Edgar Colt

Vitor Miguel

Prisma Soulstorm

Serena

Jordan

Bruna Guedes

Husain Kothari

FRNK

Uendi Prifti

Abdul Hasib

Loughlin Sullivan

Delaney Knopp

Lestat. The vampire hero of Anne Rice's enthralling new novel is a creature of the darkest and richest imagination. Once an aristocrat in the heady days of pre-revolutionary France, now a rock star in the demonic, shimmering 1980s, he rushes through the centuries in search of others like him, seeking answers to the mystery of his eternal, terrifying existence. His is a mesmerizing story --- passionate, complex, and thrilling.

This is the story of Louis, as told in his own words, of his journey through mortal and immortal life. Louis recounts how he became a vampire at the hands of the radiant and sinister Lestat and how he became indoctrinated, unwillingly, into the vampire way of life. His story ebbs and flows through the streets of New Orleans, defining crucial moments such as his discovery of the exquisite lost young child Claudia, wanting not to hurt but to comfort her with the last breaths of humanity he has inside. Yet, he makes Claudia a vampire, trapping her womanly passion, will, and intelligence inside the body of a small child. Louis and Claudia form a seemingly unbreakable alliance and even "settle down" for a while in the opulent French Quarter. Louis remembers Claudia's struggle to understand herself and the hatred they both have for Lestat that sends them halfway across the world to seek others of their kind. Louis and Claudia are desperate to find somewhere they belong, to find others who understand, and someone who knows what and why they are.Louis and Claudia travel Europe, eventually coming to Paris and the ragingly successful Theatre des Vampires--a theatre of vampires pretending to be mortals pretending to be vampires. Here they meet the magnetic and ethereal Armand, who brings them into a whole society of vampires. But Louis and Claudia find that finding others like themselves provides no easy answers and in fact presents dangers they scarcely imagined.Originally begun as a short story, the book took off as Anne wrote it, spinning the tragic and triumphant life experiences of a soul. As well as the struggles of its characters, Interview captures the political and social changes of two continents. The novel also introduces Lestat, Anne's most enduring character, a heady mixture of attraction and revulsion. The book, full of lush description, centers on the themes of immortality, change, loss, sexuality, and power.source: annerice.com

A richly-illustrated adaptation of Anne Rice's Interview with the Vampire, told through the eyes of the vampire Claudia, who was just a little girl when she was turned by the vampire Lestat. Though she spends many years of happiness with her two vampire fathers, she gradually grows discontent with their insistence upon treating her like a little girl, even though she has lived as long as any mortal man...and her lust to kill is certainly no less than theirs...

Collected for the first time, here are the twelve extraordinary illustrated volumes that form the graphic novel of THE VAMPIRE LESTAT. Evocative full-color paintings and an artful abridgment of the original text capture the inimitable spirit and atmosphere of this passionate, complex, and thrilling tale.The story begins in our own time with Lestat, tall, blond, and handsome, a world-renowned rock star. His gifts are timeless, his youth never withers. But he was not always the powerful and famous child of darkness. Before his long earth-encrusted sleep, he was an aristocrat in the heady days of pre-Revolutionary France. It was then that he came face-to-face with the incarnation of evil and the temptations of love that he has ravenously pursued through time. Where it has led him and what he has become is the heart of the tale that has captured millions of readers.

The Dursleys were so mean and hideous that summer that all Harry Potter wanted was to get back to the Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry. But just as he's packing his bags, Harry receives a warning from a strange, impish creature named Dobby who says that if Harry Potter returns to Hogwarts, disaster will strikeAnd strike it does. For in Harry's second year at Hogwarts, fresh torments and horrors arise, including an outrageously stuck-up new professor, Gilderoy Lockhart, a spirit named Moaning Myrtle who haunts the girls' bathroom, and the unwanted attentions of Ron Weasley's younger sister, Ginny.But each of these seem minor annoyances when the real trouble begins, and someone -- or something -- starts turning Hogwarts students to stone. Could it be Draco Malfoy, a more poisonous rival than ever? Could it possibly be Hagrid, whose mysterious past is finally told? Or could it be the one everyone at Hogwarts most suspects . . . Harry Potter himself?

There is a door at the end of a silent corridor. And it’s haunting Harry Pottter’s dreams. Why else would he be waking in the middle of the night, screaming in terror?Harry has a lot on his mind for this, his fifth year at Hogwarts: a Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher with a personality like poisoned honey; a big surprise on the Gryffindor Quidditch team; and the looming terror of the Ordinary Wizarding Level exams. But all these things pale next to the growing threat of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named - a threat that neither the magical government nor the authorities at Hogwarts can stop.As the grasp of darkness tightens, Harry must discover the true depth and strength of his friends, the importance of boundless loyalty, and the shocking price of unbearable sacrifice.His fate depends on them all.

Lowry's book is a piece of nationalist propaganda, using oversimplification, emotional appeals, and dualistic morality to shut down her readers' minds. More troubling is that it is aimed at children, who don't yet have the critical faculties to defend themselves from such underhanded methods.Unsurprisingly, Lowry adopts the structure of the monomyth, equating a spiritual journey with a moral one. Her Christ-figure uses literal magic powers to rebel against his society. This rebellion and the morality behind it are presented as 'natural', to contrast with the 'abnormal morality' around him.Lowry doesn't seem to understand that we get our morality from our culture, it isn't something in-born that we 'lose'. This is the first hint of Lowry's misunderstanding of the human mind. She assumes her own morality is correct, and then builds her story to fit it.She also makes the character act and think like a modern person would, despite never adequately explaining how he came up with such unusual notions. It's the same trick many historical fiction authors use, leaving us scratching our heads as to why a Fourteenth Century French peasant speaks like a second-wave feminist. I'd suggest that Lowry falls to this fault for the same reason they do: she has no talent for imagining how others might think differently.Lowry's book ends with the standard nonspecific transgressive spiritual event that marks any overblown monomyth. Since the book is not a progressive presentation of ideas, it does not suggest any conclusion. Instead, the climax is a symbolic faux-death event (symbolic of what, none can say). Confusingly, Lowry later redacts the ending in the sequels, undermining the pseudo-spiritual journey she created.Though some call this book 'Dystopian', it's closer to the truth to say Lowry borrows elements from the Dystopian authors, attempting to combine the spiritual uplift of the monomyth with the political and social deconstruction of the Dystopia. What she doesn't recognize is that the faith of the one conflicts with the cynicism of the other. She draws on ideas and images from many other authors: Bradbury, Huxley, Orwell, Burgess, but doesn't improve upon them.These authors created novels that reflected the world around them. They based them on the political events of the times, presented with realism and careful psychology. Though they presented the struggle between the individual and the society, they portrayed morality as grey, and suffering as the result of individual human faults, not political systems. Lowry doesn't realize that the best way to critique Fascism or Communism is not to present it as 'evil', but to simply present it as it was.But Lowry's world is not based in reality, it is symbolic and hyperbolic. Instead of writing about how poverty makes the world seem small and dull, she has the characters magically unable to experience life. Instead of an impersonal government, she presents a sort of evil hippy commune. The only political system it resembles is a school, which is a neat little trick to get the kids interested. The idea that 'school=unfeeling totalitarian hell' is not an uncommon one, but it's one I'm surprised teachers would support. The book also suggests a creche, but lacking similarity to any real-world system, it doesn't work as a political criticism.Lowry creates this artificial world to suit her purposes, but it is not a symbolic exercise like 'Animal Farm'. We understand that the pigs of animal farm are symbolic, because there are no talking pigs. Lowry's world is more insidious, since its oversimplification is hidden. She builds an artificial world to support the dualist morality that she's pushing. She presents the same knee-jerk fears about euthanasia and abortion that people use against Women's Rights or Health Care.Worse than these Straw Man arguments is the fact that she never deals with the economic causes of totalitarianism. Tyrants don't just rise up and take control by their own force of will, they come into power because of the socioeconomic situations that surround them. Lean times produce strong, fascist leaders while profitable times produce permissive, liberal societies.Strong, centralized leadership simply doesn't self-propagate in cultures where everyone is clothed, fed, and housed. The Holocaust was socially about some ideal of 'change' and 'purity', but it was economically about the transmission of wealth from Jews, Poles, and Catholics to Germans (and more specifically, to those Germans who had elected the new ruling party).The atrocities of war are, for the most part, committed by normal people on other normal people. By presenting the power structure as 'amoral' and 'inhuman', Lowry ignores the fact that people will willingly cause others to suffer. Painting the enemy as 'evil' and 'alien' is just an unsophisticated propagandist method.She contrasts her 'evil' with the idealized 'goodness' of emotion, beauty, and freedom. This is nothing more than the American dream of 'specialness' that Mr. Rogers was pushing for so many years. We are all special, we are all good, we all deserve love and happiness. Sure, it sounds good, but what does it mean?Where does this 'specialness' come from? If it is just the 'sanctity of human life', then it's not really special, because it's all-encompassing. If all of us are special, then none of us are. There's nothing wrong with valuing life, but when Lowry presents one mode of life as valuable and another as reprehensible, she ceases to actually value humanity as a whole. Instead, she values a small, idealized chunk of humanity. 'People are good, except the ones I don't like' is not a moral basis, nor is it a good message to send to kids.If the specialness is only based on fitting in with a certain moral and social guideline, then Lowry isn't praising individuality, she's praising herd behavior. The protagonist is only 'special' because he has magic powers. His specialness is not a part of his character, it is an emotional appeal.The idea of being a special individual is another piece of propaganda, and its one kids are especially prone to, because kids aren't special: they are carefully controlled and powerless. Giving a character special powers and abilities and then using that character to feed a party line to children is not merely disingenuous, it's disturbing.There is also a darker side to universal specialness: giving a child a sense of importance without anything to back it up creates egotism and instability. Adults noticed that children with skills and friends had high self-esteems, but instead of teaching their children social skills and knowledge, they misunderstood the causal relationship and tried to give them self-worth first.Unfortunately, the moment unsupported self-worth is challenged, the child finds they have nothing to fall back on. Their entitlement didn't come from their skills or experiences, and so they have nothing to bolster that sense of worth. Instead, any doubt sends them down a spiral of emotional instability.A single book like this wouldn't be the cause of such a state in a child, but it does act as part of the social structure built to give a sense of worth without a solid base for that worth. People like to believe they are special, kids especially so, but being a remarkable person is not a result of belief but of actions. If the book had informed them, then it would leave them better off, but giving them a conclusion based on emotional appeals does nothing to build confidence or character.Many people have told me this book is good because it appeals to children, but children often fall for propaganda. Children develop deep relationships with pop stars, breakfast cereals, and Japanese monsters. This does not make them good role models for children.Feeding 'specialness' to kids along with a political message is no better than the fascist youth programs Lowry intends to criticize. The obsession with individuality is just another form of elitism. It's ironic that people in America most often describe themselves as individuals when pointing out the things they do to align themselves with groups.But banding together in a community is not a bad thing. For Lowry and other 'Red Scare' children, any mention of 'communal' can turn into a witch hunt, but we all give up some personal rights and some individuality in order to live in relatively safe, structured societies. There are benefits to governmental social controls and there are drawbacks, and it's up to us to walk the line between the two. Anarchy and Totalitarianism never actually exist for long: we are social animals.It's not difficult to understand why Lowry is so popular, especially amongst educators. The message she gives aligns perfectly with what they were taught as kids, from Red Scare reactionism to the hippy-dippy 'unique snowflake' mantra. These ideas aren't entirely misguided, either. It's good to recognize the benefits of difference and the dangers of allowing other to control our lives.If a reader believes that fascism and socialism are inherently wrong and that their own individuality is their greatest asset, they will likely sympathize with Lowry's work. However, this doesn't make the book honest, nor beneficial. One of the hardest things we can do as readers is disagree with the methods of authors we agree with ideologically.It makes us feel good to find authors who agree with us, but this is when we should be at our most skeptical. Searching the world for self-justification is not a worthwhile goal, it simply turns you into another short-sighted, argumentative know-it-all. 'Yes men' never progress.Lowry is toeing the party line. She does not base her book around difficult questions, like the Dystopian authors, but around easy answers. She doesn't force the reader to decide for themselves what is best, she makes it clear what she wants us to think. Her book is didactic, which means that it instructs the reader what to believe.Even if her conclusions about Individuality vs. Community are correct, she doesn't present arguments, she only presents conclusions. Like rote memorization or indoctrination, she teaches nothing about the politics, social order, economics, or psychology of totalitarianism or individuality. The reader is not left with an understanding, just an opinion.The baseless 'individuality' of the book lets the reader imagine that they are rebels--that they are bucking the system even as they fall into lock-step. By letting the reader think they are already free-thinking, Lowry tricks them into forgetting their skepticism.She is happy to paint a simple world of black and white, and this is likely the world she sees. I doubt she is purposefully creating an insidious text, she just can't see past her own opinions. She writes this book with a point to make, and makes it using emotional appeals and symbolism. She doesn't back it up with arguments because she doesn't seem to have developed her opinions from cogent arguments.In the end, she doesn't show us that the structure of this society is wrong, she says nothing poignant about individuality vs. community; instead, she relies on threats to the life of an innocent infant. Yet nowhere does she provide an argument for why communal living or the sacrifice of freedoms for safety must necessarily lead to infanticide.In politics, making extreme claims about the opposing side is called mud-slinging, it is an underhanded and dishonest tactic. It works. Arguing intelligently is difficult, accusing is easy, so that's what Lowry does.She is another child of WWII and the Cold War who hasn't learned her lesson. She quickly condemns the flaws of others while failing to search out her own. Even after the Holocaust, there are many racist, nationalist, violent Jews; conflict rarely breeds a new understanding.America condemned the faceless communal life of the Second World, and yet America created The Projects. We critiqued strong governmental controls, but we still have the bank bailout, socialized medicine, socialized schooling, and socialized charity. America condemned the Gulags and Work Camps, and yet we imprison one out of every hundred citizens; far more than Stalin ever did. Some are killed, all are dehumanized.As a little sci fi adventure, the book isn't terrible. It's really the pretension that goes along with it. Lowry cobbles together religious symbolism and Dystopic tropes and then tries to present it as something as complex and thoughtful as the authors she copied. Copying isn't a crime, but copying poorly is.Like Dan Brown or Michael Crichton, she creates a political pamphlet of her own ideals, slaps a pretense of authority on it, and then waits for the money and awards to roll in--and they did. Many people I've discussed this book with have pointed to those awards as the surest sign of this book's eminent worth.Award committees are bureaucratic organizations. Their decisions are based on political machinations. This book is a little piece of Nationalism, and so it was lauded by the political machine that Lowry supports. The left hand helps the right. If awards are the surest sign of worth, then Titanic is a better movie than Citizen Kane.What surprises me is how many of those who brought up the award as their argument were teachers. If a politically-charged administrative committee is the best way to teach children, then why do you take umbrage when the principal tells you that bigger class sizes (and fewer benefits) are fine? Listen to him: doesn't he have award plaques?The other argument is usually that 'kids like it'. I usually respond that kids also like candy, so why not teach that? Some people also get angry at me for analyzing a book written for children:"Of course it's not a great book, it's for kids! If you want a good book, go read Ulysses!"I prefer to give children good books rather than pieces of political propaganda (even if they agreed with me). Children can be as skeptical, quick-witted, and thoughtful as adults if you give them the chance, so I see no excuse for feeding them anything less. Kids aren't stupid, they just lack knowledge, and that's a fine distinction. It's easy for adults to take advantage of their naivete, their emotionality, and their sense of worth. Just because it's easier for the teacher doesn't mean it's better for the child.When we show children something that is over-simplified, presenting an idealized, crudely moralizing world, we aren't preparing them for the actual world. If you give a child a meaningless answer to repeat, he will repeat it, but he won't understand why. Why not give the child a book that presents many complex ideas, but no rote answers, and let them make up their own minds? If they don't learn how to separate the wheat from the chaff and form their own opinions early, in a safe, nurturing environment, what chance will they have on their own as adults?In all the discussions and research regarding this book, I have come across very little analysis. It's especially surprising for a book with such a strong following, but there aren't many explanations of why the book is supposed to be useful or important.This lack of argument makes sense from a political standpoint, since there is no reason to analyze the worth of propaganda: its worth is that it agrees with society and indoctrinates readers. Analyzing it would defeat the purpose; political diatribes do not stand up to thoughtful attention.Perhaps someday someone will create a thoughtful, textual analysis of this book that will point out its merits, its structure and its complexity. I've gradually come to doubt it. I never expected when I wrote my original review of this book that it would garner this much attention.I still welcome comments and thoughts, but if your comment looks roughly like this: "You should read this book again, but this time, like it more. You think you're smart but you aren't. You're mean. Lowry is great. This book won awards and kids like it. It's meant for kids anyways, why would you analyze what its about? I bet you never even read the sequels. Go read 'Moby Dick' because you are full of yourself."I've heard that one before. If you do want to comment though, you might check out this article; I find it helps me with presenting my ideas.

One late night in a college dorm, four socially inept geeks immerse themselves in a fantasy world of their own creation. As their characters journey through forbidden kingdoms, ancient ruins, and the forsaken wilderness, the players attempt to solve a mysterious puzzle that could ultimately mean the difference between getting a life and death. Who is The Shadow? Where is The Princess hidden? Will any of them ever find a date? And how long do they have before their annoyed neighbors call the cops?

Eric Draven, a musician, and his girlfriend are killed. Draven returns to life as an undead mime, with psychic powers and a spirit guide (a crow). He first avenges his and his girlfriend's deaths, but finds that he must remain on Earth, separate from her, until he restores the balance between good and evil.

This show was based on Superman (Dean Cain) being a Generation X man. In his twenties, somewhere Clark Kent (Dean Cain) must experience life as a pre-thirties pupil. Lois Lane (Teri Hatcher), as always, is by his side at the Daily Planet, adding that oh-so-ever romantic side to his life. The relationship between Lois and Clark, is as always, a platonic but on the edge of mad love, type of experience.

In this quasi-mythological costume series, Hercules (in Greek Herakles), the noble bastard son of Zeus, hence hated to death by his step-mother Hera, doesn't live as an Olympian after accomplishing his Works and the Argonauts' journey, as classical myth has it, but relinquishes immortality and continues to fight both human and supernatural evil on earth, as a wanderer in and beyond Greece, usually accompanied by his human side-kick Iolaus and sometimes by dodgy Salmoneus. Countless are the challenges, either especially set up by Hera or just on his way, but he always triumphs against all odds, delivers otherwise often hopeless mortals and moves on to new adventures.

A look into the daily (or rather, nightly) lives of three vampires, who've lived together for over 100 years, on Staten Island.

A young boy sells his soul to a demon in order to avenge his family's death and successfully lead their influential toy manufacturing company. The demon takes the form of a loyal butler who's always dressed in black and is required to protect, serve and arrive whenever summoned by his young master Ciel.

Vampire Knight is a story about how Vampires Survive without drinking blood

Vampire Knight tells the story of Yuki Cross. The earliest thing she remembers is being attacked on a snowy night by a vampire, and being rescued by Kaname Kuran, who is also a vampire. The story takes place 10 years after that event, Yuki is now the adopted daughter of the Headmaster of Cross Academy. She and her longtime friend Zero Kiryu keep peace at the academy, making sure no problems arise between the Day Class (humans) and the Night Class (vampires). However, the peace they try to keep is fragile, and personal feelings begin to interrupt their duty.

Set in modern times, vampires roam the Earth and are humans' mortal enemies. However, a substitute has been found for human blood, a substitute that vampires can consume with the same effect as human blood. This is True Blood. Now humans and vampires can co-exist in harmony, and even form relationships. But there will always be rogue elements on both sides ready to exploit the uneasy truce.

The comedic misadventures of Roy, Moss and their grifting supervisor Jen, a rag-tag team of IT support workers at a large corporation headed by a hotheaded yuppie.

Galavant (Joshua Sasse) is a dashing knight who is on the quest to reclaim his reputation and the love of his life, Queen Madalena (Mallory Jansen), who was stolen away from him by the evil King Richard (Timothy Omundson). In this musical comedy television adventure, Galavant is assisted by Princess Isabella (Karen David), and Sid (Luke Youngblood), his squire. Meanwhile, King Richard tries to win over the affections of his captured love, Madalena. The show follows Galavant's journeys through medieval times creating countless hilarious twist and turns plus a wealth of original new musical numbers.

American fairy tale-themed musical comedy television series

With a small variety of metal objects to choose their metal from, four new competitors attempt to forge a knife in their own style. In five days, the final pair must create in their own forge a Moro Kris sword, a blade with roots dating back to 300BC, in the season finale of this suspenseful and fiery History Channel series.

Leonard Hofstadter and Sheldon Cooper are both brilliant physicists working at Cal Tech in Pasadena, California. They are colleagues, best friends, and roommates, although in all capacities their relationship is always tested primarily by Sheldon's regimented, deeply eccentric, and non-conventional ways. They are also friends with their Cal Tech colleagues mechanical engineer Howard Wolowitz and astrophysicist Rajesh Koothrappali. The foursome spend their time working on their individual work projects, playing video games, watching science-fiction movies, or reading comic books. As they are self-professed nerds, all have little or no luck with women. When Penny, a pretty woman and an aspiring actress from Omaha, moves into the apartment across the hall from Leonard and Sheldon's, Leonard has another aspiration in life, namely to get Penny to be his girlfriend.

This casts key characters from The Jungle Book (1967) into a 1930s pacific setting where Baloo is a bush pilot who finds himself as part of a struggling courier company.

In the city of St. Canard, the people are plagued by the most bizarre criminals, but they have a protector as well, Darkwing Duck (Jim Cummings). This bumbling and egotistical superhero battles evil in that fair city with the help of his dumb pilot sidekick, Launchpad McQuack (Terence McGovern) and his rambunctious adopted daughter, Gosalyn Waddlemeyer (Christine Cavanaugh).

American animated television series from 1991–1992

When Donald Duck decides to join the Navy, he leaves his nephews, Huey, Dewey, and Louie in the care of his cantankerous Uncle Scrooge. He is an eccentric and miserly billionaire who loves to literally swim in his money that is held in his corporate headquarters/vault known as the Money Bin. While the initial meeting was less than pleasant, events soon have them, along with a newly hired nanny, her granddaughter, and Scrooge's dimwitted, but skilled pilot, on countless adventures as the group goes around the world looking for treasure, or defending Scrooge's current assets from enemies like the Beagle Boys or Magica De Spell.

American animated television series from 1987

This sequel series done largely without the original creators' involvement showcases the further adventures of the Manhatten Clan. In this series, the clan now have to deal with a city that knows about them and fears them. This situation is made all the more difficult with the insanely fanatical Jon Canmore, now known as John Castaway (Scott Cleverdon), exploiting that fear to form the murderous anti-gargoyle militia, the Quarrymen. With their help of their powerful former enemies and now patrons, the Xanatos family, the clan must try to convince the human population that they mean no harm to the innocent.

In the Dark Ages, there was a race of heroic warrior monsters known as Gargoyles. These creatures existed as stone during the day, but become flesh and blood at night. One Scottish clan made an alliance with humans to help protect a castle by night if the humans would protect their stone forms by day. The uneasy alliance was shattered when human prejudice provoked a betrayal that allowed the castle to be sacked and most of the resident clan destroyed, leaving only six adult survivors and a rookery of unhatched eggs. A further misunderstanding during the clan's retaliation on the invaders and rescue of their hostages left the clan frozen in stone by a magic spell that would only be broken when the "castle rises above the clouds." For a thousand years, the castle laid abandoned and the clan condemned by this curse. In 1994, a wealthy multibillionare named David Xanatos (Jonathan Frakes) bought the castle and transported the whole structure to Manhattan, where he placed it on top of the Eyrie building which he owned. It is high enough to be above the clouds, thus the conditions of the spell were met and the Gargoyles were revived. Now, this clan must adjust to this new age and gain friends, like Detective Elisa Maza (Salli Richardson-Whitfield), who reveals that Xanatos revived them to exploit them for his unscrupulous ends. This is coupled by the fact that another Gargoyle comrade, Demona (Marina Sirtis), is alive from their age, and is now an insane renegade bent on the extermination of humanity. Rebelling against them, the clan abandon the castle and pledge to protect New York City like they protected the castle in the past.

1994–1997 American animated television series

Asta and Yuno were abandoned together at the same church and have been inseparable since. As children, they promised that they would compete against each other to see who would become the next Wizard King. However, as they grew up the differences in their abilities became considerably noticeable. Yuno was a genius in his magic control and power, whilst Asta possessed no magic at all so he trained his physical body as much as possible in an attempt to make up for his lack of magic. Having received their Grimoires at age 15, Yuno unexpectedly got one with a four leaf clover symbol on his whilst Asta unfortunately did not even get a Grimoire at all. However, when Yuno was threatened, the truth about Asta's power was revealed, he received a five leaf clover Grimoire, a "black clover". Now the two friends are heading out in the world, both seeking the same goal.

For Emma Swan, life has been anything but a happy ending. But when she's reunited with Henry - the son she gave up for adoption ten years ago - on the night of her 28th birthday, everything changes. The now 10-year-old Henry is in desperate need of Emma's help because he believes from reading a book of fairy-tales that she's the daughter of Snow White and Prince Charming - who sent her away from the Enchanted Forest to be protected from a curse that was enacted by the Evil Queen. Emma initially refuses to believe a word of Henry's story but soon finds that his hometown of Storybrooke, Maine is more than it seems. Because it's in Storybrooke that all of the classic characters we know are frozen in time with no memories of their former selves - except for the Evil Queen, who is Storybrooke's mayor and Henry's adoptive mother Regina Mills. Now, as the epic "Final Battle" for the future of both worlds approaches, Emma will have to accept her destiny and uncover the mystery behind a place where fairy-tales are to be believed.

TasteDive Official

Roberta

Young Merlin (Colin Morgan) is a teenager, discovering and then learning to master his magical gift. Magister Gaius (Richard Wilson), King Uther Pendragon's (Anthony Head's) learned court physician to whom he's assigned as humble page, teaches him medicine, coaches his magical self-study, and warns him of Uther's strong aversion to magic. Merlin becomes squire to the noble but imprudent crown Prince, Arthur (Bradley James), whose fate is linked with Merlin.

2008 British fantasy-adventure television programme

The Adventures of Sindbad across the seven seas in a brand new version. Sindbad and his shipmates encounter a numerous strange and dangerous situations on their journey but they always find their way out. No mythical creature or black magic can stop them!

movies

shows

books

Active tastebuds