Books #16 and #17
#16: The Seasons of Lent by Dr. K.P. Yohannan, Metropolitan
Number of pages: 48
This was quite a short book and sort of like a "beginner's guide to Lent", explaining the traditions that occur during Lent. I've not been a big fan of Dr. Yohannan's books, and this just felt too preachy and overly conservative, particularly one bit where he suggested giving up eating out during Lent - made it feel like a book about austerity. The book ended with a guide to conducting a Lent service, which made me feel like this was more aimed at church leaders.
#17: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald: The Original Screenplay by J.K. Rowling
Number of pages: 272
Reading the screenplay to the film caused me to pick up on a few nuances that I'd missed watching it on the big screen. I have noticed that the film gets a lot of criticism online, possibly because of it being overly talky, or possibly because (according to some things I've read) it rewrites some parts of the Harry Potter canon.
[Spoiler (click to open)]For example, Credence revealed as Aurelius Dumbledore is a good twist, but I've had it pointed out to me that he was never mentioned in the Harry Potter books.
I thought the film was okay itself, I just had to deal with the shift from a CGI-heavy film to something darker, more talky and full of politics.
Next book: Is the New Testament History? (Dr. Paul Barnett)
Number of pages: 48
This was quite a short book and sort of like a "beginner's guide to Lent", explaining the traditions that occur during Lent. I've not been a big fan of Dr. Yohannan's books, and this just felt too preachy and overly conservative, particularly one bit where he suggested giving up eating out during Lent - made it feel like a book about austerity. The book ended with a guide to conducting a Lent service, which made me feel like this was more aimed at church leaders.
#17: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald: The Original Screenplay by J.K. Rowling
Number of pages: 272
Reading the screenplay to the film caused me to pick up on a few nuances that I'd missed watching it on the big screen. I have noticed that the film gets a lot of criticism online, possibly because of it being overly talky, or possibly because (according to some things I've read) it rewrites some parts of the Harry Potter canon.
[Spoiler (click to open)]For example, Credence revealed as Aurelius Dumbledore is a good twist, but I've had it pointed out to me that he was never mentioned in the Harry Potter books.
I thought the film was okay itself, I just had to deal with the shift from a CGI-heavy film to something darker, more talky and full of politics.
Next book: Is the New Testament History? (Dr. Paul Barnett)