Search
Sim 299 (I Am Sleepless #1)
9.0
Rate It
Book
The planet Ethos is at war with a savage enemy known as the Splicers. Their only successful defense...
Young Adult Science Fiction Dystopian Mystery
Ross (3284 KP) rated Perfect Death in Books
Sep 28, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
I have debated with myself over a rating for this, the third in the "DI Luc Callanach" series of Edinburgh police procedurals. While the overall story is definitely a 4 star, verging on 5, certain aspects of the dialogue in this one were a little jarring at times, and the plot hinged on a couple of very out of character decisions on the part of the murderer.
As with the previous two books, we join the story at the start of two independent investigations, which inevitably expand and take up the whole team's efforts (it's almost as if there was no crime in the city before these came along as no other cases seem to be mentioned or worked on!). We have the apparent death by misadventure of a young girl on the hills around Arthur's Seat, and the apparent suicide of former DCI Begbie.
Both cases are interesting and very different, the former being a more typical murder investigation, the latter being more focused on police corruption and the Glasgow gangland (I do enjoy the fact that any nasty gangsters in these Edinburgh-based stories have to be based in Glasgow, almost like they are sponsored by the Edinburgh tourist board, or someone with an anti-East Coast agenda).
While the murder investigation is decent, a number of clangers really spoiled it for me. We have a young man who appears to be poisoning people after having ingratiated themselves into their lives and the lives of their loved ones under different false names. However, as is so often the case in these stories, the killer is made too clever to be caught (at least too clever to be caught in under 300 pages!), and so the slightest mistake or piece of luck is what the investigation hinges on. Here it transpires that, while the killer has used false names in every interaction, in one of them he seems to have for some reason used the name of someone who leads the police directly to his backstory and hence uncovering his real identity. This piece of Batman vs Superman ("Your Mom was called Martha?!") level plot pivot was just so jarring and so out of character for this supposedly clever murderer. And yet without it there was pretty much no way of the murderer being found. For a secret poisoner to then start waving a gun around was also a bit hard to accept.
And also, all characters seem to be very well spoken. We have a young man who grew up in care homes from the age of 5, a Glasgow gangster and his henchmen and numerous bad sorts along the way and all are very well spoken, to the point that none of them have a voice and are just ... there. And, of course everyone refers to the police in the same way as the police refer to themselves - I cannot imagine anyone referring to a policeman as "DI something" or ""your DCI said this". It just totally jars and again comes across as the author simply inserting their voice into the mouths of characters that they could not be bothered to properly consider.
This brings me on to the dialogue gripe. I have always struggled to accept the formality in the way fictional detectives speak to members of the public. I get that interviews etc have to be carried out in a certain way, but at one point DCI Turner is speaking to a 17 year old boy about the death of his mother and she says "I cannot leave someone who might be a danger to themselves without establishing first-hand contact". This just struck me as the author inserting a piece of research into dialogue rather than considering how that point would be addressed in a human conversation. Similarly, at one point a DC refers to one of the victims as "she" and Callanach snapped at her "We use victims' names not pronouns", which just struck me as an odd thing to say, and at several times throughout the book he himself refers to victims with pronouns.
And finally, while there was never a great deal of swearing in the first two books, it was believable swearing. Here we have the occasional use of "frigging" instead of the other "f" word, which I cannot think I have ever heard a Scottish person say, unless singing along to the Sex Pistols sea shanty.
Overall, I give this book 4 stars for the plot, 3 stars for the writing, then averaged out and rounded down for the annoying little things.
A definite step down from the second book, and a more slapdash feel to it.
As with the previous two books, we join the story at the start of two independent investigations, which inevitably expand and take up the whole team's efforts (it's almost as if there was no crime in the city before these came along as no other cases seem to be mentioned or worked on!). We have the apparent death by misadventure of a young girl on the hills around Arthur's Seat, and the apparent suicide of former DCI Begbie.
Both cases are interesting and very different, the former being a more typical murder investigation, the latter being more focused on police corruption and the Glasgow gangland (I do enjoy the fact that any nasty gangsters in these Edinburgh-based stories have to be based in Glasgow, almost like they are sponsored by the Edinburgh tourist board, or someone with an anti-East Coast agenda).
While the murder investigation is decent, a number of clangers really spoiled it for me. We have a young man who appears to be poisoning people after having ingratiated themselves into their lives and the lives of their loved ones under different false names. However, as is so often the case in these stories, the killer is made too clever to be caught (at least too clever to be caught in under 300 pages!), and so the slightest mistake or piece of luck is what the investigation hinges on. Here it transpires that, while the killer has used false names in every interaction, in one of them he seems to have for some reason used the name of someone who leads the police directly to his backstory and hence uncovering his real identity. This piece of Batman vs Superman ("Your Mom was called Martha?!") level plot pivot was just so jarring and so out of character for this supposedly clever murderer. And yet without it there was pretty much no way of the murderer being found. For a secret poisoner to then start waving a gun around was also a bit hard to accept.
And also, all characters seem to be very well spoken. We have a young man who grew up in care homes from the age of 5, a Glasgow gangster and his henchmen and numerous bad sorts along the way and all are very well spoken, to the point that none of them have a voice and are just ... there. And, of course everyone refers to the police in the same way as the police refer to themselves - I cannot imagine anyone referring to a policeman as "DI something" or ""your DCI said this". It just totally jars and again comes across as the author simply inserting their voice into the mouths of characters that they could not be bothered to properly consider.
This brings me on to the dialogue gripe. I have always struggled to accept the formality in the way fictional detectives speak to members of the public. I get that interviews etc have to be carried out in a certain way, but at one point DCI Turner is speaking to a 17 year old boy about the death of his mother and she says "I cannot leave someone who might be a danger to themselves without establishing first-hand contact". This just struck me as the author inserting a piece of research into dialogue rather than considering how that point would be addressed in a human conversation. Similarly, at one point a DC refers to one of the victims as "she" and Callanach snapped at her "We use victims' names not pronouns", which just struck me as an odd thing to say, and at several times throughout the book he himself refers to victims with pronouns.
And finally, while there was never a great deal of swearing in the first two books, it was believable swearing. Here we have the occasional use of "frigging" instead of the other "f" word, which I cannot think I have ever heard a Scottish person say, unless singing along to the Sex Pistols sea shanty.
Overall, I give this book 4 stars for the plot, 3 stars for the writing, then averaged out and rounded down for the annoying little things.
A definite step down from the second book, and a more slapdash feel to it.
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Precious Blood (The Blessed, #1) in Books
Nov 3, 2018
Not for everyone, but I enjoyed it
What I liked about this book is it was able to draw you in slowly to the plot and it unfolds gradually by introducing you to the main characters and their backgrounds. You can’t help but keep reading to see what will happen next. Your curiosity is piqued and it’s worth reading through. There is a chapter here and there that lets you think ‘Gee what the heck am I reading here’ but it makes up for it wholeheartedly towards the ending of the book.
The plot and the pace is slow but steady. You’re taken through each girl’s perspective and when they finally come together, if you can bypass the pettiness and mean girl attitude (some parts were quite fun to read, the comebacks are something to be filed away for future use should need arise) they actually do make a solid team. Each girl has their own story and their own pain to deal with. Of the three, I’d taken a liking to Cecilia. She’s a tough one and although all three have gone through a substantial amount of pain, Cecilia seems to be the most likable and the most independent (plus she’s a Rocker girl. Who doesn’t think Rocker Girls are cool?)
As the story unfolds, it gets chaotic towards the last third of the novel. Pretty good action - brutal at times so might not be for the faint of heart, and of course it leaves room for more things to come (two books follow after this one). Understandably this book might not be for everyone. Gratuitous swearing, references to Catholicism which may be offensive to some, some serious what the F chapters that make you wonder what kind of shrooms they’re on, and references to rape are mentioned in the book.
So while it may not be for everyone, I was surprised that I enjoyed reading this one so much. Although it took awhile for the book to gain momentum and this thing with Sebastian being a somewhat Charles Manson wannabe without the murders is a bit tedious, it was actually pretty good. However it comes across as a book that either you’ll really like, or you’ll really hate. So, when in doubt, just take it out of the library and save your money for other things.
The plot and the pace is slow but steady. You’re taken through each girl’s perspective and when they finally come together, if you can bypass the pettiness and mean girl attitude (some parts were quite fun to read, the comebacks are something to be filed away for future use should need arise) they actually do make a solid team. Each girl has their own story and their own pain to deal with. Of the three, I’d taken a liking to Cecilia. She’s a tough one and although all three have gone through a substantial amount of pain, Cecilia seems to be the most likable and the most independent (plus she’s a Rocker girl. Who doesn’t think Rocker Girls are cool?)
As the story unfolds, it gets chaotic towards the last third of the novel. Pretty good action - brutal at times so might not be for the faint of heart, and of course it leaves room for more things to come (two books follow after this one). Understandably this book might not be for everyone. Gratuitous swearing, references to Catholicism which may be offensive to some, some serious what the F chapters that make you wonder what kind of shrooms they’re on, and references to rape are mentioned in the book.
So while it may not be for everyone, I was surprised that I enjoyed reading this one so much. Although it took awhile for the book to gain momentum and this thing with Sebastian being a somewhat Charles Manson wannabe without the murders is a bit tedious, it was actually pretty good. However it comes across as a book that either you’ll really like, or you’ll really hate. So, when in doubt, just take it out of the library and save your money for other things.
Debbiereadsbook (1197 KP) rated Tutus and Tinsel (Half Moon Bay 2.5) in Books
Dec 21, 2018
wonderful catch up!
I was lucky enough to win an ARC copy of this book.
This is a little catch up, if you will, with the Harris-Reid family, and you really SHOULD at least read Fish Stick Fridays before this one. Hanging the Stars ain't too shabby either, but this is more about Zig and her dads.
Zig is eleven, and blindsided by a school project. Her dads go about rallying around and making the project a little less painful for her.
I'm not usually one for Holiday/Christmas stories, but I loved Zig, and Deacon and Lang, so really had to catch up with them! And I LOVED this! It packs quite an emotional punch for some 90 odd pages!
Zig has to do a project on Christmas traditions on her family. But she doesn't have any, not really. So Deacon and Lang go all out about making NEW traditions: using some from Lang's grandmother, some from their friends and making some up as they go along.
They do cracker house decorations, the chopping of trees down. Trees in each and every room. Making salt dough ornaments. Lots of different things, from a whole host of backgrounds, and choosing which ones to make their own.
I loved that we caught up with Deke and Lang, but also with West, Angel and Rome. Loved the plans the adults have for the kids should something happen to either set of parents.
But Zig, again, made this book! Set 3 years after Fish Stick Fridays, and she still has her eclectic taste in tutus and boots, and it's so great she hasn't lost her swear jar! Indeed, opening line in the book is Zig swearing her little head off and realising that Deke can hear her! Loved it!
And even though Zig was sick, and not actually able to do her presentation at school, loved that she WAS able to still show her dads what did. I cried at that point! Because even though it was about making NEW traditions, Zig still draws on her painful past and how important it is to remember where you came from, and that past is a part of you, always. And new families need new traditions.
5 full and sparkly stars!
ps, we ALWAYS have take out Christmas Eve!
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
This is a little catch up, if you will, with the Harris-Reid family, and you really SHOULD at least read Fish Stick Fridays before this one. Hanging the Stars ain't too shabby either, but this is more about Zig and her dads.
Zig is eleven, and blindsided by a school project. Her dads go about rallying around and making the project a little less painful for her.
I'm not usually one for Holiday/Christmas stories, but I loved Zig, and Deacon and Lang, so really had to catch up with them! And I LOVED this! It packs quite an emotional punch for some 90 odd pages!
Zig has to do a project on Christmas traditions on her family. But she doesn't have any, not really. So Deacon and Lang go all out about making NEW traditions: using some from Lang's grandmother, some from their friends and making some up as they go along.
They do cracker house decorations, the chopping of trees down. Trees in each and every room. Making salt dough ornaments. Lots of different things, from a whole host of backgrounds, and choosing which ones to make their own.
I loved that we caught up with Deke and Lang, but also with West, Angel and Rome. Loved the plans the adults have for the kids should something happen to either set of parents.
But Zig, again, made this book! Set 3 years after Fish Stick Fridays, and she still has her eclectic taste in tutus and boots, and it's so great she hasn't lost her swear jar! Indeed, opening line in the book is Zig swearing her little head off and realising that Deke can hear her! Loved it!
And even though Zig was sick, and not actually able to do her presentation at school, loved that she WAS able to still show her dads what did. I cried at that point! Because even though it was about making NEW traditions, Zig still draws on her painful past and how important it is to remember where you came from, and that past is a part of you, always. And new families need new traditions.
5 full and sparkly stars!
ps, we ALWAYS have take out Christmas Eve!
**same worded review will appear elsewhere**
Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Terminator: Dark Fate (2019) in Movies
Oct 23, 2019 (Updated Oct 23, 2019)
Dull Fate
Terminator Dark Fate only isnt the worst film in the Terminator franschise but only because Genisys exists. Dark Fate is basically a reskin of Terminator 2 but minus everything that made that movie one of the greatest films of all time. Dark Fates main problem is its just dull and after the opening nothing intresting, unique, creative or thrilling happenes leaving the movie with almost no redeeming features and nothing that sets it apart from the other terrible sequels. Dark Fate seems to think pure nostalgia alone will make an entertaining movie and while it certainly can do Dark Fate doesnt understand how nostalgia works even coming across like its mocking the very film it ows its existance too. Plot wise its increadibly generic/unintresting, characters are one dimentional/unlikable, acting is stale and lacks drama, dialog is painful and every interaction only serves as exposition explaining every single part of the very basic plot repeatedly just so even the most brain dead of viewer understands whats happened or what is about to happen. Worst of all it doesnt feel like a Terminator film, wheres the grit, the dark atmosphere, the horror, the tension, the realistic humour, the high stakes, the menacing and relentlessly intimidating bad guy, the memorable action set pieces, the complicated story, character depth, quotable dialog and most importantly the soul because this movie has none. Linda Hamilton is back but shes wasted and doesnt even feel like the same person with the film thinking what made her such an iconic character was just her gratuitios swearing. Arnie is great but feels pushed to the side serving to be nothing more than a joke/nostalgia piece. Cgi is bad/texturless and animation is cheap looking, infact there are some cgi moments so bad its almost like they didnt have time to finish them off. Action has a few ok sequences but they lack tension, weight and a high stake plot to fully find them exciting. If you are a Terminator fan to save dissapointment I would just forget everything after T2 exists because this just like the others is souless hollow mess. An utter shambles of a film, I wish I could send myself back to stop the past me from seeing it.
Kelly (279 KP) rated Spartacus - Season 1 in TV
Dec 21, 2018
Gladiators (1 more)
Great fighting scenes
Much better than the 1960 film
Who would have thought that the story of Spartacus could have been made raunchy for a modern audience, but Starz did this really well. The general facts around the slave rebellion against the Romans, led by the former gladiator Spartacus are limited, however Starz used what information there was and filled in the rest to create a believable version of the tale.
I know that around the release of the series, there was a lot of talk about the use of CGI in the show, mainly during the battle scenes, with the appearance of animated blood splatters/slashes, similar to that shown in the film 300. This use seemed to have divided the audience into either ‘love it’ or ‘hate it’. Personally, I feel that this was the unique selling point of the show- something different that we are not used to on the TV screen, I felt it helped made the show more watchable.
For me Andy Whitfield made Spartacus (and his loss was noticed in the later series of the show). His love towards wife Sura is clear throughout series one, and gave us a believable reason as to why he allowed himself to be manipulated by Batiatus. He was also supported by a number of well cast actors including Manu Bennett (Crixus) and Peter Mensah (Oenomaus), by the end of the series, we find that we really care about these characters.
The reason that I have not rated the show higher, is the casting of John Hannah as Batiatus. John Hannah is a good actor, but I felt the role was not suited to him. To me, Batiatus needed to be a little crueler and more angry, at the end of the day, he was profit and power hungry, and willing to give the lives of men in order to pay the cost of his personal success. There were times, when I did not believe that this was what John Hannah was portrayed, and there was an awkwardness around some of his scenes (particularly those where there were a lot of swearing).
Overall, despite the odd flaw, I really enjoyed watching Spartacus (and have happily purchased the complete box set for re-watching in future) .
I know that around the release of the series, there was a lot of talk about the use of CGI in the show, mainly during the battle scenes, with the appearance of animated blood splatters/slashes, similar to that shown in the film 300. This use seemed to have divided the audience into either ‘love it’ or ‘hate it’. Personally, I feel that this was the unique selling point of the show- something different that we are not used to on the TV screen, I felt it helped made the show more watchable.
For me Andy Whitfield made Spartacus (and his loss was noticed in the later series of the show). His love towards wife Sura is clear throughout series one, and gave us a believable reason as to why he allowed himself to be manipulated by Batiatus. He was also supported by a number of well cast actors including Manu Bennett (Crixus) and Peter Mensah (Oenomaus), by the end of the series, we find that we really care about these characters.
The reason that I have not rated the show higher, is the casting of John Hannah as Batiatus. John Hannah is a good actor, but I felt the role was not suited to him. To me, Batiatus needed to be a little crueler and more angry, at the end of the day, he was profit and power hungry, and willing to give the lives of men in order to pay the cost of his personal success. There were times, when I did not believe that this was what John Hannah was portrayed, and there was an awkwardness around some of his scenes (particularly those where there were a lot of swearing).
Overall, despite the odd flaw, I really enjoyed watching Spartacus (and have happily purchased the complete box set for re-watching in future) .
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Gentlemen (2020) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021
It’s been a while since Guy Ritchie dealt with some proper geezers doing crime and talking bollocks. Maybe there were elements of it in The Man From U.N.C.L.E. but really it’s Rock ‘n Rolla from 2008 we are talking about. Personally I hadn’t missed it. I pretty much think he took it as far as it needed to be taken, and I much prefer the Sherlock Holmes stuff, anyway.
Judging from the inexplicably high rating (currently 7.8) for this on IMDb somehow someone had missed it big time though! Or is it just easy for those in search of a nutter with a gun and a swear word or six to click 9/10? I don’t want to speculate. Suffice to say The Gentlemen is not very good. Not awful. Colin Farrell wins by having a lot of fun hamming up a bonkers creation of a man (as he does so expertly and effortlessly), and Hugh Grant comes out of it with credit too, for at least looking engaged and having some of the best lines to deliver.
As for Matthew McConnaughey, who is surely to be considered top billing, I can’t honestly remember a thing about his role in this forgettable fable some 9 weeks after seeing it. Literally, can’t recall anything he does in it to mind. Bad sign. And Charlie Hunnam doesn’t fare much better, but that’s probably because he isn’t that good or memorable in anything in the first place. There are a couple of women in this as well, but they really don’t make a difference to anything, and no one cares (sadly).
We’ve seen the whole thing before, I’m afraid, and even first time the style wasn’t for everyone and felt a bit “wrong” to a 21st century sensibility. It really is just guns and violence and swearing in ever decreasing creativity. I liked some of the costumes though.
No one involved’s best work, by a long way. A distracting way to kill a few hours if you are completely stuck for ideas, but little more than that. In a year or two no one will remember or talk about it at all. May that be a lesson to you Mr Ritchie. Leave outdated indulgences, even with your pals, in the past where they belong.
Judging from the inexplicably high rating (currently 7.8) for this on IMDb somehow someone had missed it big time though! Or is it just easy for those in search of a nutter with a gun and a swear word or six to click 9/10? I don’t want to speculate. Suffice to say The Gentlemen is not very good. Not awful. Colin Farrell wins by having a lot of fun hamming up a bonkers creation of a man (as he does so expertly and effortlessly), and Hugh Grant comes out of it with credit too, for at least looking engaged and having some of the best lines to deliver.
As for Matthew McConnaughey, who is surely to be considered top billing, I can’t honestly remember a thing about his role in this forgettable fable some 9 weeks after seeing it. Literally, can’t recall anything he does in it to mind. Bad sign. And Charlie Hunnam doesn’t fare much better, but that’s probably because he isn’t that good or memorable in anything in the first place. There are a couple of women in this as well, but they really don’t make a difference to anything, and no one cares (sadly).
We’ve seen the whole thing before, I’m afraid, and even first time the style wasn’t for everyone and felt a bit “wrong” to a 21st century sensibility. It really is just guns and violence and swearing in ever decreasing creativity. I liked some of the costumes though.
No one involved’s best work, by a long way. A distracting way to kill a few hours if you are completely stuck for ideas, but little more than that. In a year or two no one will remember or talk about it at all. May that be a lesson to you Mr Ritchie. Leave outdated indulgences, even with your pals, in the past where they belong.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated When Patty Went Away in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href=http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>.
The blurb intrigued me a lot. This was a book I really wanted to read. However, I was a bit disappointed when I finally got a chance to read it.
The title definitely fits the book for at least the second half. (I'll go into more detail about that later). The title reminds me of someone who checks out of reality though.
I like the serene look of the cover. I don't really know how it ties into the book though. The cover made me think more of a holiday romance type.
I can't really fault the world building. I thought it was done rather well and very believable. From a historic viewpoint, the facts and events were all correct. It was interesting that Ms. Burt chose to narrate through the point of view of a man. She did a great job of making it work though. There was one or two times I felt a bit confused, but I put it down to just a personal thing like maybe I wasn't paying as much attention as I should've been. The only thing that bothered me was when the narrator of the book would suddenly start talking about a memory. It was too sudden, and I didn't know if it was happening in present time or if it was indeed a memory. I felt as if a memory could've had a better introduction so the audience was aware that it happened at another time in the book.
I felt that the pacing was too slow for about the first two-thirds of the book. It seemed to drone on and on about a topic I wasn't that interested in (farming). I realize that Ms. Burt was setting up a back story, but there was too much focus on the whole farming aspect of the book and not about Patty disappearing as the title and the blurb would suggest. Once the main character goes to Montreal, the pacing picks up decently, and it becomes a book that I had a hard time putting down.
The whole story line was a bit weak, I felt. First off, it reads like two books. The first two-thirds of the book is about a family who has lost their farm due to a bad storm. The reader then takes a journey into finding out how this family struggles to survive without their means of income. I found it a bit tedious because I don't really care about farming, and this book used a lot of farming terminology. The last third of the book is when Jack goes to Montreal to look for Patty. This explores the seedy side of Montreal (which could be just about anywhere) and prostitution involving runaways. I thought the story line was strong during this bit.
I felt that Jack was a well developed character and very likable. It was easy to feel what he was feeling and to feel sorry for him with all that he was going through. Molly is a strict God fearing woman. However, I felt that there was too much focus on her being overweight which was uncalled for. I didn't really like how Christianity was portrayed when it came to Molly. I'm sure there are people in the world like her, but there were times when I just felt a bit offended. I would've loved to know more about Patty and Edie as individuals. I just felt like they didn't get enough time throughout the book, Patty especially. I found it a bit hard to care about Edie and Patty especially as I felt like I didn't have enough information on them to care.
The dialogue fit this book very well. However, I think a lot of people will struggle with the farming terminology and have a hard time relating to the whole farm scenario. As I've said before, this book reads like two books in one. To further prove my point, even the dialogue is different. During the whole family losing their farm scenario, the language isn't vulgar nor is there any swearing (that I could remember). Once Jack gets to Montreal, the language turns a bit vulgar, and there is some swearing.
Overall, When Patty Went Away is just an alright read. The plot could've been better and the merging of ideas could've been smoother. Saying that, the main character is very likable and the world building was good.
I'd recommend this book to those 18+ who know something about farming or those who want a book that will last awhile.
<b>I'd give When Patty Went Away by Jeannie Burt a 2.5 out of 5.</b>
(I received a free paperback of this book from LibraryThing for free in exchange for a fair and honest review).
The blurb intrigued me a lot. This was a book I really wanted to read. However, I was a bit disappointed when I finally got a chance to read it.
The title definitely fits the book for at least the second half. (I'll go into more detail about that later). The title reminds me of someone who checks out of reality though.
I like the serene look of the cover. I don't really know how it ties into the book though. The cover made me think more of a holiday romance type.
I can't really fault the world building. I thought it was done rather well and very believable. From a historic viewpoint, the facts and events were all correct. It was interesting that Ms. Burt chose to narrate through the point of view of a man. She did a great job of making it work though. There was one or two times I felt a bit confused, but I put it down to just a personal thing like maybe I wasn't paying as much attention as I should've been. The only thing that bothered me was when the narrator of the book would suddenly start talking about a memory. It was too sudden, and I didn't know if it was happening in present time or if it was indeed a memory. I felt as if a memory could've had a better introduction so the audience was aware that it happened at another time in the book.
I felt that the pacing was too slow for about the first two-thirds of the book. It seemed to drone on and on about a topic I wasn't that interested in (farming). I realize that Ms. Burt was setting up a back story, but there was too much focus on the whole farming aspect of the book and not about Patty disappearing as the title and the blurb would suggest. Once the main character goes to Montreal, the pacing picks up decently, and it becomes a book that I had a hard time putting down.
The whole story line was a bit weak, I felt. First off, it reads like two books. The first two-thirds of the book is about a family who has lost their farm due to a bad storm. The reader then takes a journey into finding out how this family struggles to survive without their means of income. I found it a bit tedious because I don't really care about farming, and this book used a lot of farming terminology. The last third of the book is when Jack goes to Montreal to look for Patty. This explores the seedy side of Montreal (which could be just about anywhere) and prostitution involving runaways. I thought the story line was strong during this bit.
I felt that Jack was a well developed character and very likable. It was easy to feel what he was feeling and to feel sorry for him with all that he was going through. Molly is a strict God fearing woman. However, I felt that there was too much focus on her being overweight which was uncalled for. I didn't really like how Christianity was portrayed when it came to Molly. I'm sure there are people in the world like her, but there were times when I just felt a bit offended. I would've loved to know more about Patty and Edie as individuals. I just felt like they didn't get enough time throughout the book, Patty especially. I found it a bit hard to care about Edie and Patty especially as I felt like I didn't have enough information on them to care.
The dialogue fit this book very well. However, I think a lot of people will struggle with the farming terminology and have a hard time relating to the whole farm scenario. As I've said before, this book reads like two books in one. To further prove my point, even the dialogue is different. During the whole family losing their farm scenario, the language isn't vulgar nor is there any swearing (that I could remember). Once Jack gets to Montreal, the language turns a bit vulgar, and there is some swearing.
Overall, When Patty Went Away is just an alright read. The plot could've been better and the merging of ideas could've been smoother. Saying that, the main character is very likable and the world building was good.
I'd recommend this book to those 18+ who know something about farming or those who want a book that will last awhile.
<b>I'd give When Patty Went Away by Jeannie Burt a 2.5 out of 5.</b>
(I received a free paperback of this book from LibraryThing for free in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Shattered in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
I'm a huge fan of horror books, so when Shattered by C.S. Kane was offered for review, I knew it was a book I had to read! However, I was really disappointed with this book.
I don't think the title suits the book at all. I don't really understand what is being shattered unless it's talking about Stacey's sanity.
The cover is alright. It is a scene from the book. It took me awhile to realize that the red thing on the cover was a heart pinned to the wall.
I didn't really have any problems with the world building except that it didn't come across as a creepy world. Not once was I the slightest bit scared or creeped out.
I felt the pacing of this book was slow. If it had been a longer book, I probably would've added it to my DNF (did not finish) shelf. It took forever, or so I thought, before the action really started, and when it did, it felt like it wasn't much.
The plot idea itself was a good one but sadly fell flat with poor execution. I would've liked this story to involve more of a haunting with more goings on. This story was poorly lacking I believe.
I found all the characters to be a bit dull and on dimensional. I couldn't connect with Stacey on any level, and I found myself not really caring what happened to her. There's a few other characters that are minor but I felt that they are also just sub par.
The dialogue doesn't feel disjointed or awkward in this novel, so it does have that going for it. The character interactions also flow well. There may be a slight amount of swearing in this book. (To be honest, I was a bit bored with this book, so I just wanted to get to the end). There is some blood and gore as well.
Overall, the idea for Shattered was a good one but was just poorly executed. Personally, I found it to be a bit dull and lacking depth. However, there are some good reviews for this book, so I encourage you to form your own opinion.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone.
I'd give Shattered by C.S. Kane a 1.75 out of 5.
(I received a free ecopy of this title from the publisher in exchange for a fair and honest review).
I'm a huge fan of horror books, so when Shattered by C.S. Kane was offered for review, I knew it was a book I had to read! However, I was really disappointed with this book.
I don't think the title suits the book at all. I don't really understand what is being shattered unless it's talking about Stacey's sanity.
The cover is alright. It is a scene from the book. It took me awhile to realize that the red thing on the cover was a heart pinned to the wall.
I didn't really have any problems with the world building except that it didn't come across as a creepy world. Not once was I the slightest bit scared or creeped out.
I felt the pacing of this book was slow. If it had been a longer book, I probably would've added it to my DNF (did not finish) shelf. It took forever, or so I thought, before the action really started, and when it did, it felt like it wasn't much.
The plot idea itself was a good one but sadly fell flat with poor execution. I would've liked this story to involve more of a haunting with more goings on. This story was poorly lacking I believe.
I found all the characters to be a bit dull and on dimensional. I couldn't connect with Stacey on any level, and I found myself not really caring what happened to her. There's a few other characters that are minor but I felt that they are also just sub par.
The dialogue doesn't feel disjointed or awkward in this novel, so it does have that going for it. The character interactions also flow well. There may be a slight amount of swearing in this book. (To be honest, I was a bit bored with this book, so I just wanted to get to the end). There is some blood and gore as well.
Overall, the idea for Shattered was a good one but was just poorly executed. Personally, I found it to be a bit dull and lacking depth. However, there are some good reviews for this book, so I encourage you to form your own opinion.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone.
I'd give Shattered by C.S. Kane a 1.75 out of 5.
(I received a free ecopy of this title from the publisher in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Creepy and Maud in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can also be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
I wanted to love this book, I really did. The blurb made me think of Rainbow Rowell's Eleanor & Park. However, this book just fell a bit flat for me.
The title did catch my attention especially since it had the word Creepy in it.
I like the cover of the book. It's just so simple, yet interesting. I think it definitely fits in with the book since the two characters converse from their bedroom windows.
The world building was believable. Most of the story takes place within the confines of Creepy's window and sometimes from Maud's window. It's a very believable setting.
The pacing was really slow. I kept hoping it would pick up at some point, but it never did. At no point, did it pick up even a little bit.
I think the plot had the potential to be interesting. Creepy watches Maud from his bedroom window. Eventually, Maud notices, and they start writing notes to each other and put them in their bedroom window. Maud has a disorder where she pulls out the hair on her body. Creepy is just a strange teen. I just felt that their was no plot development. I kept waiting for some action or plot twist to happen, but nothing did. It's just two teens conversing from their windows.
I liked Maud and Creepy. They have their problems, but they are still likable enough. However, I felt there was no character development either. It would've been nice to have a bit more back story on both characters. All we're told is that Maud and Creepy's families hate each other. It is explained a little bit as to why at least.
Some of the wording is Australian phrasing which I had a hard time understanding. However, it only happens now and again, so the book is easy to understand for other cultures. There is some swearing, but nothing too bad. There is a little bit of violence but no sex or sexual references.
Overall, Creepy & Maud by Dianne Touchell just falls flat from lack of character and plot development. The writing itself wasn't bad though.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this book unless it has some tweaking when it comes to the characters and the plot.
(I won this book from a competition. I was not required to write a review).
I wanted to love this book, I really did. The blurb made me think of Rainbow Rowell's Eleanor & Park. However, this book just fell a bit flat for me.
The title did catch my attention especially since it had the word Creepy in it.
I like the cover of the book. It's just so simple, yet interesting. I think it definitely fits in with the book since the two characters converse from their bedroom windows.
The world building was believable. Most of the story takes place within the confines of Creepy's window and sometimes from Maud's window. It's a very believable setting.
The pacing was really slow. I kept hoping it would pick up at some point, but it never did. At no point, did it pick up even a little bit.
I think the plot had the potential to be interesting. Creepy watches Maud from his bedroom window. Eventually, Maud notices, and they start writing notes to each other and put them in their bedroom window. Maud has a disorder where she pulls out the hair on her body. Creepy is just a strange teen. I just felt that their was no plot development. I kept waiting for some action or plot twist to happen, but nothing did. It's just two teens conversing from their windows.
I liked Maud and Creepy. They have their problems, but they are still likable enough. However, I felt there was no character development either. It would've been nice to have a bit more back story on both characters. All we're told is that Maud and Creepy's families hate each other. It is explained a little bit as to why at least.
Some of the wording is Australian phrasing which I had a hard time understanding. However, it only happens now and again, so the book is easy to understand for other cultures. There is some swearing, but nothing too bad. There is a little bit of violence but no sex or sexual references.
Overall, Creepy & Maud by Dianne Touchell just falls flat from lack of character and plot development. The writing itself wasn't bad though.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend this book unless it has some tweaking when it comes to the characters and the plot.
(I won this book from a competition. I was not required to write a review).