
Sports and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Since launching at The Veuve Clicquot Gold Cup in 2008, The Polo Magazine has firmly established...
This Will Be My Undoing: Living at the Intersection of Black, Female, and Feminist in (White) America
9.0
Rate It
Book
From one of the fiercest critics writing today, Morgan Jerkins’ highly-anticipated collection of...
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated See You Yesterday (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020
A Fresh New Take On Classic Time Travel Film
See You Yesterday is a sci-fi movie directed by Stefon Bristol and written by Stefon Bristol and Fredrica Bailey. It was produced by Spike Lee and production company 40 Acres & A Mule Filmworks and distributed by Netflix. The film stars Eden Duncan-Smith, Dante Crichlow, Brian "Stro" Bradley, and Jonathan Nieves.
Two teenage prodigies, C.J. Walker (Eden Duncan-Smith) and her best friend, Sebastian Thomas (Dante Crichlow) spend every spare minute working on their latest homemade invention: backpacks that enable time travel. When one of their older brothers is killed, they put their unfinished project to the test to save him and face the perilous consequences of time travel.
This movie was very emotional. It didn't always make sense but it had a good narrative that sustained the entire film. This movie was equal parts very realistic and fantastically unreal. At its core, it's a story about grief and second chances. Who wouldn't want to go back in time and prevent a tragic event if they could. I mean that's what one of my favorite movies The Time Machine is all about. It also had a lot of social commentary. I believe the writer/director did an awesome job in this their directorial debut. Eden Duncan-Smith's acting was also top notch and really made you feel for her through her struggles and really brought to life a very relatable character. What I didn't like was that as smart as the kids were in the movie, and as good as the time travel logic was in making sense, to me it still wasn't believable that they would have been able to create time travel devices. Also the special effects weren't always the best but seemed to work well. But if you can get past that hiccup it is an emotional roller coaster and a surprising fresh take on a classic sci-fi trope. I give it a 7/10.
Two teenage prodigies, C.J. Walker (Eden Duncan-Smith) and her best friend, Sebastian Thomas (Dante Crichlow) spend every spare minute working on their latest homemade invention: backpacks that enable time travel. When one of their older brothers is killed, they put their unfinished project to the test to save him and face the perilous consequences of time travel.
This movie was very emotional. It didn't always make sense but it had a good narrative that sustained the entire film. This movie was equal parts very realistic and fantastically unreal. At its core, it's a story about grief and second chances. Who wouldn't want to go back in time and prevent a tragic event if they could. I mean that's what one of my favorite movies The Time Machine is all about. It also had a lot of social commentary. I believe the writer/director did an awesome job in this their directorial debut. Eden Duncan-Smith's acting was also top notch and really made you feel for her through her struggles and really brought to life a very relatable character. What I didn't like was that as smart as the kids were in the movie, and as good as the time travel logic was in making sense, to me it still wasn't believable that they would have been able to create time travel devices. Also the special effects weren't always the best but seemed to work well. But if you can get past that hiccup it is an emotional roller coaster and a surprising fresh take on a classic sci-fi trope. I give it a 7/10.