Steve's Bookshelf 2013

[Marie H]

A good review.    I nodded in agreement many times, as for many years I couldn't get the fanatical joy that people had with Tolkien novels.  A Marmite thing I suppose...

[Signor Finzione]

I'm glad you enjoyed it! (Finally ). I totally agree about there being too many songs in it (although I actually loved the ones they put in the film), and about it being a nicely compact plot.

 

"The horrors of the Tom Bombadil episode" - bit dramatic, Steve.

[poppyshake]

Oh yay!!  So glad you enjoyed it Steve and totally agree .. perfect but too many songs!!

Haha .. I loved all that 'eleventy-one/eleventy-first' nonsense in LOTR    but Tom Bombadil and Goldberry were beyond tedious (though I liked the Barrow-wight part) .. and again the songs .. and the Council of Elrond

Great review

[Karsa Orlong]

Thanks

 

 

"The horrors of the Tom Bombadil episode" - bit dramatic, Steve.

 

Oh, I don't know - there's a reason Jackson and co left that whole part out of the movies, even the extended versions

 

 

I watched The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey last night.  On the whole I enjoyed it, but talk about overkill   Reading the book, I can guess where each film will end (and guessed correctly with this one), but three 3 hour movies, really??  Like Jackson's King Kong really needed to be 3 hours long   This is just Jackson and Boyens indulging themselves, imo, and it seems to me they're somewhat missing the book's target audience.  How many children are going to sit through 9 hours worth of films where there's so much talk?

 

Anyway, it was fun being back in their interpretation of Middle Earth.  I thought Martin Freeman was excellent, and the 'Riddles in the Dark' section of the book was filmed just about perfectly (apart from changing the bit with the buttons - why? ).  There were lots of changes, though, some of which made cinematic sense, whilst others were just to indulge the special effects department, or just dovetail with the LotR movies (is it wrong that I got annoyed that the filming of Bilbo finding the ring was different to that in the prologue to Fellowship?   ).  I'm guessing a lot of the scenes that weren't in the book are from The Silmarillion or the appendices to LotR or somesuch?   And why do some of the dwarves look like normal men whilst others . . . don't?

 

And James Nesbitt?  Why why why?    That's just my general attitude to James Nesbitt, not just in this film

 

Lots of minor niggles, but generally very enjoyable.  Streets, worlds, galaxies ahead of the Star Wars prequels   New Zealand looks spectacular as usual.  The music is wonderful (not including the songs!).  Glad I didn't have to sit through it at the cinema, though - I took about an hour's break in the middle

[Signor Finzione]

Glad you (mostly) enjoyed the film. It's actually really awesome at the cinema, except that I had to go to the toilet about three times during it.

 

I agree that they're stringing it out - when they originally announced it as two films, I was sceptical; when they stretched it to THREE, I was annoyed. Much as I loved it, I feel they could easily have condensed it into two films. I think it's stuff from the LotR appendices that they're filling in with, and I imagine they're going to be hammering us with the connection between 'the Necromancer' and LotR.

 

I do agree about the finding of the ring - why did they change it? - although I noticed the last time I watched LotR that if you pause on Bilbo's face as he finds the ring, he actually looks a lot like Martin Freeman!

 

Riddles in the dark was the best bit, but I'm looking forward to Beorn's house (will he basically be Hagrid?  ). And Mirkwood! Ooh, only a couple of weeks to go.

 

What did you think of the songs?

[Athena]

Great review of The Hobbit! I read it for the first time earlier this year and liked it. I agree with you about the songs, there were too many of them.

 

I also agree @ the films, I feel three three hour long films is too much. A lot of things were added to try and make it as epic as the LOTR films, I felt they could've told the story in less time. I look forward to see the second and third films, though.

[Karsa Orlong]

Glad you (mostly) enjoyed the film. It's actually really awesome at the cinema, except that I had to go to the toilet about three times during it.

 

I agree that they're stringing it out - when they originally announced it as two films, I was sceptical; when they stretched it to THREE, I was annoyed. Much as I loved it, I feel they could easily have condensed it into two films. I think it's stuff from the LotR appendices that they're filling in with, and I imagine they're going to be hammering us with the connection between 'the Necromancer' and LotR.

 

I do agree about the finding of the ring - why did they change it? - although I noticed the last time I watched LotR that if you pause on Bilbo's face as he finds the ring, he actually looks a lot like Martin Freeman!

 

Riddles in the dark was the best bit, but I'm looking forward to Beorn's house (will he basically be Hagrid?  ). And Mirkwood! Ooh, only a couple of weeks to go.

 

Funnily enough, I imagined him as Hagrid   Mirkwood    Could do without the spiders, quite frankly  

 

 

What did you think of the songs?

 

I tried not to   

 

Of course, not having seen the theatrical version, I have no idea which bits were added to make the extended edition.  But I expect there were more songs, mostly sung by Barry Humphries    And more of the bloody washing up.  Over half an hour in and they're still washing up.  What is this, a Fairy Liquid advert?  

[Signor Finzione]

I tried not to   

 

Of course, not having seen the theatrical version, I have no idea which bits were added to make the extended edition.  But I expect there were more songs, mostly sung by Barry Humphries    And more of the bloody washing up.  Over half an hour in and they're still washing up.  What is this, a Fairy Liquid advert?  

 

Did the extended version include a scene where James Nesbitt turns to the camera and says with a wink: 'That's why dwarves use Fairy'?

 

In the bog-standard version of the film I think ol' Barry sings a little song about torture, but that's it as far as I can remember. The only others were the dwarves' misty mountains song (which I love!) and yeah, the washing up one. Blunt the knives, bend the forks, smash the bottles and burn the corks . . . Yeah, I've watched it far too many times.

[Timstar]

The book is great, the film is enjoyable but feels a bit contrived and far too digital. And Ori is the most annoying character in it, he's the Jar Jar Binks of the Hobbits.

[Karsa Orlong]

And Ori is the most annoying character in it, he's the Jar Jar Binks of the Hobbits.

 

There is no character, in any film, as annoying as Jar Jar Binks.  Fact.

 

Apart from the entire cast of every Michael Bay film ever

[Timstar]

"Have they got any chips?"

 

*shudders*

[Karsa Orlong]

Curses!  Once again my attempts to get my TBR list down to 50 have been foiled!   

 

Bought:

 

The Forgotten Beasts of Eld by Patricia A. McKillip

The Riddle-Masters Game by Patricia A. McKillip

The Red Knight by Miles Cameron

Mayhem by Sarah Pinborough

The Broken Sword by Poul Anderson

 

[Signor Finzione]

Awesome! Nothing wrong with a huge TBR . . . 

 

A blog I read recently posted a Q&A thing for readers about favourites fantasy series/authors, and a few commenters said McKillip was one of the best authors they'd ever read.  

 

I've had The Red Knight sat on my shelf for about a year now. I'll read it when you do.

[Karsa Orlong]

A blog I read recently posted a Q&A thing for readers about favourites fantasy series/authors, and a few commenters said McKillip was one of the best authors they'd ever read.

 

Ooh, it's good to know that there's something of a concensus of opinion, as I read similar comments elsewhere.  Unless they were the same comments you read, in which case carry on

 

 

I've had The Red Knight sat on my shelf for about a year now. I'll read it when you do.

 

Excellent!    I've looked at it several times in Waterstone's but the size of it (not the page count, but the physical size of it - it's huge) put me off - I just didn't want to take a chance on a book that was going to take up so much shelf space    But then it was going cheap on Kindle the other day, so . . . 

[Athena]

Congrats on your new books ! I hope you enjoy them.

[Signor Finzione]

Excellent!    I've looked at it several times in Waterstone's but the size of it (not the page count, but the physical size of it - it's huge) put me off - I just didn't want to take a chance on a book that was going to take up so much shelf space    But then it was going cheap on Kindle the other day, so . . . 

 

I know it's proper MASSIVE, and it looks really odd on my shelf.   But I got it back when I worked at The Works - it was £2.99, and I bought it last Christmas on the day staff get 50% discount. (God I miss that place  ).

[Karsa Orlong]

My favourite thread of the week.  Some guy resurrected a six year-old thread about Brent Weeks . . .

 

http://forum.malazanempire.com/topic/7623-any-really-good-medieval-based-assassin-bookseries/page__st__20

 

Look at the usernames :lol:

[Athena]

Awesome !

[Signor Finzione]

My favourite thread of the week.  Some guy resurrected a six year-old thread about Brent Weeks . . .

 

http://forum.malazanempire.com/topic/7623-any-really-good-medieval-based-assassin-bookseries/page__st__20

 

Look at the usernames :lol:

 

That's hilarious. :lol: Reminds me of why I used to be a member of Malazan.

[poppyshake]

Great review of The Hobbit film Steve  I enjoyed it but had some problems with it also. For all that they were gorgeous .. I didn't see the point of making Kili and Fili .. sort of boyband dwarves .. I didn't like James Nesbitt either. I thought the troll scene played out better in the book and I thought the wargs were better in the LOTR. It was too long and they stuffed stuff in that they could have easily left out (though I didn't mind the washing-up song but then I haven't seen the extended.) I loved Hugo, Cate and Elijah in LOTR but was it that necessary to bring them back for cameos? My fave bit was also the 'Riddles in the Dark' section .. just amazing and Martin I thought was excellent throughout. I quite liked the goblin scenes though they took it to extreme lengths .. Barry Humphries' Goblin King was fascinatingly gross.

I'm not too worried about the next film .. it's got all the good bits in .. but what on earth are they going to do in the final film? .. string it out for a bit longer obviously

[Karsa Orlong]

Great review of The Hobbit film Steve

 

Thankee  

 

 

 I didn't see the point of making Kili and Fili .. sort of boyband dwarves

 

  The singing was just about on the same level, definitely     

 

 

 I loved Hugo, Cate and Elijah in LOTR but was it that necessary to bring them back for cameos?

 

Not even slightly.  The opening with Ian Holm and Elijah Wood could easily have been left out, imo.  I guess Jackson just wants all that framing stuff there to make all six films feel like a whole (when they're finished)

 

On the plus side, at least there was no Liv 'soft-focus, slow-motion' Tyler to ruin things  

 

 

 I'm not too worried about the next film .. it's got all the good bits in .. but what on earth are they going to do in the final film? .. string it out for a bit longer obviously

 

Well I'm guessing the third film will be:

 

 

about the war of the five armies (which Tolkien dealt with in about two pages, but Jackson will drag out for at least two hours), and then an hour of Bilbo saying goodbye to everyone and going home, then another half hour with Ian Holm and Elijah Wood, just for balance, of course

 

 

[Timstar]

Not even slightly. 

 

To be fair to Hugo, Elrond was in the Hobbit, Cate and Christopher Lee on the other hand...

 

 

 

Well I'm guessing the third film will be:

 

 

about

the war of the five armies (which Tolkien dealt with in about two

pages, but Jackson will drag out for at least two hours), and then an

hour of Bilbo saying goodbye to everyone and going home, then another

half hour with Ian Holm and Elijah Wood, just for balance, of

course

 

 

 

 

That's exactly how i'm imagining it!

[Athena]

Well I'm guessing the third film will be:

 

 

about the war of the five armies (which Tolkien dealt with in about two pages, but Jackson will drag out for at least two hours), and then an hour of Bilbo saying goodbye to everyone and going home, then another half hour with Ian Holm and Elijah Wood, just for balance, of course

 

 

x

Yep!

 

Personally I'm most interested to see:

 

 

Smaug

.

 

But that might be in the second film, I don't know, it's not out yet here in cinemas. My memory is a bit hazy on what happens when in the book or where '2/3rds in of the book' is in the storyline.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Athena

[Karsa Orlong]

To be fair to Hugo, Elrond was in the Hobbit

 

Very true!      

[Karsa Orlong]

Book #71:  Mayhem by Sarah Pinborough

 

 

From Amazon:

 

When a rotting torso is discovered in the vault of New Scotland Yard, it doesn't take Dr Thomas Bond, Police Surgeon, long to realise that there is a second killer at work in the city where, only a few days before, Jack the Ripper brutally murdered two women in one night.

Though just as gruesome, this is the hand of a colder killer, one who lacks Jack's emotion.

And, as more headless and limbless torsos find their way into the Thames, Dr Bond becomes obsessed with finding the killer. As his investigations lead him into an unholy alliance, he starts to wonder: is it a man who has brought mayhem to the streets of London, or a monster?

 

 

Thoughts:

 

This was an impulse buy the other day because it was going cheap on Kindle.  Probably unwise, you'd think, but I had a quick look at a couple of non-Amazon reviews and it sounded like my kind of thing.

 

Welcome to Victorian London - in 1887, to be precise - and the time of Jack the Ripper.  Except this story isn't about Jack, it's about another series of murders that were happening at the same time: the so-called 'Embankment murders', or the 'Thames Torso' murders.  Thomas Bond is a doctor who often helps the police with their investigations, and he is called in to examine a woman's torso that has been found on the construction site of the new police headquarters at New Scotland Yard.  Soon the missing limbs (but not the head!) of the victim begin to turn up in the river, and Bond makes connections to another murder, in Rainham, earlier that year.

 

Now, see, this is what I had read about the book, and it sounded very intriguing, a bit gruesome, but mostly a bit scary, and I really liked the sound of it.  I should probably have read the blurb a bit more closely.  The thing is, a little way into the book, it becomes clear that Pinborough is taking the tale down a supernatural route.  Where I was expecting murder investigation and some excitement as the detectives think they may be closing in on the killer, instead we have a Polish immigrant with visions of past and future killings, and a mysterious priest-come-monster hunter who might just as well be Van Helsing with a dog collar.

 

The change in tone threw me a bit, I must confess.  It doesn't make it a bad book - the writing is decent and it is easy to read - but once the truth becomes clear, which is around a third of the way through, I felt it pretty much lost all sense of pacing and fear.  As it's set in Victorian times, I was hoping for some of the atmosphere and smarts that pervade the work of Conan Doyle, but the atmosphere is strangely lacking, and the characters are somewhat flat and uninvolving.  I felt there should have been an overriding feeling of suspense, the terror of who and where the killer might strike next, but it just seemed completely missing to me

 

I expected a bit more from it, really, and I wish Pinborough had stuck to telling that real story.  These murders actually happened.  Dr Bond was a real person.  There is so much scope for a great period crime novel here, even if the crimes were ultimately unsolved.

 

It's such a shame and, as such, I find it hard to recommend.  On the plus side, it's only 350 pages long . . .

 

 

5/10

 

 

ETA:  Oh and it looks like this is the first in a series she is writing about Dr Bond - the next one, Murder, is due out next year.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Karsa Orlong