So, I finished M.M. Kaye's Death in Kashmir and am allowed to roll again, and what shall I say -- whenever it's an "oh, I'll just quickly do this before going to bed" situation, it's raining doubles and extras like there's no tomorrow.

My first roll ends up being doubles, which land me on the Scottie Dog card -- which I pocket (for the moment) and get to roll again twice; once for the doubles and once for the novelty card.

So my next roll (thankfully not doubles again) takes me to to square 35: The European Vacation -- read a book set in Europe, by a European author, or that involves travel by boat or has a ship on the cover.

Then I pass go and finally land on square 9: The Stay-Cation -- read a book including a visit to a museum, concert, library or park, or whose author's name begins with a letter in R - E - L - A - X.

Both of these are squares I've visited before, and since I'm also holding one Scottie Dog card already (picked up on July 2), it kind of seems a bit overindulgent to keep both of them.

So for square 35 and in honor of Andrea Camilleri, who just died the other day -- R.I.P. -- I'll be reading the first Inspector Montalbano novel, A Shape of Water.

But for square 9, I'll be using one of my two Scottie Dog cards -- separate post to follow.

And until the votes on square 9 / Scottie Dog are in, my two little helpers get another snack time break!

I think I remember someone on my friends list who read this. I want to use it for Halloween Bingo, was wondering if it would fit for either of these two squares:

Cryptozoologist: any supernatural creature, from Ammit to Ziz;

Is the creature supernatural or did the scientists make him in the book?

Or

Fear the Drowning Deep: mystery, suspense, supernatural or horror books with sea-related elements: sea creatures, ships, shipwrecks, and/or sharks.

Was the creature found and captured from the ocean or rivers?

Any help with knowledge so I can find the square it would fit in is greatly appreciated!

Thanks :)

This is due in four days. I could probably push really hard and get through it, but I'm not sure I want to. Parts of it are definitely better than the movie, while other parts are...not. It fleshes out a lot of the characters more and makes them more sympathetic, which is nice, except not always necessary.

For example, if the plot stays the same as in the movie, there isn't much of a reason to flesh out Lainie, Strickland's wife, the way this book is doing. At best, it reassures readers that she'll somehow manage to be fine after the events at the end. As far as the attempts to make Strickland more sympathetic go, he's supposed to be one of the book's horrible villains. I don't need him to be more sympathetic.

Zelda is a stronger character here than in the movie, where the only thing that saved her was Octavia Spencer's acting skills. Unfortunately, Elisa is somehow less sympathetic in the book than in the movie. She's the main character so this isn't good.

Zelda's a better, more fleshed out character here than in the movie. In the book she actually has a dream for her future: she wants to own her own cleaning business. Lainie, Strickland's wife, is also a much better character here than in the movie, although in her case it feels unnecessary - unless the story is tweaked so that she has a larger part, she really doesn't have anything to do with the River God storyline.

And yay, the whole "I only wash my hands before using the urinal, not after" conversation doesn't exist here. Will the rotting fingers be edited out too? I doubt it, but I can always hope.

"Giles mazes into the queue. It's a weekday midafternoon, a peculiar time for pie, and he's second in line. He likes being here, he tells himself. It's cozy and warm and smells of cinnamon and sugar. He doesn't look at the cashier, not yet; he's too old to feel this nervous. Instead, he studies a five-foot glass tower, each level presenting a different dessert. Double-decker pies like department-store hat boxes. Sculpted pies like the bout of a cello. Pie puffs like a woman's breast. There is room for all kinds, all kinds."

The writing style isn't working for me. Also, I seriously doubt that Giles would mentally be comparing pies to a woman's breast. And this whole book is present tense, OMG.