Week in Review #12

 This week I read nine books! 

26. To Say Nothing of the Dog. (Oxford Time Travel #2) Connie Willis. 1998. 512 pages. [Source: Bought]

Read this if...

• You enjoy TIME TRAVEL
• You enjoy VICTORIAN ENGLAND
• You enjoy mysteries/detective fiction especially that of Dorothy Sayers
• You enjoy romance with banter

27. One Wrong Step. Jennifer A. Nielsen. 2025. 336 pages. [Source: Library] [5 stars, mg historical, mg action, mg survival, mg fiction]

Read this if...

• You enjoy coming of age stories AND survival/peril stories
• You enjoy historical fiction set in the 1930s
• You enjoy adventure/survival stories, especially mountain climbing stories

28. Famous Last Words. Gillian McAllister. 2025. 336 pages. [Source: Library] [3 stars] 

Read this if...

• You don't require thrills in your thriller
• You like predictable twists and turns
• You enjoy dull characters

 26. I Have Three Cats. Michelle Sumovich. 2025. 40 pages. [Source: Library] [picture book, cats, pets, 3 stars]

Read this if...

• You enjoy cats
• You enjoy slow-thaw stories (the main character is grumpy towards the cat at first)

27. How To Make a Bedtime. Meg McKinlay. Illustrated by Karen Blair. 2025. 32 pages. [Source: Library] [4 stars, picture book, bedtime books]

Read this if...
You enjoy bedtime stories
You don't mind mixed families--BEARS AND HUMANS

28. The Baby Who Stayed Away Forever. Sandra Salsbury. 2025. 40 pages. [Source: Library] [picture book, bedtime book, humor, family, 5 stars]

Read this if...

• You enjoy humorous stories about situations that are far from funny *if* you are still in the midst of them
• You enjoy BABIES with lots of personality and spunk

25. Sing!: How Worship Transforms Your Life, Family, and Church. Keith and Kristyn Getty. 2017. B&H Books. 176 pages. [Source: Review copy]

Read this if...

• You love hymns and worship songs
• You don't love hymns and worship songs
• You want ideas on how to incorporate singing into your home life

26. 8 Bible Stories for Early Readers (Adventure Bible) Illustrations by David Miles. 2025. Zondervan. 248 pages. [Source: Library] [3 stars]

Read this if...

• You don't mind MOSES' story being presented before Joseph's story
• You are looking for an early reader Bible story book
• You don't mind super-super-super stripped down and simplified Bible stories

2. The Holy Bible, 1611 Edition, King James Version, 400th Anniversary, Hendrickson Publishers. 1611/2003. God. 1536 pages. [Source: Bought] [5 stars]

Read this if...

• You find the original spelling from 1611 charming, delightful, enjoyable to decode
• You enjoy collecting early Bible translations

Century of Viewing Week 12

1910s

• 1916 Intolerance I am SO conflicted. On the one hand, there are several versions of this one to pick from. The one I watched was two hours and forty-seven minutes. So perhaps there were scenes missing that would have influenced my overall impressions? On the other hand, I can only speak to the scenes I did see. There are FOUR stories. The screen-time of each varied greatly. The significance of each time varied greatly. One of the four is during the life of Christ. Viewers see several scenes from his life--including the wedding at Cana, the adulterous woman (John 8), the Crucifixion, and perhaps one more? two more? These scenes might be weighted in significance. Perhaps. Perhaps not. But they make up a tiny-tiny-tiny fraction of screen time. The medieval France story also gets very little overall screen time. The 'big picture' of that story is Catholics vs. Huguenots. I am NOT to judge the movie that could have been or should have been. But part of me can't help *wanting* that one to be more fully fleshed. The Ancient Babylon story gets a LOT of screen time. They also got elaborate sets and costumes. And, I'll be fair when I can, the actress playing MOUNTAIN GIRL was great--absolutely fantastic in the role. If there's a single stand-out performance in the whole movie, it goes to HER. No doubt in my mind. This story line features a lot idolatry, idol worship, sacrifices to idols, pleasure-oriented 'exotic' lavishness. I could have sworn I saw some nudity. HOWEVER I have not been able to verify that. So perhaps the clothes were just on the side of sheer and immodest. The modern story also gets a LOT of screen time. For better or worse. Without the modern story, I'm not sure there is a film to be seen. For better or worse, however while the story is certainly something worth telling, I found the acting to be terrible. Dear One and The Boy are tolerable--but just just. There is nothing compelling about their performances. Just distracting over-the-top. You don't have to be *so, so, so, so, so, so* over the top to convey EMOTIONS and tell a story. Sometimes less is more. Sometimes a lot LESS is fantastic. The theme is conflicting as well. Because there's a thin line at times. Because it is 'good' to be intolerant of evil, of injustice, of wrongs. To tolerate immorality is intolerant. That being said, the story they "chose" to represent the modern times, of course, set the Reformers up to be evil (boo, hiss) and the good characters to be unjustly treated by the Reformers. And that's the story that plays out. I don't necessarily believe in legislating morality (this film was BEFORE Prohibition), but I don't believe in legislating immorality either.
  

1920s

• 1922 The Blacksmith What a difference watching a different, longer version makes! Apparently, the "Blacksmith" that is most commonly seen as being "The Blacksmith" was a pre-release copy and not its final edited form. (You work with what you got. And I'm just super thankful for what silent films *do* exist and have been saved. Especially Buster Keaton films. But this version was a more recently discovered, recovered "final" version found in Europe. So there are quite a few changes to the film. I like both versions. I do. But I *love* some of the scenes in this one. It works for me better. 
• 1926 The General. This time I compelled my mom to watch with me. (Dad I compelled a few weeks ago). I won't stop until the whole world joins in. Joking. Not joking. I love this movie so much. Johnny Gray, train engineer, risks all to save his two loves--his engine (The General) and his girl (Annabelle).
  

1930s

• 1935 Palooka from Paducah is a Buster Keaton short film for Educational Pictures. Whatever you do, don't let this be your first Buster Keaton. Was it the worst thing I've ever watched? No. Was it entertaining? Not really. Could it have been better? Definitely. Could it have been worse? For sure. Let's start with the positive: Buster Keaton stars with almost his entire family--father, mother, and sister. (Remember this was in the midst of the Great Depression. Buster Keaton had fallen from his 'movie star' salary. (His wife literally took everything--everything, everything--in the divorce.) There was never not a time in his life--from age four on up--where he wasn't supporting the family. Joe Keaton has starred with his son in plenty of silent movies. No matter how horrible times were, Buster Keaton found a way. This script certainly was 'a way.' There were a few funny bits: namely the family playing horse shoes, passing food around the table, Buster getting clunked on the head by his brother's boots, all the snoring, dog howling. Tame stuff to be sure. Not outstanding humor. Moving onto the less positive: it was sports themed. And not in a good way like Battling Butler. This one had Buster getting knocked around (as a referee to a wrestling match) but no big victory for Buster. It was his "brother" in the wrestling ring who triumphed. The film-making could have been better. Most of the time dear Buster's face was completely blocked by the ropes of the ring. So there weren't even any possibilities for screen shots. Battling Butlers was all kinds of awesome. There was all this build-up and a fantastic boxing match. This was just....so far from entertaining.One *small* thing that could have improved this movie a tiny bit was to not have all the men wear those horrid fake beards to mark them as 'hillbillies.'
  

1950s

• 1953 Calamity Jane is a musical set in the Black Hills of Dakota. I adored this film as a young child. (Doris Day, Howard Keel). I still adore this film. I love the songs--most of them anyway. I love everything about this one.
  
• 1956 Trapeze. Do I like circus movies? Not particularly. This one stars Tony Curtis and Burt Lancaster. I liked those two just fine. However, I didn't really care for the female character. The character is why the book of Proverbs exists. Seriously. Run far, run fast, avoid at all costs. I hated this character so much. And I can't say that the ending saved it. Yet what I enjoyed I did enjoy.
  

1960s

• 1962 Billy Rose's Jumbo Again do I like circus movies? NO. Not really. It was just chance that had me viewing two in one week--mere days apart. This one stars Doris Day and Stephen Boyd. And JUMBO of course (the elephant). A little amount of Jimmy Durante goes a *long, long, long, long* way. I enjoyed some of the songs of this musical. However, the film's main problem is that it is about ten to fifteen minutes too long. The last ten minutes or so of film are pure torture.
  

1970s

• 1972 Man of La Mancha is a musical. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, LOVE two of the songs. "Impossible Dream" and "Dulcinea" are among my favorites. Truly. Especially "Impossible Dream." The musical itself is rough around the edges. There's some BRUTALITY that is just tough to get through. Just raw, rough stuff. The musical is in a framework. I liked it overall, but some songs I loved.
  

1980s

• 1980 Coal Miner's Daughter. It has been a while since I saw this bio-drama of Loretta Lynn. I *probably* saw a somewhat edited for TV version growing up. Though I can't say for certain that it was. There are some brutal things about this one--though realistic, I suppose, if you are going to be true to life and not sugar-coat everything. 
  
• 1985 Ladyhawke is something. I have categories by which I'm sorting/classifying movies. It doesn't quite fit in period drama, romantic drama, or speculative fiction. Or it fits slightly in all three. Regardless, MAGIC CURSES with fantastical elements in otherwise a romantic period drama. He is cursed to be a wolf (at night). She is cursed to be a hawk (by day). Their love is everlasting...but can the curse be broken. Enter baby Matthew Broderick. Not really. It's just I don't think I've seen him younger than this. (But what do I know???) I enjoyed this one. The soundtrack is "special" to say the least. Though it did tame way down by the end. It almost sounded like the composer was watching the actual movie instead of an aerobics class.

2000s

• 2008 Iron Man. LOVE the ending. LOVE the character--though it takes many films for him to become the man I love. I did notice--though this isn't surprising--is that silent movies *are* good for me. In that, silent movies *make* me pay attention to the screen. I can't rely 100% on my ears, on listening, on following the story based on one sense alone. I fall into a lazy pattern of  doing mostly listening. Silent movies engage me in a way that require more work and are thus more rewarding. That being said, could I try to be more vigilant about talkies. YES. But I am all about the characters and very little concerned with all the action-y fighty bits. I don't see that changing.
  

2020s

• 2025 The Electric State. I don't know how many 2025 movies I'll get to. This one was okay. I've heard reviews that talk about it as being the worst movie ever. I wouldn't go that far. I've not heard anyone praise it as being awesome and fantastic. I don't think I will. It was okay for what it was. I liked the premise of the alternate reality 90s after a robot uprising. I thought it had potential. Not sure it lived up to the potential. But it wasn't painful.
  

© 2025 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

28. Famous Last Words

 

28. Famous Last Words. Gillian McAllister. 2025. 336 pages. [Source: Library] [3 stars]

First sentence: It is one hour before Camilla's life changes, though she doesn't yet know it.

Premise/plot: Readers are promised (but does it deliver?!?!) a twisty-turny crime novel. Camilla, our heroine, is returning to work from maternity leave on the day her husband, Luke, commits a crime. Allegedly commits a crime. He never stands trial. He goes on the run. Her life changes forever--as does her daughter's Polly. Most of the novel takes place seven years later. (And to a smaller extent, an additional seven years after that]. This one is told through two perspectives that of Camilla and that of Niall, the hostage negotiator assigned to the case. Though the narration is not even: readers will go [long] stretches without Niall's narration.

My thoughts: It had one job. One job. ONE. To be twisty-turny. To keep *this* reader guessing, guessing again, guessing yet again. To keep me doubting my instincts and delivering punchy surprises. Things that would only supposedly make sense at the end. Did it deliver????

NO. That's the short answer. No, it did not keep me guessing because I guessed correctly essentially about anything where clues were provided. No big thrills. No big surprises. It has me doubting a review by a famous author that uses words like "brilliant" and "blindsided." (How many books has she read?) 

I don't consider myself particularly outstanding when it comes to "solving" crime books or thrillers. So did I just happen to be lucky in my guess? Or is it poorly constructed to make readers feel smart when they guess? 

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

A
H
E
A
D

Be

W
A
R
N
E
D

So the jacket flap intentionally spoils a lot of the early suspense. That's a choice. For better or worse. It's a way to get a reader, perhaps, to pick up your book. Though with her NAME and reputation, I don't know that it's necessary to spoil that much.

So the big question throughout is *WHY* and to a much lesser degree *how*.

I guessed VERY early on that Charlie was NO GOOD, VERY BAD. I don't know how she could have made it more obvious. So that zaps a lot of suspense out of the book.

I guessed VERY early on that Luke was the true author of her "new book by Adam" that she received in the mail. Was this a lucky guess? Maybe. Maybe not. But the way we were getting excerpts and the fact that it was crime related....it just made the most sense to me.

I did not guess about Luke witnessing the murder of two teens in April---however, that clue was sprinkled so late in the book that it almost doesn't contribute to the suspense in the first place. The only clue for the longest time being that his location was turned off that one night in April. Not any clue with which to build a back story.

I did guess that Isabella was HIDING something big. I was a little suspicious of her husband as well. Though her husband takes up so little space in the story it was easy to forget he existed at all. 

So did I guess that Luke's actions could 1000% be explained away. Yes. Mostly. I guessed that as the most obvious "blindsiding" twist and turn.

I think the book would have been more suspenseful without Charlie's "short" and not-so-subtle perspective.

© 2025 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

27. One Wrong Step

   

27. One Wrong Step. Jennifer A. Nielsen. 2025. 336 pages. [Source: Library] [5 stars, mg historical, mg action, mg survival, mg fiction]

First sentence:  It's been almost three years since my dad and I climbed Kings Peak, but I still think about the summer of 1936 every single day.

Atlas, our hero, loves climbing mountains--first with his parents, then with just his dad. However his relationship with his father has been strained of late since his mother's death. The novel is set on Mount Everest in 1939: the world is on the verge of war AND the mountain is on the verge of an avalanche.

Atlas and his new friend, Maddie, are left behind at Advanced Base Camp. Maddie has little to no experience climbing mountains--she is just along with her dad. Atlas has some climbing experience, but at 14 he's not deemed "reliable" and "wise" enough to include in the quest for the summit. For perspective, however, consider that in 1939, NO HUMAN BEING--male or female--had reached the summit. So it makes all the sense in the world why the leader--Atlas' dad--would decide NO. 

The book's adventure truly begins when they hear an AVALANCHE above them knowing that the group--including both their fathers--will be in great danger. After their sherpa, Chodak, is greatly injured, these two head out on their own to rescue the team. Against advice--mind you--but the very young do not always do what they are told...

My thoughts: This is an action-packed historical survival-themed coming of age story. I never set out to read a moderate amount of books about mountain climbing. It just happened throughout the years. This one was compelling. It was action-packed yet it had a lot of substance and depth. Atlas is going through a lot--emotionally, mentally, physically. This time on the mountain may just change how he sees everything.

 

© 2025 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

26. To Say Nothing of the Dog

  

26. To Say Nothing of the Dog. (Oxford Time Travel #2) Connie Willis. 1998. 512 pages. [Source: Bought]

First sentence: There were five of us--Carruthers and the new recruit and myself, and Mr. Spivens and the verger. It was late afternoon on November the fifteenth, and we were in what was left of Coventry Cathedral, looking for the bishop's bird stump. Or at any rate I was. 

Premise/plot: Ned Henry narrates the novel. And he does a great job. When we first meet him, he's suffering from time-lag. He's spent too much time--of late--jumping through time. He's not alone. There is someone doing her very, very best to drive EVERYONE in his department crazy. Lady Schrapnell is a woman on a mission--a RICH woman on a mission. And she won't take no for an answer. If Lady Schrapnell volunteers you for a job, well, you stay volunteered until the job is done to her satisfaction. And what does Lady Schrapnell want most of all? The bishop's bird stump. Her project is the rebuilding of Coventry Cathedral--a cathedral destroyed/damaged during World War II. And she HAS to know if the bishop's bird stump was still in the church during the raid. She needs to know if it should be replicated as part of the 'restoration.' So Ned Henry is just one of dozens looking IN THE PAST for the answers as to what happened to the bishop's bird stump.

But that 'mission' becomes almost secondary....when it is 'discovered' that there's been an incongruity. At first they think it's simple, it's easily fixed. One of the time travelers interfered when she shouldn't. But. They'll just send another time traveler to fix that interference, and things should go smoothly. But since the time traveler they send is Ned Henry, since he's suffering from exhaustion and time-lag, since he barely heard his instructions, since he jumped into the Net to avoid being discovered by an angry Lady Schrapnell, nothing is simple. What Ned Henry soon realizes is that his arrival in June 1888 has changed things. His arrival has kept two people from meeting (and subsequently falling in love and marrying), and that's just the start.

But he isn't the only one in the past. He isn't the only time-traveler working to restore things. Verity Kindle. The beautiful Verity Kindle has a role to play as well....

Verity Kindle is the heroine of To Say Nothing of the Dog. She is on a mission of her own. While Ned Henry was given the assignment of finding out the whereabouts of the bishop's bird stump, Verity's assignment is to read Tocelyn's diary. The diary is available to read in the future. But the most relevant pages to the Coventry Cathedral project were damaged. So she's been sent to the oh-so-important summer of 1888 to read the newly written diary entries. She's having about as much success as Ned Henry. In other words, not much luck at all! These two work together as best they can. Verity manages to travel back and forth a few times to the future. Their mission--as they see it has changed a bit. They worry that they've damaged the future and that something horrible may happen as a result. Like Tocelyn, they know, was supposed to marry a "Mr. C". They know this for a fact from future diary entries. Yet here they are and she's engaged to someone else! Their "new mission" is to find the identity of "Mr. C." and make sure they meet when they're supposed to meet....

My thoughts: Read this book. That's all I have to say about that. No, not really. I have plenty to say about this one. But I don't think my review will be able to do this one justice. What is To Say Nothing of the Dog? It's a funny sci-fi mystery with a smidgen of romance.

I have a weakness for time travel. I do. And this one is a great example of a time-traveling sci-fi novel that just works really well. It's smart. It's funny. 

I loved this one. I have always loved this one. It is a delightful time travel novel. I love the humor! I do! It's so very, very funny! And I love the details and the dialogue. This one is just a joy cover to cover!

Quotes:

2 Quotes About the bishop's bird stump:

"Perhaps it was removed for safekeeping," he said, looking at the windows. "Like the east windows."
"The bishop's bird stump?" I said incredulously. "Are you joking?"
"You're right," he said. "It isn't the sort of thing you'd want to keep from being blown up. Victorian art!" He shuddered. (7)

I must be getting light-headed from lack of sleep. No one, even badly shell-shocked, would steal it. Or buy it at a jumble sale. This was the bishop's bird stump. Even the munitions scrap iron drive would turn it down. Unless of course someone recognized its potential as a psychological weapon against the Nazis. (12)

About time-lag:

One of the first symptoms of time-lag is a tendency to maudlin sentimentality, like an Irishman in his cups or a Victorian poet cold-sober. (9)

And isn't this the truth:

There is nothing more helpful than shouted instructions, particularly incomprehensible ones. (153)

Verity Kindle on mystery novels:

"Of course they're usually about murder, not robbery, but they always take place in a country house like this, and the butler did it, at least for the first hundred mystery novels or so. Everyone's a suspect, and it's always the least likely person, and after the first hundred or so, the butler wasn't anymore--the least likely person, I mean--so they had to switch to unlikely criminals. You know, the harmless old lady or the vicar's devoted wife, that sort of thing, but it didn't take the reader long to catch on to that, and they had to resort to having the detective be the murderer, and the narrator, even though that had already been done in The Moonstone. The hero did it, only he didn't know it. He was sleepwalking, in his nightshirt, which was rather racy stuff for Victorian times, and the crime was always unbelievably complicated. In mystery novels. I mean, nobody ever ever just grabs the vase and runs, or shoots somebody in a fit of temper, and at the very end, when you think you've got it all figured out, there's one last plot-twist, and the crime's always very carefully thought out, with disguises and alibis and railway timetables and they have to include a diagram of the house in the frontispiece, showing everyone's bedroom and the library, which is where the body always is, and all the connecting doors, and even then you don't have a prayer of figuring it out, which is why they have to bring in a world-famous detective--"
"Who solves it with little gray cells?" I said.
"Yes. Hercule Poirot, that's Agatha Christie's detective, and he says it isn't at all necessary to go running about measuring footprints and picking up cigarette ends to solve mysteries like Sherlock Holmes. That's Arthur Conan Doyle's detective--"
"I know who Sherlock Holmes is." (205)

Well, it wasn't exactly the ending of an Agatha Christie mystery, with Hercule Poirot gathering everyone together in the drawing room to reveal the murderer and impress everyone with his astonishing deductive powers. And it definitely wasn't a Dorothy Sayers, with the detective hero saying to his heroine sidekick, "I say, we make a jolly good detectin' team. How about makin' the partnership permanent, eh, what?" and then proposing in Latin. (431)

Verity and Ned:

She peered at me. "It isn't fair, you know."
"What isn't?" I said warily.
"Your boater. It makes you look just like Lord Peter Wimsey, especially when you tilt it forward like that." (254)

"The first time I ever saw you, I thought, he looks just like Lord Peter Wimsey. You were wearing the boater and--no, that wasn't the first time," she said accusingly. "The first time was in Mr. Dunworthy's office, and you were all covered in soot. You were still adorable, though, even if your mouth was hanging open." (254)

"Lord Peter took a nap," she said. "Harriet watched him sleep, and that's when she knew she was in love with him."
She sat up again. "Of course, I knew it from the second page of Strong Poison, but it took two more books for Harriet to figure it out. She kept telling herself it was all just detecting and deciphering codes and solving mysteries together, but I knew she was in love with him. He proposed in Latin. Under a bridge. After they solved the mystery. You can't propose till after you've solved the mystery. That's a law in detective novels."
She sighed. "It's too bad. 'Placetne, magistra?' he said when he proposed, and then she said, 'Placet.' That's a fancy Oxford don way of saying yes. I had to look it up. I hate it when people use Latin and don't tell you what they mean..." (259)

 

 

 

 

© 2025 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Week in Review #11

This week I read six books.

24. The Rose Bargain. Sasha Peyton Smith. 2025. 400 pages. [Source: Library] [YA Fiction, YA Fantasy, YA Horror, YA Romance] [3 stars]

Read this if...

• You enjoy YA fantasy with faeries or fae
• You enjoy alternate history
• You enjoy YA romance on the steam side
• You enjoy BIG twists
• You can tolerate unbearable cliffhangers

25. Daughters of Shandong. Eve J. Chung. 2024. 400 pages. [Source: Library] [adult historical fiction, coming of age, refugees, adult fiction] [4 stars]

Read this if...

• You enjoy adult historical fiction with coming of age themes
• You enjoy historical fiction set in China
• You enjoy refugee stories
• You enjoy stories based loosely on the author's family history

24. Hi, Cat. Bye, Cat. Jade Orlando. 2025. 24 pages. [Source: Library] [5 stars] [board books, cats]

Read this if...

• You enjoy board books with CATS
• You enjoy rhyming stories for little ones

25. Squash the Cat: Stuck in the Middle. Sasha Mayer. 2025. 40 pages. [Source: Library] [5 stars, cats, jealousy, toys, picture book]

Read this if...

• You enjoy picture books with CATS
• You think Toy Story would have been improved with CATS
• You love, love, love fat orange cats

23. A Book of Comfort for Those In Sickness. Philip Bennett Power. 1876/2018. Banner of Truth. 97 pages. [Source: Bought] [5 stars]

Read this if...

• You are looking for a classic Christian devotional-style book on pain, suffering, and God's goodness
• You are looking for a great read that is encouraging

24. The Wages of Cinema: A Christian Aesthetic of Film in Conversation with Dorothy L. Sayers. Crystal L. Downing. 2025. 256 pages. [Source: Review copy] [philosophy, film history, biography; 3 stars]

Read this if...

• You want Dorothy Sayers as a metaphorical guide to film theory
• You have an interest in the intersection between theology and films

Century of Viewing Week #11

1910s

• 1915 Those Bitter Sweets is a short little take on the dangers of love triangles. Mostly. Not really. Two men rival for the love of one girl. Except when one doesn't get his way, he sends his supposed 'love' a box of poisoned chocolates. Later feeling remorse, he rushes over to stop her from eating them only to discover that she's given the box away to someone else--a group picnicking on the beach. So off the three go to try to save those unsuspecting folks....I don't remember it ending tragically. But honestly this one didn't impress me much.
  

1920s

• 1926 The General is a feature film starring Buster Keaton. By the time this posts, I'll have seen it two more times--at least. (But at the very, very, very least once more.) Is this how I spend every Friday night??? Yes. Yes, it is. Buster Keaton and I have a steady date night. Hee hee. The plot? Johnnie Gray has TWO loves in his life--his train (The General) and his girl (Annabelle). When Northerner spies steal his ENGINE and his girl, he'll do anything to get them back.
  

1930s

• 1931 The Stolen Jools is unusual at best--disjointed is perhaps the better word. It's what I imagine would happen if you cram forty to sixty Hollywood stars together into the briefest of shorts with a flimsy plot. The plot: An actress's jewels are stolen at a Hollywood party, so the police investigate who robbed the robbers--gangsters took the gems originally. Buster Keaton is EARLY in the film as a police officer. And he's adorable as ever. However once you've seen his cameo, I'm not sure there's reason to persist because there's not much payoff except seeing all the stars get about thirty seconds of screen time each.
  

1940s

• 1945 State Fair Mom thinks I don't like State Fair because of the 'farm stuff.' But I don't think that's it. Not really. I think it's more my overthinking EVERYTHING in terms of the two grown children. Wayne annoys me greatly. Every time he's on screen all I can see are red flags waving. Here he is with a steady girlfriend, Eleanor. Is he true and faithful to her? No. Why? He's too busy sulking over not getting his way AND too lusty over a girl he's known less than ten seconds. Is there anything real with Emily? I doubt it. I think Wayne is lusty, lusty, lusty and not thinking with his brain at all. He doesn't know her at all, yet, in his imagination they are as good as married. It's like Eleanor who????? Then there's this stupid ring-toss business. A man who can hold a grudge for a YEAR and come back raging and angsty, is NOT a man you'd ever want to marry. He's faithless AND prone to anger AND sulking. Eleanor, not knowing about Emily, is smiling at their reunion. But I just cannot. Wayne is DUMB. Margy is marginally better. She's just empty-headed. I guess the scene that irritates me with Margy is HOW she stands up on a roller-coaster ride because she is scared. This is a roller coaster without any bars *holding* you down. So you're being trusted to keep yourself alive. And she just can't be bothered. Her new love interest, Pat, (who is an improvement on a man who couldn't read a room if his life depended on it) saves her from herself. And he'll probably spend the rest of his life saving her from herself because she just doesn't have much going on. I didn't mention it but this one is a musical.
  

1950s

• 1954 Seven Brides for Seven Brothers is a musical with Howard Keel. I love this one. Is it in my top ten of musicals? Probably not. Maybe? It's not in my top five. I have SO MANY ABSOLUTELY FAVORITE musicals. I do love this one. There are scenes--like the barn raising--that I absolutely love and adore. It was always fun to "pick" the "cutest" brother. My opinion has changed WIDELY through the years.
• 1955 Oklahoma. I have so many conflicted feelings on this musical. I love, love, love some of the songs. I love some of the characters. I hate some of the characters. I really think OKLAHOMA as a wedding song is a horrible idea. But there I am overthinking things. I do love Charlotte Greenwood. She starred in Parlor, Bedroom and Bath with BUSTER KEATON. And I can't get those scenes out of my head.
  
• 1956 You Can't Run Away From It is one of my absolute all-time favorite, favorite movies. I discovered it first in 2023--watching it a dozen times at least. I watched it at least that many times in 2024. I've only seen it once this far. Before I was obsessed with all things Buster Keaton, Jack Lemmon was the one. I do plan on rewatching a LOT of Jack Lemmon this year too. And I'm always happy to watch new-to-me Lemmon as well. This is a MUSICAL. Jack Lemmon. June Allyson. It is a remake of the [non-musical] It Happened One Night. A rich heiress marries a sleazeball, her father wants to have it annulled. She runs away. On the bus trip, she makes the acquaintance of a newspaper journalist....they end up traveling together and getting cozy--with boundaries in place.
  

1960s

• 1964 A Hard Day's Night is a BEATLES film/musical. A lot of scenes of them just performing their songs. The ending was the most dull for me--just a straight up concert with four or five songs? Some of the songs had been previously featured in the movie in earlier scenes. There were some quite funny scenes. And the police chase, of course, had me thinking again of Buster Keaton. Plenty of running as well--them running from fans. Not as off-the-wall silly as Help. But still fun.
  

1980s

• 1987 Buster Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow is a British documentary that is a little over two and a half hours long. I believe it was broadcast as three episodes. I am trying to both view it as it stands--it is fabulous--but also view it as it would have been at the time. Being a Buster Keaton fan [fan-girl] is EASY, easy, easy these days. His work is in the public domain and readily available just about anywhere. But in 1987, I imagine that was far from the case. This documentary might have served as an introduction to Buster Keaton for some. And been a pleasant revisit for others. It features clips from his shorts and films. It features Keaton voice-overs talking about his movies--taken from interviews. It features interviews with those who worked with him in front of and behind the cameras. It features extensive interviews with Eleanor Keaton, his beloved wife. It gives a good chronological approach to his life. Which seems obvious I know. But often people get so distracted focusing on just one bit of his life that they rush through everything else or dismiss it. But what I really truly appreciated were all the I-didn't-know-that facts BEHIND filming certain movies, certain scenes. Facts that made me see the film a little differently the next time around. For example, behind the scenes details about The General.
  

1990s

• 1991 What About Bob? I discovered What About Bob? late in life. But I love, love, love, love, love this movie so much. I get Bob. I really truly get Bob. And it's a wonderful little film. I absolutely love everything about it. Essentially, Bob a mental-patient inserts himself a little too freely into his doctor's family. On paper it sounds like Bob is the villain. It does. I get that. But you'll just have to watch it yourself to have Bob win you over.
  
• 1998 The Wedding Singer is a romantic comedy that I definitely at one time absolutely loved. I still love a few things about it. The LANGUAGE is something that I had blocked apparently from my memory. But there are wonderful scenes, funny scenes. I love the ending when he writes her a love song and performs it for her on the plane.
  

2000s

• 2000 Miss Congeniality is a FUN comedy. I would say there's more comedy than romance. But there's a tiny bit of romance. Sandra Bullock is just enjoyable to watch. The cast of characters is great. Just very quotable and memorable.
  
• 2009 Castle, Season 1. A mystery writer teams up with a police detective--his "muse" for a new series. Together they solve murder cases.
  

2010s

• 2010 When In Rome. If this one didn't star Josh Duhamel would I love it so much? Difficult to answer honestly. The main character, Beth, is a museum curator who travels to Rome for her sister's wedding. She's a bit of a pessimist when it comes to "true love." She meets a groomsmen, Nick, who is unforgettable. Sorry. Just he is. She's not smitten at all. He is. She has a drunken spell in a magic fountain picking up as souvenirs several coins from the fountain not knowing that in doing so there's a "curse" that all the people who threw those coins will now be in love with HER. Returning home, she's now being PURSUED by a group of unlikely suitors. (A muscle builder, an artist, a magician, a sausage-maker, etc.) Nick, of course, is still pursing her. She thinks he's just one of the many following her about because of the curse....but as she tries to break it....she may just find true love where she least expects it. This is a very physical--physical comedy--romantic comedy. There's a scene with a clown car that is just hilarious. This one is equal parts charming and delightful and JUST cringe.
  

 

© 2025 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews