Search
Golden Gate
10.0
Rate It
Book
In this second installment in the New York Times bestselling series from Edgar Award winner James...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Aladdin (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Oh. My. This was always going to be a tough one for me, and I've been thinking long and hard about how on earth I was going to review this. I love the original, anyone who even remotely enjoys it would be able to sing you at least one of the songs, and therein lies one of the problems. Would I have had a different opinion about some of the elements had I not seen the original so many times? After a lot of contemplating I think the answer in most cases is no.
Note: I went to see this for a second time so I'm going to edit what I previously wrote up as I go because on second viewing it was better. Once the initial shock and annoyance had passed after seeing it the first time it was much easier to watch for the second time.
Remaking something that's peak Disney has so many issues, recasting roles, changing social views and cultural sensitivities, are probably the biggest ones.
Let's talk about the (blue) elephant in the room... although I guess that phrase isn't really accurate as we all want to talk about it. Oh Genie, my Genie. I don't think anyone would have been able to fill that lamp the way Robin Williams did, he was larger than life and brought such a sense of fun whenever he did roles like this. The man is a comedic legend. Recasting this was always going to be difficult, and honestly, I don't know if there's anyone I would have been happy with taking over the mantle.
When I found out that Will Smith was on board I wasn't completely put off. On paper he's got everything you'd need for this role. He had one of two choices, stick to the original faithfully or take it your own way. I just don't think Smith actually had a choice though, he was going to have to do a reinterpretation of the role, but how could you ever follow Williams?
The thing I'm most surprised about with Genie is just how bad the CGI is. It's not like this is something Disney are unfamiliar with. Why did some of it even need to be CGId? I obviously don't know the ins and outs of these techniques or options, but if people can make Robbie Coltrane look larger than life in Harry Potter without mucking it up then why aren't they smurfing Will Smith up and doing the same?
Casting across the rest of the film wasn't such an epic task, Mena Massoud as Aladdin and Navid Negahban as the Sultan hit exactly the right spot. I had issues with Jafar, that's nothing to do with Marwan Kenzari's acting which was very good, but it was the fact that in my head Jafar should have been older. (Dream casting: Ben Kingsley.) I'm sure I won't be popular saying this but I didn't really like Naomi Scott as Jasmine, I don't think she brought enough sass to the role, I also felt that some of the new inclusions into the film around Jasmine negatively affected my view of her.
By far and away my favourite from the live action cast was Nasim Pedrad as Dalia, Jasmine's lady in waiting. I don't know why they felt the need to bring this character in, but I'm really glad they did. She's funny and a welcome break in some scenes. She completely outshines Jasmine as almost every point in the film... actually, I retract the word "almost". While I might not be happy about part of her character's story (ask me for the spoilers) she was definitely the best added extra in the film.
Our group of sidekicks, Abu, Iago, Rajah and Carpet all come out with varying degrees of success. Abu wasn't entirely lucky with the CGI and didn't get such a fun part as before. Iago was much more bird-like than previously which meant less actual talking so I have to wonder why they hired Alan Tudyk if they weren't going to use him properly. Rajah while less quizzical than in the original was entertaining and luckily wasn't mutilated by the CGI. Carpet though, I loved Carpet. He was super cute and absolutely adorable with Abu.
I'm not going to go over every change they made to the original, but one tweak particularly bugged me. They change the way that Aladdin gets out of the cave of wonders. The verbal trickery that Aladdin uses in the original is gone and they switch it out for a much more deceitful moment. The idea isn't as clever as its predecessor and also means that later in the film when Aladdin tricks Jafar you don't get that same connection, watching Genie working out what was going on was painful viewing.
I can't really put off talking about the songs anymore.
As trailers and sneak peeks appeared online I became increasingly nervous about the songs. Prince Ali seemed to be less upbeat than before, and while the sequence looked like it had potential all of it together didn't feel as vibrant. I appreciate that they tried to keep all those little Genie added extra in but it felt like they went with a "safe" option.
I enjoy Will Smith's singing, but I'm not a fan of it in this. I don't think the change in style is suited to these songs. I've seen people saying about how he's rapping in it... but I wouldn't have identified it as rapping. If anything it felt like they went "you should get some rapping in there, but we're Disney so tone it down... a lot."
We get a new offering on the soundtrack in the shape of Speechless, Jasmine's empowering song. I like the song, it certainly has the Disney vibe, and Scott sings it beautifully... but it didn't give me those goosebumps that I expect from power songs. I probably would have given the song a pass had it not been for the way it was included in the film. The frozen scenes with Jasmine dramatically moving in and out of the cast and set... ugh... that just didn't work for me.
Massoud had originally given me so much hope for the music when I heard One Jump Ahead at the beginning. It was excellent, and throughout the film I loved his singing.
Here's where my opinion changed a bit after my second visit... the songs weren't all as bad as I'd felt after the first viewing. I still didn't enjoy Genie's offering, but Aladdin and Jasmine both felt like an excellent choice. The main thing that didn't change was the fact that I didn't feel the songs fit well into the scenes. Part of the draw of Disney is the toe-tapping singalong vibe you get from the music, and there was a lack of pizzaz in most of the sequences that left my toes untapped.
I could probably go on for a very long time about this film. (I already have.) Ultimately, I don't think it's an improvement on the original, I don't think these modern rehashes really add a lot when you have to adjust for the modern culture. I'm not saying that you shouldn't take the changing times into consideration, I just think you should do it in a way that doesn't just come across as trying to score points with the audience to prove how "with it" you are. I also don't think that coming up with 30 minutes of extra footage is ever a sensible idea. If that's what you want to do then perhaps you need to really mix things up and come up with a whole new concept for the story.
What you should do
You're either a Disney nut or you're not. Personally, I would recommend staying at home and having a binge of old Disney classics, starting with the one true Genie.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Could I get Genie powers without the itty-bitty living space?
Note: I went to see this for a second time so I'm going to edit what I previously wrote up as I go because on second viewing it was better. Once the initial shock and annoyance had passed after seeing it the first time it was much easier to watch for the second time.
Remaking something that's peak Disney has so many issues, recasting roles, changing social views and cultural sensitivities, are probably the biggest ones.
Let's talk about the (blue) elephant in the room... although I guess that phrase isn't really accurate as we all want to talk about it. Oh Genie, my Genie. I don't think anyone would have been able to fill that lamp the way Robin Williams did, he was larger than life and brought such a sense of fun whenever he did roles like this. The man is a comedic legend. Recasting this was always going to be difficult, and honestly, I don't know if there's anyone I would have been happy with taking over the mantle.
When I found out that Will Smith was on board I wasn't completely put off. On paper he's got everything you'd need for this role. He had one of two choices, stick to the original faithfully or take it your own way. I just don't think Smith actually had a choice though, he was going to have to do a reinterpretation of the role, but how could you ever follow Williams?
The thing I'm most surprised about with Genie is just how bad the CGI is. It's not like this is something Disney are unfamiliar with. Why did some of it even need to be CGId? I obviously don't know the ins and outs of these techniques or options, but if people can make Robbie Coltrane look larger than life in Harry Potter without mucking it up then why aren't they smurfing Will Smith up and doing the same?
Casting across the rest of the film wasn't such an epic task, Mena Massoud as Aladdin and Navid Negahban as the Sultan hit exactly the right spot. I had issues with Jafar, that's nothing to do with Marwan Kenzari's acting which was very good, but it was the fact that in my head Jafar should have been older. (Dream casting: Ben Kingsley.) I'm sure I won't be popular saying this but I didn't really like Naomi Scott as Jasmine, I don't think she brought enough sass to the role, I also felt that some of the new inclusions into the film around Jasmine negatively affected my view of her.
By far and away my favourite from the live action cast was Nasim Pedrad as Dalia, Jasmine's lady in waiting. I don't know why they felt the need to bring this character in, but I'm really glad they did. She's funny and a welcome break in some scenes. She completely outshines Jasmine as almost every point in the film... actually, I retract the word "almost". While I might not be happy about part of her character's story (ask me for the spoilers) she was definitely the best added extra in the film.
Our group of sidekicks, Abu, Iago, Rajah and Carpet all come out with varying degrees of success. Abu wasn't entirely lucky with the CGI and didn't get such a fun part as before. Iago was much more bird-like than previously which meant less actual talking so I have to wonder why they hired Alan Tudyk if they weren't going to use him properly. Rajah while less quizzical than in the original was entertaining and luckily wasn't mutilated by the CGI. Carpet though, I loved Carpet. He was super cute and absolutely adorable with Abu.
I'm not going to go over every change they made to the original, but one tweak particularly bugged me. They change the way that Aladdin gets out of the cave of wonders. The verbal trickery that Aladdin uses in the original is gone and they switch it out for a much more deceitful moment. The idea isn't as clever as its predecessor and also means that later in the film when Aladdin tricks Jafar you don't get that same connection, watching Genie working out what was going on was painful viewing.
I can't really put off talking about the songs anymore.
As trailers and sneak peeks appeared online I became increasingly nervous about the songs. Prince Ali seemed to be less upbeat than before, and while the sequence looked like it had potential all of it together didn't feel as vibrant. I appreciate that they tried to keep all those little Genie added extra in but it felt like they went with a "safe" option.
I enjoy Will Smith's singing, but I'm not a fan of it in this. I don't think the change in style is suited to these songs. I've seen people saying about how he's rapping in it... but I wouldn't have identified it as rapping. If anything it felt like they went "you should get some rapping in there, but we're Disney so tone it down... a lot."
We get a new offering on the soundtrack in the shape of Speechless, Jasmine's empowering song. I like the song, it certainly has the Disney vibe, and Scott sings it beautifully... but it didn't give me those goosebumps that I expect from power songs. I probably would have given the song a pass had it not been for the way it was included in the film. The frozen scenes with Jasmine dramatically moving in and out of the cast and set... ugh... that just didn't work for me.
Massoud had originally given me so much hope for the music when I heard One Jump Ahead at the beginning. It was excellent, and throughout the film I loved his singing.
Here's where my opinion changed a bit after my second visit... the songs weren't all as bad as I'd felt after the first viewing. I still didn't enjoy Genie's offering, but Aladdin and Jasmine both felt like an excellent choice. The main thing that didn't change was the fact that I didn't feel the songs fit well into the scenes. Part of the draw of Disney is the toe-tapping singalong vibe you get from the music, and there was a lack of pizzaz in most of the sequences that left my toes untapped.
I could probably go on for a very long time about this film. (I already have.) Ultimately, I don't think it's an improvement on the original, I don't think these modern rehashes really add a lot when you have to adjust for the modern culture. I'm not saying that you shouldn't take the changing times into consideration, I just think you should do it in a way that doesn't just come across as trying to score points with the audience to prove how "with it" you are. I also don't think that coming up with 30 minutes of extra footage is ever a sensible idea. If that's what you want to do then perhaps you need to really mix things up and come up with a whole new concept for the story.
What you should do
You're either a Disney nut or you're not. Personally, I would recommend staying at home and having a binge of old Disney classics, starting with the one true Genie.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Could I get Genie powers without the itty-bitty living space?
Once Upon Another Time
10.0
Rate It
Book
Storybook characters collide in this first book in a new trilogy of twisted fairy tales from New...
Holly Johnson recommended The Rise And Fall Of Ziggy Stardust And The Spiders From Mars by David Bowie in Music (curated)
Fairy Tale Catalog - Big Book of 555 Fairy Tales
Catalogs
App
The first fairy tale catalog, including 555 stories - nearly all fairy tales that have ever been...
Bubblesreview (110 KP) rated Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde in Books
Mar 25, 2019 (Updated Mar 25, 2019)
Pros:
â–ª Unique story
â–ª Short Story
â–ª Extra short story at the back
Cons:
â–ª Boring start
â–ª Constructed poorly
â–ª Not much to offer if you know the plot twist (who doesn't right?)
Ok so for as long as I can remember I've always known the basis of the story of Jekyll and Hyde, particularly when someone would have a mood swing another would note that they're acting like Jekyll and Hyde, for example.
However, I've never actually read the story.
A quick read it was, less than 100 pages, it's the shortest story I've read yet. Considering the amount of tv/film recreations of this story I was shocked to find its so short and it's really not very descriptive on terms of Mr Hydes character in particular, which is what the author was aiming for.
If you already know the twist in this story then the book won't really get you revved up, I found it very dry and bland. I can however imagine that back in the 1880s this book would've been an incredible read and very different and creative.
I'm not going to conclude by saying this book was awful because it's far from it, it does have good parts.
The last chapter in particular, Henry Jekylls full statement, was the best part of this book, it's the only part that kept me intrigued, it's just getting there that's the problem.
Aside from the boring background story of the lawyer and the will, the actual story of Jekyll and Hyde and the way Jekyll comes about finding Hyde is actually something of a mind blowing creation, and very original.
This particular print had an extra short story afterwards, the bottle and the imp, now this story I did find intriguing, it captivated me. I found it similar to Aladdin with a magic lamp, but in a much shorter story and a magic bottle and an imp instead of a lamp and genie.
â–ª Unique story
â–ª Short Story
â–ª Extra short story at the back
Cons:
â–ª Boring start
â–ª Constructed poorly
â–ª Not much to offer if you know the plot twist (who doesn't right?)
Ok so for as long as I can remember I've always known the basis of the story of Jekyll and Hyde, particularly when someone would have a mood swing another would note that they're acting like Jekyll and Hyde, for example.
However, I've never actually read the story.
A quick read it was, less than 100 pages, it's the shortest story I've read yet. Considering the amount of tv/film recreations of this story I was shocked to find its so short and it's really not very descriptive on terms of Mr Hydes character in particular, which is what the author was aiming for.
If you already know the twist in this story then the book won't really get you revved up, I found it very dry and bland. I can however imagine that back in the 1880s this book would've been an incredible read and very different and creative.
I'm not going to conclude by saying this book was awful because it's far from it, it does have good parts.
The last chapter in particular, Henry Jekylls full statement, was the best part of this book, it's the only part that kept me intrigued, it's just getting there that's the problem.
Aside from the boring background story of the lawyer and the will, the actual story of Jekyll and Hyde and the way Jekyll comes about finding Hyde is actually something of a mind blowing creation, and very original.
This particular print had an extra short story afterwards, the bottle and the imp, now this story I did find intriguing, it captivated me. I found it similar to Aladdin with a magic lamp, but in a much shorter story and a magic bottle and an imp instead of a lamp and genie.
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Mar 1, 2020
Listen. This might be controversial, but I LOVED this film. I remember when it first came out and I was unsure about whether or not I wanted to see it in theaters because critics were all over it and so upset - it seemed like a letdown.
So it finally came out on Disney+ and I have kind of been putting it off - along with the live-action Aladdin. I am so happy that I waited, but I really did love this film. The main comment I saw from critics was the lack of emotion or animation in the faces of the animals and truthfully I didn't mind it, nor was it something I was actively searching for. I thought that the lines were so powerfully delivered that the emotion was there, regardless.
The one downside of this film were some of the lines. I felt like they were unnecessary or just bad. Like when Simba confronts the hyenas and Scar attacks him and Nala says, "Lions, attack!" I just felt like that was bad. I feel like a roar would've done it or no line at all and just the action. That's the example that is most prominent in my head after finishing the film but I know I felt it in other spots too. The other downside, I felt, was this disconnect in chemistry between Donald Glover and Beyonce. It felt obvious - to me at least - that they recorded separately. I didn't feel like that love I know it's supposed to be.
I promise as much as I'm talking about things I didn't like, I really did love this film. Seth Rogan and Billy Eichner were the best throughout the whole film. They always made me laugh and when they started singing Be Our Guest? I died. I thought that was great.
I loved this cast. I love Jon Favreau as a creator. I love this story. I love Disney. I love this film. I don't think anyone will ever change my mind.
So it finally came out on Disney+ and I have kind of been putting it off - along with the live-action Aladdin. I am so happy that I waited, but I really did love this film. The main comment I saw from critics was the lack of emotion or animation in the faces of the animals and truthfully I didn't mind it, nor was it something I was actively searching for. I thought that the lines were so powerfully delivered that the emotion was there, regardless.
The one downside of this film were some of the lines. I felt like they were unnecessary or just bad. Like when Simba confronts the hyenas and Scar attacks him and Nala says, "Lions, attack!" I just felt like that was bad. I feel like a roar would've done it or no line at all and just the action. That's the example that is most prominent in my head after finishing the film but I know I felt it in other spots too. The other downside, I felt, was this disconnect in chemistry between Donald Glover and Beyonce. It felt obvious - to me at least - that they recorded separately. I didn't feel like that love I know it's supposed to be.
I promise as much as I'm talking about things I didn't like, I really did love this film. Seth Rogan and Billy Eichner were the best throughout the whole film. They always made me laugh and when they started singing Be Our Guest? I died. I thought that was great.
I loved this cast. I love Jon Favreau as a creator. I love this story. I love Disney. I love this film. I don't think anyone will ever change my mind.
The Disney Musical on Stage and Screen: Critical Approaches from 'Snow White' to 'Frozen'
Book
The Disney Musical: Critical Approaches on Stage and Screen is the first critical treatment of the...
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 21, 2019
Middle of the Road
I have to give the Walt Disney Company credit, with their Live Action remakes of their classic animated movies, they have developed a very lucrative profit stream with properties that they already own - and are well known to audiences. Some are successful (THE JUNGLE BOOK, ALADDIN), some are not quite so successful (DUMBO, ALICE IN WONDERLAND).
And...somewhere in the middle...is the LION KING.
Directed by Jon Favreau (THE JUNGLE BOOK, IRON MAN), this Lion King is a fairly faithful reproduction of the animated movie - and that is a blessing and a curse - and it, ultimately, keeps this remake squarely in the middle in terms of quality, interest and achievement.
What works: the CGI animation of the animals and scenery. Favreau shot CGI-fest films like THE JUNGLE BOOK and IRON MAN, so he knows how to do these things and they work here in a very workmanlike way. The are all professionally done - there's not a bad shot in the film. But the "wow" moments are few and far between in this film as well
The story is a timeless classic (kind of an "animal adventure Hamlet") and that works as do OME of the voice cast (more on that later)...and...of course...the songs - especially the faithful recreation of the CIRCLE OF LIFE opening - one of the best opening musical numbers in movie history.
What doesn't work: The first 1/2 of the film's pacing. It drags pretty badly early on and the songs in that part of the film (like I CAN'T WAIT TO BE KING) just don't have the energy and pizzazz that is needed. And SOME of the voice work is just plain bland and boring and (in one case) I found irritating.
So...let's talk about the voice cast. James Earl Jones (reprising Mufasa) is terrific (of course) as is John Oliver's Zazu (a much bigger presence in this film than the animated film), Chiwetel Ejiofor's Scar is appropriately menacing, if a bit bland, but "good enough" as is Beyonce's grown up Nala. I would have liked to see/feel a bit more of her "presence" in this character's voice, but that might be a Director choice and not an actress choice. John Kani's Rafiki is quite good as is the always steady/credible Alfre Woodward as Sarabi.
What doesn't work is the two voice actors cast to play Simba. Donald Glover (TV's ATLANTA) is just too bland and boring as the adult Simba. He doesn't really bring anything interesting to his voice work of this character (but does hold his own in the musical duet "Can You Feel The Love Tonight" opposite the great Beyonce).
I usually don't comment on child performances that I don't like (they are kids after all), so I won't really comment much on JD McCrary's voice performance as the young Simba except to say I didn't really how much MORE the young Simba is in this film as opposed to the older Simba - or at least it felt to me that the weakest voice performance in this film was on screen for far longer than I remembered from the animated film.
As for the best voice performances in this film - that is easy - Billy Eichner and Seth Rogan's performance as Simba's pals Timon and Pumbaa. They had big shoes to fill in comparison to the voice work in the animated film from Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella, so they did the smart thing - they didn't even try. Much like Will Smith not trying to imitate Robin Williams in the live action ALADDIN earlier this year (another voice performance that worked well) Eichner and Rogan make these characters their own and succeeded well - these two characters/performances are the high point in the film and bring much needed life and energy to a movie that was sagging under it's own weight by the time they show up.
This Lion King will be THE Lion King for this generation - and that is "fine" - if the youngsters in my life want to watch this, I won't complain. But... I will try to steer them towards the much better animated version of this film from the 1990's.
Letter Grade: a solid B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
And...somewhere in the middle...is the LION KING.
Directed by Jon Favreau (THE JUNGLE BOOK, IRON MAN), this Lion King is a fairly faithful reproduction of the animated movie - and that is a blessing and a curse - and it, ultimately, keeps this remake squarely in the middle in terms of quality, interest and achievement.
What works: the CGI animation of the animals and scenery. Favreau shot CGI-fest films like THE JUNGLE BOOK and IRON MAN, so he knows how to do these things and they work here in a very workmanlike way. The are all professionally done - there's not a bad shot in the film. But the "wow" moments are few and far between in this film as well
The story is a timeless classic (kind of an "animal adventure Hamlet") and that works as do OME of the voice cast (more on that later)...and...of course...the songs - especially the faithful recreation of the CIRCLE OF LIFE opening - one of the best opening musical numbers in movie history.
What doesn't work: The first 1/2 of the film's pacing. It drags pretty badly early on and the songs in that part of the film (like I CAN'T WAIT TO BE KING) just don't have the energy and pizzazz that is needed. And SOME of the voice work is just plain bland and boring and (in one case) I found irritating.
So...let's talk about the voice cast. James Earl Jones (reprising Mufasa) is terrific (of course) as is John Oliver's Zazu (a much bigger presence in this film than the animated film), Chiwetel Ejiofor's Scar is appropriately menacing, if a bit bland, but "good enough" as is Beyonce's grown up Nala. I would have liked to see/feel a bit more of her "presence" in this character's voice, but that might be a Director choice and not an actress choice. John Kani's Rafiki is quite good as is the always steady/credible Alfre Woodward as Sarabi.
What doesn't work is the two voice actors cast to play Simba. Donald Glover (TV's ATLANTA) is just too bland and boring as the adult Simba. He doesn't really bring anything interesting to his voice work of this character (but does hold his own in the musical duet "Can You Feel The Love Tonight" opposite the great Beyonce).
I usually don't comment on child performances that I don't like (they are kids after all), so I won't really comment much on JD McCrary's voice performance as the young Simba except to say I didn't really how much MORE the young Simba is in this film as opposed to the older Simba - or at least it felt to me that the weakest voice performance in this film was on screen for far longer than I remembered from the animated film.
As for the best voice performances in this film - that is easy - Billy Eichner and Seth Rogan's performance as Simba's pals Timon and Pumbaa. They had big shoes to fill in comparison to the voice work in the animated film from Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella, so they did the smart thing - they didn't even try. Much like Will Smith not trying to imitate Robin Williams in the live action ALADDIN earlier this year (another voice performance that worked well) Eichner and Rogan make these characters their own and succeeded well - these two characters/performances are the high point in the film and bring much needed life and energy to a movie that was sagging under it's own weight by the time they show up.
This Lion King will be THE Lion King for this generation - and that is "fine" - if the youngsters in my life want to watch this, I won't complain. But... I will try to steer them towards the much better animated version of this film from the 1990's.
Letter Grade: a solid B
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated Dragon By Midnight in Books
Aug 30, 2021
The concept of Dragon by Midnight immediately intrigued me: a Cinderella retelling where, at the stroke of midnight, Cinderella becomes a dragon and is hunted by Prince Charming? Yes please!
Karen Kincy had some bestseller-worthy ideas when it came to this book: I loved Sikandar's mysterious sorcerer vibe and dark past; the Jinni gave Arabian nights/Aladdin vibes and the plot twist of the curse was brilliant.
However, in my opinion, the major elements that made Dragon by Midnight great were just not developed enough and I was left with unanswered questions, in particular with Cinderella's story line.
Sikandar is bound to be everyone's favourite character and the description of him as a cinnamon roll hero is perfect. I would have liked him to keep his mystery for a bit longer and for the worthiness of his previous actions to be withheld instead of instantly revealed - it felt like he was a mysterious murderer one second and then an amazing hero the next . Although this was in keeping with the fast-paced nature of the story.
Similarly, the romance between Sikandar and Cinderella developed so quickly. She almost fell in love with him straight away! It was also very fluffy and cute: which is not a criticism! This is a YA book after all. However, sometimes Cinderella seemed too wrapped up in the cute boy and less concerned about ... well, being a dragon!
Prince Benedict Charming was brilliant in his arrogance and cringe worthiness. I did expect a bit more action and dragon-hunting from him though and his attitude towards Cinderella when she returned to the castle as a girl was very odd. I truly couldn't tell if he was so self-absorbed he didn't care what had happened, or if he was plotting something.
Overall I did enjoy Dragon by Midnight and read it within a day. It is a very cute, fast-paced fairytale with some genius ideas. The overly descriptive language and lack of character development would push it closer to the middle-grade side of YA for me but I enjoyed the story and will possibly pick up the sequel if I see it.
I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.
Karen Kincy had some bestseller-worthy ideas when it came to this book: I loved Sikandar's mysterious sorcerer vibe and dark past; the Jinni gave Arabian nights/Aladdin vibes and the plot twist of the curse was brilliant.
However, in my opinion, the major elements that made Dragon by Midnight great were just not developed enough and I was left with unanswered questions, in particular with Cinderella's story line.
Sikandar is bound to be everyone's favourite character and the description of him as a cinnamon roll hero is perfect. I would have liked him to keep his mystery for a bit longer and for the worthiness of his previous actions to be withheld instead of instantly revealed - it felt like he was a mysterious murderer one second and then an amazing hero the next . Although this was in keeping with the fast-paced nature of the story.
Similarly, the romance between Sikandar and Cinderella developed so quickly. She almost fell in love with him straight away! It was also very fluffy and cute: which is not a criticism! This is a YA book after all. However, sometimes Cinderella seemed too wrapped up in the cute boy and less concerned about ... well, being a dragon!
Prince Benedict Charming was brilliant in his arrogance and cringe worthiness. I did expect a bit more action and dragon-hunting from him though and his attitude towards Cinderella when she returned to the castle as a girl was very odd. I truly couldn't tell if he was so self-absorbed he didn't care what had happened, or if he was plotting something.
Overall I did enjoy Dragon by Midnight and read it within a day. It is a very cute, fast-paced fairytale with some genius ideas. The overly descriptive language and lack of character development would push it closer to the middle-grade side of YA for me but I enjoyed the story and will possibly pick up the sequel if I see it.
I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.