Scan barcode
qalminator's review against another edition
4.0
Impressive and fascinating slow creep. This is one that builds up very slowly to the actual horror elements, so some people may find that off-putting, but I found the pacing perfect for the content. It's being written as a retrospective on events, so the narrator (Lois) occasionally puts some commentary in hinting at things to come, to get the tension building sooner.
There's an embedded fairy tale of Lady Midday, who accosts people and punishes them if they are not carrying out their proper tasks, or don't know what those tasks should be. She is at the heart of the story, first with Iris Whitcomb's paintings and films, then with Lois's obsession with them. Naturally there actually is a Lady Midday, who has her (Her) own agenda.
Gemma Files' writing is, as usual, spectacular, and the plot is well-crafted. Recommended.
There's an embedded fairy tale of Lady Midday, who accosts people and punishes them if they are not carrying out their proper tasks, or don't know what those tasks should be. She is at the heart of the story, first with Iris Whitcomb's paintings and films, then with Lois's obsession with them. Naturally there actually is a Lady Midday, who has her (Her) own agenda.
Gemma Files' writing is, as usual, spectacular, and the plot is well-crafted. Recommended.
pillywiggin's review against another edition
3.0
The plot was interesting and unique, but the protagonist was thoroughly unlikeable. She whined and complained about everything including her son's teacher and the police. Yes, your son's teacher does get to send him home at the end of the day, but he/she probably has 3-4 other special needs children in the same class. This is also another example of a middle aged, liberal, white female author making political commentary where none is needed. If the protagonist had not been a whiner, this probably would have been a 4 star rating.
geve_'s review against another edition
2.0
I didn't realize the author was a film critic until like, chapter one. Yeah.
I love detail, but this was like taking a film history class that I didn't volunteer for, and in the worst possible way. LIke the way some people take their specific niche interests WAY too seriously and has to tell you all about it, and relates every single thing back to it.
That's honestly not even the problem with the book, I woulda let that boring stuff go, but the thing didn't even nail the FILM part of the story. Like its a cool concept, some kind of cursed film that's related to at least two deaths. Great, I liked the ring, and I liked the king in yellow, it's a classic idea, and it even starts out pretty great. Maybe 1/3 in it just starts to drag HARD.
Here are my major complaints:
1: the antagonist is comically bad. It's like just having the devil be the bad guy. Like he has infinite money and no soul, he just does the weirdest, unexplainable shit, with no real motivation other than to give the protagonist someone to fight. It's really weak story telling imo.
2: The author seems to already know when they've fucked up the storytelling. In the beginning they start off with some exciting chapter, then just straight up say, yeah now imma give you a bunch of exposition, and no one likes reading it, but you just gotta sit through it cause that's how im telling the story. Like, ok, or you know, don't do that, you're the author. During the climax, which DRAGS hard, the protag also says, I know this is taking a long time to explain BUT FOR ME IT WAS LIKE SO FAST. Ok, maybe edit yourself then, you can obviously tell its dragging.
3: The beginning was kinda fun, and you start out thinking this film is like haunted or something, which, cool, i'm down then
4: The autistic kid can see supernatural stuff in the manner of stephen king's "magical negro". It's not cool when stephen king did it, and it's not cool when anyone does it. It felt super gross, and like the only reason to have an autistic kid was to make the protag's life hard and also had a babadook vibe of like, horrible kid the reader hates, but also he can see supernatural gods or some shit cause autism. barf.
Anyways, I didn't like the book, but it wasn't so egregiously bad as to rate a 1 star. Had potential, but wouldn't actually recommend it to anyone.
I love detail, but this was like taking a film history class that I didn't volunteer for, and in the worst possible way. LIke the way some people take their specific niche interests WAY too seriously and has to tell you all about it, and relates every single thing back to it.
That's honestly not even the problem with the book, I woulda let that boring stuff go, but the thing didn't even nail the FILM part of the story. Like its a cool concept, some kind of cursed film that's related to at least two deaths. Great, I liked the ring, and I liked the king in yellow, it's a classic idea, and it even starts out pretty great. Maybe 1/3 in it just starts to drag HARD.
Here are my major complaints:
1: the antagonist is comically bad. It's like just having the devil be the bad guy. Like he has infinite money and no soul, he just does the weirdest, unexplainable shit, with no real motivation other than to give the protagonist someone to fight. It's really weak story telling imo.
2: The author seems to already know when they've fucked up the storytelling. In the beginning they start off with some exciting chapter, then just straight up say, yeah now imma give you a bunch of exposition, and no one likes reading it, but you just gotta sit through it cause that's how im telling the story. Like, ok, or you know, don't do that, you're the author. During the climax, which DRAGS hard, the protag also says, I know this is taking a long time to explain BUT FOR ME IT WAS LIKE SO FAST. Ok, maybe edit yourself then, you can obviously tell its dragging.
3: The beginning was kinda fun, and you start out thinking this film is like haunted or something, which, cool, i'm down then
Spoiler
it goes way off the rails into like a bunch of european mythology. Like way into the mythology, which seems to have NOTHING to do with film. Like bro, you can write a story about this mythology that you're obviously into without also making it about film just because you're a film critic. instead it's like two totally disparate elements that never come together to make any real sense at all.4: The autistic kid can see supernatural stuff in the manner of stephen king's "magical negro". It's not cool when stephen king did it, and it's not cool when anyone does it. It felt super gross, and like the only reason to have an autistic kid was to make the protag's life hard and also had a babadook vibe of like, horrible kid the reader hates, but also he can see supernatural gods or some shit cause autism. barf.
Anyways, I didn't like the book, but it wasn't so egregiously bad as to rate a 1 star. Had potential, but wouldn't actually recommend it to anyone.
goonicorn's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
felkyo_grey's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
sloatsj's review against another edition
3.0
I really should stop pretending I like horror stories. I always end up just saying 'meh.' This one is as preposterous as any, and halfway through it's like a Scooby Doo episode with a team of semi-fearless avengers (though unlike Scooby Doo there really is something supernatural at work). Anyway, it was well written, but I must finally stop wishing I liked horror.
dnemec's review against another edition
3.0
This was pretty good, but there is a LOT of background on film in general and film in Canada specifically that I could have just done without. This is a pretty cool ghost story, it just got lost for awhile amidst all the fluff.
merricatadamtine's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
zj5's review against another edition
2.0
I liked a lot about the book (Lois was great, the Canadian Film stuff was excellent, and I'm a sucker for creepy folk legends) but I couldn't muster up much interest in the actual plot. I just didn't click. It's nicely written but feels a little densely packed at times and that's great when the subject is something I was interested in but otherwise it just felt dry. This one might not have been for me but I'm excited to check our some of Files' other work.
penwen97's review against another edition
2.0
Well, this was disappointing. There's an interesting plot somewhere in this book, but it's hard to find as the author constantly interrupts her own narrative to go off on one tangent after another. It's almost a stream-of-consciousness style that didn't work for me at all. I kept losing track of what the author was talking about due to the constant interruptions. There is a lot of information about film, art and religion. Some of it interesting, most of it not, but little to none of it relevant at all. Experimental Film would have been a lot shorter and a lot more interesting had it stayed on track. It also wasn't creepy or scary at all, so that was disappointing too. I did like Lois, and it was refreshing to see a supportive husband for once. I mainly read thrillers and most of the time the husband is controlling, abusive, cheating or doesn't believe anything the wife tells him. So, it was nice to see a happily married couple that actually acted like a team. 2.5 stars.