Movie review: The Life of David Gale by Alan Parker

Directed by Alan Parker
Release date: 2003
Screenplay: Charles Randolph
Cast: Kevin Spacey, Kate Winslet, Laura Linney, Gabriel Mann, Matt Craven, Rhona Mitra

The Life of David Gale (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Summary:

"The Life of David Gale" tells the story of a professor of philosophy and a famous opponent of capital punishment who, in what he must find an absurdly ironic development, finds himself on death row in Texas, charged with the rape and murder of Constance Harraway (Laura Linney), a woman who was not only his fellow activist but also one of his few real friends. The whole plot revolves about David’s brilliant academic career and his swift, steep fall, right into the arms of degrading unemployment, alcoholism and despair, with a divorce and even more painful estrangement from his little son as seasoning.

While in prison, David Gale, understandably a very bitter man who's lost literally everything, decides to tell his version of events and to protest his innocence to a reporter named Bitsey Bloom (Kate Winslet), summoned especially to Texas. They are given a limited amount of time, two hours every day in a short, 72-hour period right before the impending execution. Very soon – apparently during the first session- Bitsey becomes more or less convinced of David's innocence. She is joined in her investigation by her eager intern Zack (Gabriel Mann), and they become aware that: a) Gale’s attorney is a shifty fellow who won’t lift his little finger if he doesn’t have to and, it seems, he doesn’t care b) they are being followed everywhere in a pickup truck by a gaunt-faced man in a cowboy hat, who is either a right-wing death-penalty supporter who really killed the victim and framed David or somebody sinister else. Will they manage to prevent the worst – a judicial murder of an innocent – against all odds?

My impressions:

This movie was recommended to me by Rameau (thank you!) and its online blurbs read really well: an interesting plot about a complex man with a cause, an important cause to boot, a film starring plenty of great actors and actresses and set in Texas (yeeehaaaw!). What could go wrong? Unfortunately quite a lot but let’s start with the positives.

I really liked David Gale as portrayed by Kevin Spacey. He was a truly three-dimensional character, a man with many vices and demons, a brilliant scholar, very human and never ashamed to admit it, cruelly punished for his own cleverness. Spacey has exactly the right amount of understated earnestness to make such a character work effectively; actually it seemed that the role was too easy for him, especially if you remember his other creations. I believe this kind of role he could play in his sleep. Spacey's finely honed performance was coupled with those of Kate Winslet and Gabriel Mann who did their bits well – no fireworks but good, believable performances nevertheless.

The movie is set in Texas, a delightful location as it is the very US state which, in a good year, all by itself, carries out almost half of the executions in America. Death Row in Texas is like a machine. It’s no longer about human life and sanctity thereof, it’s about efficiency of getting rid of those pesky criminals. Faced with such a soulless, bureaucratic machine , Gale knows very well he has just a few days to prove his innocence before he's sent for some short, sharp, shock treatment in the big, uncomfortable chair. And here all my problems began. Told in flashback, "The Life of David Gale" started piling up more and more clicheed red herrings than a fishmonger. As the plot twists are ironed out for the revelatory finale, it's clear that there's actually a lot less to this than meets the eye. The man in the cowboy hat – why did they need him to behave in such an outrageous way? It was beyond silly as it screamed 'guilty' from a great distance. And that lawyer? He screamed “guilty” in every frame as well and guess what? He was! (not a big spoiler, really). Where is the subtlety and subterfuge? As though Parker felt the film's point was in danger of being missed, he spelled it out for us at critical moments with the use of text. Words such as 'Guilty', 'Innocent', 'Lust' 'Power' and 'Desire' flash up on screen, serving little purpose other than take you out of the drama and remind you that you're in the hands of a calculating director.

Finally my biggest complaint. I am sure the filmmakers believe their film is against the death penalty but, contrary to them, I believe it supports it. In my eyes the ending discredited the opponents of that penalty as unprincipled fraudsters, shifty and ruthless like (or even more than) your average politician or lawyer. In other words (spoiler, highlight to read) the final revelation on the videotape registered during the so-called murder, when we see it was in fact a suicide, was to me like a punch in the gut. Surely David Gale knew that Bitsey Bloom couldn't keep it private without violating the ethics of journalism and sacrificing probably the biggest scoop of her career so it served no functional purpose except to give a cheap thrill to the audience and make you doubt everything, the noble 'no-death-penalty' cause included. If you are against the killing you are not supposed to kill yourself or force anybody else to kill - it sounds like a logical premise, right? I was left stupefied that somebody as intelligent as David and his fellow activists had ever agreed with such a plan. Congratulations on shooting your cause movie in the leg, Mr. Parker because no, with such an ending I don't think it was deliberate.

Final verdict:

I would call this movie an excellent example of lost opportunities - an unconvincing, dishonest and leaden political message drama that takes a stand against capital punishishment, but does its cause more harm than good . It could have been something epic and it is merely average. What a pity. Still I do not regret having watched it.

Trial by Desire by Courtney Milan (Carhart #2)

Synopsis:
SHE CANNOT FORGET THE FIRE HE IGNITED ...

In the three years since her husband left her, Lady Kate Carhart has managed to forge a fulfilling life for herself. But when Ned Carhart unexpectedly returns, she finds her tranquility uprooted --- and her deepest secrets threatened. Though she has no intention of falling for Ned's charms, Kate can no longer deny the desire that still burns in her heart.

OR THE PROMISE OF HIS LOVE ...

Ned is determined to regain his wife's trust by using unbridled seduction. But just as Kate surrenders to Ned's passion, her carefully guarded past threatens to destroy her. Now Kate must place her faith in the only man she's ever loved, and the only one who has ever betrayed her ...

  

Quite disappointing.

I’d been saving this book, so I could savour it whenever I felt like I needed to read a really good romance novel. After the last couple of months, it felt like it was time.

Trial by Desire is a sequel to Proof by Seduction and although the couple set up is much more believable than in its prequel, the romance itself isn’t.

A scandal forced Ned and Kate to marry, but it was clear that both of them—Ned—at least needed to grow up in leaps and bounds for them to earn their (believable) happy ever after mandated by the genre. Milan’s solution is to send Ned away soon after the nuptials for three years and let him grow up into a capable man abroad.

Ned does grow up. When he comes back he’s a changed man and his reunion with his estranged wife is promising. Of course there are the familiar tropes keeping them apart: Miscommunication and a caricature villain. I’m wretchedly disappointed in the villain’s characterisation as the early promise of a multilayered characterisation for the domestic abuser is never realised. He has his internal logic that justifies the abuse but the reader is never shown why he thinks that way. Other than it’s assumed the period explains men’s attitudes towards women.

Even so, one man wanting his runaway wife back isn’t what stands between Ned and Kate and their happiness. It’s Ned himself. Milan tackles an important issue by making Ned bipolar—I assume that’s the correct diagnosis—and showing people have battled with mental illness before they had names for them. As admirable as it is to see Ned find his own solution for his mood swings, it doesn’t change the fact that his dogged insistence to cope on his own is what destroys the romance. The constant repetition of his desire to be the hero and secrets kept until the very end, don’t make him good husband material. He may have learned to stand on his own feet, but Ned doesn’t believably learn to lean on his wife, which leaves their marriage a sham.

Worse than Ned’s inability to transform from an independent man into a half a married couple, is how Kate’s plot is handled. She’s supposed to be saving battered wives from their husbands and an early feminist who learns to win her own battles, but time and time again Ned rushes to her rescue. He saves her both from a physical and a juridical attack. He’s the one who comes up with the final solution. Having read Kate’s story makes me appreciate Margaret and Jessica and all the other Milan heroines that much more.

The writing itself is uneven—which still occasionally true for Milan’s novels—and the story is boring. There are hideous amounts of telling and horrible smut euphemisms I wish never to see in a romance book again. Milan kept me engaged with the story at times but only at times.

I feel like I’ve read the worst Milan has to offer and I can go back to waiting for her next book. At least I know most of these novice mistakes won’t be repeated quite as blatantly ever again.

Review: In The Woods (Dublin Murder Squad 01) by Tana French

Cover of In the Woods

Book info:
Form: pdf
Genre: crime mystery, contemporary fiction, psychological mystery
Target audience: adults

Synopsis (from Goodreads):
As dusk approaches a small Dublin suburb in the summer of 1984, mothers begin to call their children home. But on this warm evening, three children do not return from the dark and silent woods. When the police arrive, they find only one of them, a boy called Adam Ryan, gripping a tree trunk in terror, wearing blood-filled sneakers, and unable to recall a single detail of the previous hours.

Twenty years later, the found boy who changed his name into Rob Ryan, is now police detective on the Dublin Murder Squad. He keeps his past a secret because it is the most convenient for his career. He still doesn't remember anything but soon he will have to face the demons of his past. When a twelve-year-old girl is found murdered in the same woods, he and Detective Cassie Maddox—his partner and closest friend—find themselves investigating a case chillingly similar to the previous unsolved mystery. Now, with only snippets of long-buried memories to guide him, Ryan has the chance to uncover both the mystery of the case before him and that of his own shadowy past.

What I liked:

I am happy to say I liked a lot. Firstly the narrative voice of Tana French is completely captivating - atmospheric, funny, intelligent without being patronizing. Secondly the author managed to omit many template mistakes. Imagine yourself a book without a love triangle. Imagine a book in which two main characters, a young man and a young woman at the beginning of their career, simply befriend each other, without any sexual context, and continue that friendship almost to the very end. Imagine that Rob Ryan, the narrator, can be deliciously honest about his own shortcomings, saying something like this:

"What I am telling you, before you begin my story, is this - two things: I crave truth. And I lie."

There is also Cassie Maddox, who not only thinks and acts like an intelligent human being but also is a dropout psychology student so perfectly able to analyze herself and the others. If only those others listened to her and believed in her best intentions...

The friendship between her and Rob Ryan is at the heart of the story, interwoven with Rob's childhood trauma and the ongoing investigation concering a murder of a 12-year-old Katharine Devlin, an aspiring ballet dancer. I found that thread really refreshingly original. I was so pleased it wasn't the case of an insta-love or insta-lust but something far more mature and real, something beautiful and true. Of course the fact that their frienship is doomed from the beginning because Rob admits he destroys every relationship, sexual or otherwise, due to his childhood drama or maybe a flaw of his character, adds to it a dash of nostalgia. Let me quote him once again:

"And then, too, I had learned early to assume something dark and lethal hidden at the heart of anything I loved. When I couldn't find it, I responded, bewildered and wary, in the only way I knew how: by planting it there myself."

Well, I don't know about you but that quote I found simply heartrending. How not to like such a character?

Finally let me add that the attention to police procedural detail was exquisite. I was really surprised Ms. French hasn't worked as a cop herself.

What I didn't like:

This book won the Edgar Award for best debut novel but it doesn't mean it is perfect. Don’t read it for the mystery part. In fact I found the criminal puzzle the weakest as I was able to spot the main culprit without any problems somewhere in the middle of the investigation and I am not the brightest fictional crime solver around, even old, good Agatha Christie always managed to mess with my head (fortunately I loved every minute of it)

Also don't read it if you like everything nicely solved and explained in your books because plenty of questions will be left unanswered. If I were to choose an alternate title for this book (and yes, it is a bit spoilerish) could be: Complete Lack of Any Clear Explanation About What Really Happened In The Woods. It didn't bother me much; I admit that monsters living inside our heads are rarely exposed or explained and that's why they are more interesting and terrifying than any real creature you can meet. Those kids might have been taken by the Pooka or the slavers or the elves or Doctor Who - children disappear apparently for no reason all the time and some of the cases are never going to be solved. I am ok with that and if you share my outlook you'll be fine as well.

Also, as you might guess, do not expect any easy HEA anywhere. It is not a fairy tale.

Final verdict:

Go, read it!

ARC Review: Love, Technically by Lynne Silver

Synopsis:
Billionaire CEO and computer whiz Noah Frellish is a king among geeks. Women are attracted to his money, but he'd love to meet someone who's actually interested in him. When he helps the sweet and sexy Michelle Kolson with a printing problem, she confuses him for a help desk technician. Noah knows he should clear up this case of mistaken identity, but would she still like him if she knew he was the boss?

Michelle thinks life in Chicago is perfect, as is the whirlwind romance with her smoking-hot coworker. When she unexpectedly finds her job on the chopping block and the man she fell headfirst into bed with running the company, will she abandon her dreams?

Noah must convince the small-town girl to stay in the big city—and that he really is the man she fell for. 

This is a quick and easy read. It’s even an enjoyable romance novella if you don’t stop to think about it. I’m serious, either give your brain a holiday for the day or you’re going to be disappointed with this one. Mild spoilers ahead.

It all starts with a misunderstanding and that’s how it continues as well. Michelle is just finishing her first week at her new job when a misbehaving printer—let’s just ignore the ridiculousness of that situation and suspend disbelief for the romance for now—gives her an excuse to flirt with a cute nerd she mistakes for a help desk. technician. He’s charmed and doesn’t correct her immediately. After all being a rich CEO of his own company has such an averse effect on a man’s social life. To his credit, as soon as there’s a sign they could become more than office acquaintances or friends, Noah aka. Sark decides to tell Michelle the truth about himself. Only he does it in the most spineless way imaginable.

He writes her a note but doesn’t leave anything personal on it from where she might recognise him. Then again, she reveals her lifetime membership of club too stupid to live when she thinks that the CEO of her company would write a personal apology letter to her but not to any of the other employees he’s about to make redundant. And that’s how the miscommunication that drives this story is sustained. He thinks he’s been honest with her and she thinks it’s okay to date someone above her just not her CEO.

As easy a read as this was, there were rougher moments there too. The euphemisms grated and the convenient coincidences that drove their story forward bordered ridiculous. No one ever referred to Sark as Noah in front of Michelle and they were quick to defend him when they found out about the lie of omission. There’s a difference between saying “he must’ve had a good reason” and “that doesn’t sound like him.” One is excusing bad behaviour and the other is postponing judgement until further evidence is provided. Still, everyone, even the couple who just met him were quick to help Sark to win her back.

Another thing that bothered me were the inconsistent characterisations with regard to money. Apparently since taking the company public and earning a huge sum, Sark has only bought a handful of expensive things for himself. Yet his first impulse is to buy her a new mountain bike for their first date. He doesn’t tell her that, of course, and it somehow makes it all better. If biking is such a big part of his life, Sark must know other enthusiasts who might’ve lent him a used mountain bike for the day. It mars her characterisation too. When Michelle decides to turn her life upside down once again, what does she do? Does she decide to economise and save every penny possible? No. She decides to take a trip home for the holiday—entirely understandable—and splurge on taxi drives. Very soon after—almost in the next scene—she’s taken a temp job to earn extra cash.

The worst part is that I couldn’t even enjoy her positive career development and ambition. Michelle showed herself capable and willing to work her way to the top, but it was overshadowed by her stupidity in her personal life. Worse yet, she ended up supporting his new career move and a start-up that was based on one new idea. I guess he could have had other ideas but the author made it sound like there was only that one and it was worth the risk of losing everything.


Expected publication on July 29th 2013.

I received an Advanced Readers Copy of this book from the publisher through NetGalley.

Movie Review: Hollywoodland by Allen Coulter

Directed by Allen Coulter

Written by Paul Bernbaum

 Cast:

Adrien Brody as Louis Simo
Diane Lane as Toni Mannix
Ben Affleck as George Reeves

Bob Hoskins as Eddie Mannix
Robin Tunney as Leonore Lemmon

Synopsis:

The story presents a fictionalized account of the shadowy circumstances surrounding the death of a real actor, George Reeves (played by Ben Affleck), the star of the 1950s television series Adventures of Superman.

Adrien Brody co-stars as a fictional character, Louis Simo, a private detective investigating the death of Reeves at a request of his mother who doesn't believe in the official version of events. Soon Simo learns from a former police colleague that the Reeves suicide has aspects that the cops don't want to touch. Sensing the potential for making a name for himself and earn some money as well, Simo begins investigating and notes several apparent conflicts with the official version of Reeves's death. Soon enough he feels sympathy for the victim and wants to solve the mystery of his death despite many obstacles, thrown his way and knowing fully well that it might be detrimental to his professional plans.

In a flashback to 1951, Reeves, a charming young journeyman actor whose career has stalled since appearing in Gone With the Wind, catches the eye of a beautiful but definitely older woman in a restaurant. They end the night in bed. In the morning, a newspaper photo reveals to Reeves that his lover is nobody else but Toni Mannix (Diane Lane), the wife of MGM studio executive Eddie Mannix (Bob Hoskins). Frightened that an affair with a studio boss's wife will destroy his every chance for a decent role, Reeves wants to make it just a one-night stand. Toni, however, claims to have an open relationship with her husband, who, with her knowledge and consent, has a Japanese mistress of his own. Toni and George continue to see each other and everything seems to be rosy.

 Being much wealthier and apparently completely infatuated with her younger lover, Toni behaves like your average sugar mommy. She buys Reeves expensive gifts such as a house and a car. She also arranges a meeting with her husband, helping him to get the starring role in the television series Adventures of Superman, based on the comic-book hero. The role makes Reeves famous and gives him a steady income, but he longs for more ambitious work. He becomes rather uncomfortable with the public's stereotype of him as Superman, resulting in snickers when he is seen on screen in other productions like the war film From Here to Eternity.

Right before his death Reeves ends the affair with Toni and becomes engaged to a younger woman, an aspiring actress Leonore Lemmon (Robin Tunney). He wants to direct his own movies, move forward so people finally stop connecting him with the Superman. Unfortunately one night, right in the middle of a modest house party, he goes to his bedroom and shots himself, or is shot, apparently without any reason at all. Who did it and why?

My impressions:

It was one great movie. Actually I was surprised by the fact how much I liked it. Everything worked fine: Ben Aflleck as Reeves, Adrien Brody as Simo, the atmosphere of the 50s in Hollywood, the difficulties and woes of pursuing an acting career, everything. I never thought I would praise Ben Affleck as an actor and here he acted splendidly! What's more I learned why Superman series is cursed (yes, it is! that's official!) and some actors actually fear to be cast as that super hero in blue and red body stocking. The premise that the mysterious and unexpected death of an iconic Hollywood star may be just the tip of an iceberg of scandal in this showbiz drama rang so true.

Reeves’ death is still shrouded in mystery and Hollywoodland does its best to shed light on the decades old case which remains officially classified as a suicide.

This is a rare film that can be both intelligent and entertaining. It has comedy (not a lot but nevertheless), powerful scenes, great acting and a compelling story. Its biggest advantage? The director doesn't offer a ready-to-adopt solution, Olivier Stone - style, doesn't pretend to know more than the public, doesn’t yield any answers to the lingering question of did he or didn’t he. He only presents a couple of the more widely believed theories as to what happened that tragic night and plops them front and center to be examined and talked about by contemporary audiences. He treats the viewers as his peers, not a class of stupid pupils to be patronized and educated. 

The actors were splendid. I know I've already mentioned it but let me also add that Diane Lane’s sexy and vulnerable performance as Toni Mannix I consider one of her best. Lane never takes it over the top, even keeping the more emotionally charged scenes under control. The choice of Lane and Affleck as lovers isn't obvious but it works thanks to solid performances from both actors. Yes, Mr Affleck, this time you won me over, what a very pleasant surprise! Finally Adrien Brody delivers another riveting performance as the intelligent private eye with his own set of issues who tenaciously fights for the truth. Brody's responsible for making the story accessible, and in his hands the tale fully springs to life.

Final verdict:

A movie I recomment and one I'll watch again with real pleasure. It is an example of a well-written adult drama, that teases answers and sparks conversations. Although it could have been a bit shorter, Hollywoodland’s definitely a must-see for mature audiences who love a good mystery.

Rameau's Review Archive: Proof by Seduction by Courtney Milan (Carhart #1)

Originally posted on Goodreads on February 2nd 2012. This is one of our second opinion reviews and if you click the 2nd opinion icon, you'll find the original:

Synopsis:
"She was his last chance for a future of happiness..."A gifted fortune-teller from a humble background, Jenny can make even the most sophisticated skeptic believe her predictions simply by batting her smoky eyelashes. Until she meets her match in Gareth Carhart, the Marquess of Blakely, a sworn bachelor and scientist.

"He just didn't know it yet"

Broodingly handsome, Gareth is scandalized to discover his cousin has fallen under the spell of "Madame Esmerelda," and vows to prove Jenny a fraud. But his unexpected attraction to the fiery enchantress defies logic. Jenny disrupts every facet of Gareth's calculated plan--until he can't decide whether to seduce her or ruin her. Now, as they engage in a passionate battle of wills, two lonely souls must choose between everything they "know."..and the boundless possibilities of love.


Proof by Seduction by Courtney Milan

When an uptight scientist meets an alluring fortune-teller, a clash is unavoidable. Rich and dutiful Lord Blakely is ready to fight the conniving liar Madame Esmerelda for the soul of his cousin Ned Carhart. Who could have guessed that they'd end up fighting for something else instead?

Who indeed?

It's the basic set up for a historical romance novel. A powerful aristocratic man meets a poor but somehow exceptional woman who changes him irreversibly. Naturally he does the same for her. They meet, they squabble, and go their separate ways. Until they meet again and start anew. They end up challenging each other in ways that neither fully understands until the very last pages of the story.

What sets this novel apart from the rest, is how Milan fills the pages. There's enough material for two novels, and all the important exposures are knitted with plot points instead of being offered in info dumps. Milan also utilises secondary characters in a way many forget to do. The scenes told from Ned's point of view don't feel like a distraction from the main story, but add something heartwarming to the mix. I can't wait to read more about him.

However. This is not a fair rating. Proof of Seduction may be her debut novel, but it isn't the first Courtney Milan romance I've read, and thus she's competing against herself. And as good as this book is compared to all those other romance novels out there, I've read better, especially from Mrs Milan.

The story has all the elements I've come to love about Milan's writing–abundance of plot, tempting set up, intriguing characters, bewitching storytelling, and a historical world I'd be more than happy to suspend my belief for–but from a purely technical standpoint it's by far her weakest work. There are unfortunate word choices, questionable characterisations–Jenny, for example, is painfully naive on occasions– and unnecessary scenes, which amount to repetition at times.

Unlike with Milan's other fictitiously happy Harlequin endings, I didn't buy this one. I felt like the trademark ending only served to distort the characterisations in a way that made them unbelievable to me. I've become accustomed to suspending belief when it comes to historical romances, but this time the magic of the story wasn't strong enough to carry me through the disparity of the marriage.

See, nothing fair about that.

Book discussion: Fire and Ice (Ice 05) by Anne Stuart

Today I am very happy to host Heidenkind from Truth, Beauty, Freedom and Books who kindly agreed to discuss one of Ice series novels penned by Anne Stuart.

Synopsis (from Goodreads):

In the wake of a failed love affair, brainy beauty Jilly Lovitz takes off for Tokyo. She's expecting to cry on her sister Summer's shoulder, then spend a couple months blowing off steam in Japan. Instead, she's snatched away on the back of a motorcycle, narrowly avoiding a grisly execution attempt meant for her sister and brother-in-law.Her rescuer is Reno, the Committee's most unpredictable agent. They'd met once before and the attraction was odd-- tattooed Yakuza punk meets leggy California egghead--but electric. Now Reno and Jilly are pawns in a deadly tangle of assassination attempts, kidnappings and prisoner swaps that could put their steamy partnership on ice.

Why did you read it?

Anachronist: Because I am insane - it explains everything so neatly, right? ;p Speaking seriously, I was in the middle of a very demanding technical project and I simply needed something different as a kind of counterbalance. What can be better than a suspense romance in Japan? Especially one featuring characters which I knew and liked from the previous part of this series (Ice Blue )? I roughly knew what to expect so I went, I purchase, I read. What about you, Heidenkind?

Heidenkind: I’m a huge Anne Stuart fan and I loved Ice Blue, which took place in Japan AND had an art historian heroine. So it kind of went without saying that I would read this book, even though I have to confess I didn’t remember either Reno or Jilly from Ice Blue (is it unreasonable to be annoyed when I’m expected to remember secondary characters? even remembering the main characters is asking a lot).

It would be fair to say that I was super-excited Stuart was setting another book in Japan.

How did you like it?

Anachronist: it wasn’t completely bad but I had a strange case of déjà vu - almost every twist and turn of the plot seemed to be repeated from the previous novels. The ups and downs of Jilly and Reno’s love affair were almost a direct reflection of the ups and downs of the romance of Jilly’s older sister, Summer, and her now husband, Takanashi, Reno’s cousin, from Ice Blue. It was as if the author was writing the same book over and over again - the details can change like the colours and flavours of ice cream,  but the more it changes the more it remains the same.

Heidenkind: The book DID feel really formulaic, although I enjoyed parts of it. I would disagree that Reno and Jilly are direct reflections of Takanasha and Summer, though--they’re just pale imitations of the original characters. Which quite honestly is ridiculous because they had their own personalities in Ice Blue.

I feel like Stuart didn’t spend as much time setting up this novel and making it work as a whole as she did with the previous three.

Did the setting work?

Anachronist: It did but I wish we were granted more Japan time, less stupid meandering to and fro.

Heidenkind: For real, I was SO annoyed when Jilly went back to ‘Merica. It’s kind of like in Pirates of the Caribbean, when they go back to the island and you’re like, “You could have finished this movie 30 minutes ago while you were on the island.” Never go back to the island. It’s a rule.

Anachronist: Right. Perhaps it was done with the American readers in mind. Some writers feel their book will be received more favourably if they add a dash of patriotism here and there.

If you were to describe the series in one sentence you would say:

Anachronist: only in a cheesy romance novel professional killers make good partners and/or husbands.

Heidenkind: James Bond if you got to bang him, and he fell in looooooooove.

What disturbed you the most?

Anachronist: I think the predictability of the plot, especially when it comes to the sex scenes. If you have read (and remember) the previous parts (like yours truly) you must admit they were completely devoid of any ‘wow’ factor - as schematic and formulaic as if the author used a simple ‘copy-paste’ technique while creating them. First base, second base, third base, repetition, somebody wants to kill you, repetition...he is a jerk, she is a brat, they quarrel, they cannot live without each other...boring.

Heidenkind: When you say the previous parts, do you mean the previous novels in the series? I don’t think Stuart’s novels in general are THAT formulaic, although this one definitely was. I don’t mind the formula, honestly, because usually it works with the character progression. But in Fire and Ice, it did feel artificial.

Anachronist: Yes, I meant the previous novels in the series. The first one I liked, the third one was ok, the rest...to tell you the truth I was too bored to read all of them.

What do you think of the main leads, Jilly and Reno?

Anachronist: They were simply watered down versions of Summer and Taka from part 3.

Pity, because I liked Reno in part 3 and also Jilly was kind of sweet with her bratty attitudes and independence. Here it was as if they all forgot who and what they used to be and behaved according to a well-known scheme. Jilly never unveils her nerdy side (she is supposed to be the family brainiac, right? An archeology student at Harvard? I would never guess) Reno, the bad boy and womanizer suddenly never even looks at another girl - it’s hard to believe he is the same guy who suggested to his cousin a threesome with Summer...

Heidenkind: VERY hard to believe, and I totally agree that it seemed like they lost their personalities between Ice Blue and Fire and Ice. I actually thought Jilly was super-annoying in Ice Blue, but I’m willing to be won over by her character, assuming she had a character here of course (she didn’t). Also, I’m a sucker for the spoiled rich girl/bad boy plot and I was really looking forward to Stuart utilizing that but she didn’t! Reno wasn’t a that much of a bad boy at all (am I really reading an Anne Stuart book right now?) and Jilly had a few moments of interest, but otherwise she was just in reactionary panic mode.

What about the HEA ending? Was it satisfying?

Anachronist: It was completely artificial - as if the author was forced to add those several k words against her better judgement because the editor insisted. Overall if I drank a glass of champagne every time Jilly’s life was endangered in this novel I would be permanently drunk for two-three days and the last chapters would send me completely over the top. Not to mention the fact that, with champagne prices, I would go bankrupt double fast.

Heidenkind: Seriously, a bottle of Veuve Clicquot costs $80! I also hated the ending. It was dragged out beyond belief. I especially hated the BBQ with all the previous characters, though, because of course I couldn’t remember who any of them were.

Do you enjoy reading those ‘family’ series, in which a bunch of different characters is presented in the first book and then some of them get their own installments to find/rediscover the love of their life?

Anachronist: I am not a fan of those, not really, although I do understand the appeal. It’s like with McDonalds - you know what to expect no matter where you are and more often than not you won’t be disappointed. It has of course good and bad sides. Good side: if you feel like reading romantic crap...er...novels, you know what to buy and there is 99% of chances you will choose right. Bad side: it is basically the same book rewritten over and over again so you get bored soon.

Heidenkind: I never understood the appeal of these “family” series, and honestly they kind of annoy me. I already mentioned I can never remember previous characters from a novel; and in addition to that, it seems like an excuse for a writer to produce a series of books like vomit that fall into the same formula without even the added annoyance of creating new characters. Laaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzzyyyyyyyyyyy.

That being said, the “Ice” series is hardly the worst example of this type of series. Actually, I think only Fire and Ice is a blip in an otherwise very good series.

Who would you recommend this novel to and why ?

Anachronist: Romance fans all over the world, but not those more demanding. Actually I suppose reading this one as the first of the series would make sense - everything else will be (slightly) better.

Heidenkind: I don’t think I would recommend this novel to anyone. Compared to most of Stuart’s work it’s a forgettable, throw-away novel, imho. If I was to recommend a Stuart book it would be Ice Blue, Ice Storm, or The Widow.

Anachronist: Ice Storm was better? Hmm...

Heidenkind: The one with Isobel? I thought that was a fun twist on the classic romantic suspense of the ‘60s, like an updated Mary Stewart novel.

Anachronist: I like twists. I might try that one.

Rameau's Review Archive: Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card

Rameau's ramblings: This is one of those books everyone recommended to me and once again I'm the odd one out. Originally posted on Goodreads on March 21st 2013.

Synopsis:

Andrew "Ender" Wiggin thinks he is playing computer simulated war games at the Battle School; he is, in fact, engaged in something far more desperate. Ender is the most talented result of Earth's desperate quest to create the military genius that the planet needs in its all-out war with an alien enemy.

Is Ender the general Earth needs? The only way to find out is to throw the child into ever harsher training, to chip away and find the diamond inside, or destroy him utterly. Ender Wiggin is six years old when it begins. He will grow up fast.

But Ender is not the only result of the experiment. The war with the Formics has been raging for a hundred years, and the quest for the perfect general has been underway for almost as long. Ender's two older siblings, Peter and Valentine, are every bit as unusual as he is, but in very different ways.

Between the three of them lie the abilities to remake a world. If, that is, the world survives.

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card

I am disgusted.

I am so thoroughly disgusted with this book that I can’t even logically explain my utter revulsion. Ender’s Game reads like propaganda, and the characters in it are living it. It wasn’t until I saw the comparison to Adolf Hitler that I thought of Hitler Junge, but it makes sense. These kids are brainwashed into becoming soldiers, killers, and they’re never given a choice.

Except it’s much worse than that. Ender actually learns to doubt, to disobey, to choose, and he chooses wrong. (view spoiler)[He chooses mass murder. To add insult to injury, he writes a book about it and gives voice to the voiceless, to the dead. (hide spoiler)] How is that different from any other conqueror rewriting the history to suit them?

If this were a normal review, I’d remark upon the failed, nonexistent characterisations, the lack of character growth or lessons learned, the lack of actual challenges overcome (how can he overcome anything when he never fails?), the lack of plot that isn’t told in short paragraphs as in passing. But this isn’t a normal review and I’m just going to link you to better articles about the story itself.

Review: The Heiress Effect (Brothers Sinister 02) by Courtney Milan

Book info:
Genre: Victorian romance, historical romance
Target audience: adults

Synopsis:

“Never before had so much money been put in the service of so little taste.”

Jane Fairfield is trying on a new dress. She knows she looks utterly ridiculous but she has no choice – that’s the way it has to be. Her hideous, expensive, ghastly attires, overflowing with lace and silk of any imaginable kind, are her only armour against the polite society. She must drive away any potential marriage candidate while pretending she is actively looking for a husband – no mean task when you are young, fresh and you have one hundred thousand pounds of dowry.

Still the happiness and well-being of Jane’s sister Emily, is at stake so Jane will go to any lengths to achieve her goal. Four hundred and eighty days – that’s how long she must endure, attending parties, spouting the most stupid, the most cheeky nonsense she can think of to practically everybody and bear the consequences. Everybody around calls her the Feather Heiress; they joke about her poor taste, brainless head and giggle behind their fans and tumblers when she opens her mouth. It doesn’t matter. Being dreadful is such a wearing work but she is prepared to suffer it to the bitter end.

Everything is going exactly according to her plan until she meets Olivier Marshall, an illegitimate son of a duke, a very ambitious young man, a future politician and possibly also a prime minister. She takes him for a servant. And then insults him some more, calling him ‘common’. And then she insults his father. Such a grave mistake but at that time Jane was unaware of the consequences of treating Olivier as if he was just a headless aristocrat. Will she manage to fend off Mr. Marshall like her other suitors – with brainless talk, horrible dresses and a complete lack of manners? Never trust a politician – that’s how I’ll end my synopsis. If you want to know more you must read this novel. ;p

My impressions:
Once again Courtney Milan proved that when it comes to challenging Victorian romance clichés she has no equals. In this novel you have your ordinary uncouth heiress who is invited to the parties only because she is filthy rich. However our heroine, not as stupid as everybody would like to believe, has her own secret agenda: she can’t marry for the sake of her beloved younger sister. She must fool her uncle Titus who would love nothing more than to get rid of tempestuous Jane for good. She must endure endless jokes and derision.

It worked surprisingly well, allowing Ms. Milan to add several deliciously funny scenes during which Jane, looking as if butter wouldn’t melt in her mouth, was offending in public everybody around her. Not to mention the fact that she deliberately dressed as if she wanted to test the sense of sight and colour recognition of all the present guests at the same time. Who would like such a wife: not only stupid and socially inept but also with a complete lack of any sense of colour coordination? And here I hit the first little snag because I believe plenty of men would gladly close their eyes, plug their ears and pocket both one hundred thousand pounds and their owner, no matter how uncouth or stupid she was. Add to that the fact that Jane was rather curvaceous and pretty and I believe her little ruse wouldn't work in real world at all, not even for a month, let alone for over a year. I bet a clever gentleman would outmaneuver her in no time, using the old, stupid Titus as a bait.

Now we get Mr. Olivier Marshall who, despite being an illegitimate son of a duke, wants to make a career in politics. He is of course aware of his disadvantages; he also knows that the right wife might help his prospects a lot. Unfortunately, he falls for our heiress, admiring her stamina, wits and stubbornness. Once again, the romantic cliché of a strong male delivering a weaker female from dire straits, social or otherwise, was inverted here: firstly Jane didn’t need delivering, not really, secondly she actually provided greater assistance to Olivier than the other way round. And, surprise, surprise, soon enough the gentleman got scared off because he’d never envisioned somebody as assertive and colourful in his life. He wanted a wren and he got a phoenix. What’s more, a darker, more opportunistic part of his nature was whispering in his ear dangerous ideas: perhaps the foolish heiress could be used to his advantage after all; she had trod on too many toes. If only he could persuade his conscience there is nothing wrong with humiliating her a bit so she stops pestering his aristocratic friends with her inanities. I liked that aspect of Olivier’s personality very much but, unfortunately, it wasn’t developed properly. Eh, the woes of romance fiction...

The secondary characters I liked the best. The romance between Emily, Jane’s little sister, and a certain Hindu student of law was unexpectedly sweet. Emily was an avid reader of popular adventure series penned by a woman which also sounded very original. Sebastian Malheur and Violet reappeared again and made me curious about their relationship to say the least of it (I try hard not to spoil you here so bear with me).

As I already mentioned Emily and her interracial affair...it made me do some research concerning the actual status of Hindu-English marriages in Victorian times and, although I agree it was completely possible, I have to say it sounded a bit unreal. Let me quote a fragment from a very interesting article (which can be found here) written by William Dalrymple who presented the results of his own (much more professional) research concerning that topic:

“This period of intermixing did not last: the rise of the Victorian Evangelicals in the 1830s and 40s slowly killed off the intermingling of Indian and British ideas, religions and ways of life. The wills written by dying East India Company servants show that the practice of marrying or cohabiting with Indian bibis quickly began to decline: from turning up in one-in-three wills between 1780 and 1785, they are present in only one-in-four between 1805 and 1810. By 1830, it is one-in-six; by the middle of the century, they have all but disappeared. Biographies and memoirs of prominent 18th-century British Indian worthies that mentioned their Indian wives were re-edited in the mid-19th century so that the consorts were removed from later editions. The mutiny of 1857 merely finished off the process. Afterwards, nothing could ever be as it was. With the British victory, and the genocidal spate of hangings and executions that followed, the entire top rank of the Mughal elite was swept away and British culture was unapologetically imposed on India.”

The Heiress Effect is set clearly after the Indian Rebellion of 1857 also known as the sepoy mutiny, so you can assess on your own the probability of an Indian-English marriage in India, let alone in London. Of course it is not a historical book, just my inner nerd had to be appeased. ;p

Finally the ending. I know, I know, romance and HEA are like a horse and carriage or rather like petrol and a car – virtually inseparable. Still the HEA in this one was, again, a tad too rushed and too perfect, at least in my opinion. We were never shown the struggle of adjusting and readjusting of any of the young couples. Pity.

Final verdict:
I liked this one more than The Duchess War but less than some of the Turner series novels which were simply brilliant. Overall I of course recommend it but I do hope the next part will be even better. I know it can be so.

One more remark. I want to use this opportunity to emphasize the fact that Courtney Milan is one of those authors who appreciate both positive and negative reviews. If you don't like her book you don't have to be afraid that, after expressing your opinion in public, you might be attacked by her/her friends online for your 'cheek'. What's more she encourages sharing her novels with friends, often publishing them without DRM. I really appreciate both approaches - thank you Ms. Milan for a bit of normalcy!

The Heiress Effect (Brothers Sinister #2) by Courtney Milan

Synopsis:
Miss Jane Fairfield can’t do anything right. When she’s in company, she always says the wrong thing—and rather too much of it. No matter how costly they are, her gowns fall on the unfortunate side of fashion. Even her immense dowry can’t save her from being an object of derision.

And that’s precisely what she wants. She’ll do anything, even risk humiliation, if it means she can stay unmarried and keep her sister safe.

Mr. Oliver Marshall has to do everything right. He’s the bastard son of a duke, raised in humble circumstances—and he intends to give voice and power to the common people. If he makes one false step, he’ll never get the chance to accomplish anything. He doesn’t need to come to the rescue of the wrong woman. He certainly doesn’t need to fall in love with her. But there’s something about the lovely, courageous Jane that he can’t resist…even though it could mean the ruin of them both.


Trust Milan to turn another historical romance cliché on its head. No, it’s not an inexplicable déjà vu, yes, I’m repeating myself again.

Jane Fairfield doesn’t want to get married. It’s not that she doesn’t want to fall in love and have a family, it’s that the family she has—her sister—is more precious. Having been neglected and starved for parental love and care, Emily and Jane are each other’s worlds. Well, there’s some bad literature involved too, a girl can’t avoid that not even in the 19th century. Or they would be if Emily’s guardian would let them. The Fairfield girls have little choice but to wait and count the days until Emily’s majority and freedom.

It’s just that a promise and Jane’s enormous fortune make achieving this goal a little bit difficult. Here’s where the mountains of lace come in. Jane was never brought up to be a proper lady and now she’s taking those liberties she has taught herself to the extreme to protect herself, her fortune, and her autonomy. That is to say she wears horridly tasteless gowns (some do like bright colours, even I, occasionally) and doesn’t shut up like a proper lady should (not—which, good for her—but is expected to). She’s smart and capable, but she’s also been coddled in a way. No one has taught her how to be ruthless. She’s about to learn.

Oliver is ambitious. He has everything Jane doesn’t: A loving family and a thorough education he means to use. He wants a career in politics (which makes me question his intellect and attractiveness to be quite honest) and he wants to change the world. He knows how to be ruthless, when to take a punch and when to walk away, and that has left its mark on him. Nope, we’re not talking about visible scars either, unless you count the freckles, which my mother does every summer just to annoy me.

Both Jane and Oliver are well off. They’re not starving and though they have their challenges, they’ve found ways to cope. Neither recognises that in this link or circumstances it’s them in danger of breaking. They both need saving before they lose themselves.

I admired how proactive Jane was. She didn’t stand still and wait someone to come rescue her, she faced the danger and rescued herself. It was a treat especially now that I’ve read theCarhart books. She was the one who found a solution for Oliver’s problem. She was the one who discovered the strength to play dirty. Jane recognised Oliver’s doubts and adapted but only to a degree her self-worth would let her. And in the end her choices forced Oliver to adapt.

As I saw Jane conquer one obstacle after another, I was left wondering whether there’d be left anything for Oliver to do. Sure he had the important task of negotiating a new law, but on a more personal level he appeared inert. I didn’t get it until I did. The flinching, it’s what I’ve learned to do. Not from fights, but talking. I simply don’t have the passion and strength to do it like I used to and I’ve learned to pick my moments. I understood the importance of Oliver reclaiming that part of himself. I also chalked it up to different tempers and theatrics. Partly.

The rest of it were the genre dictated expectations, which I’m also blaming for the epilogue. Too nice a bow for the story. Maybe that moment of absolutely happiness had been earned, but I think Jane and Oliver would have been better—more real—without it.

This being a romance novel I have my little gripes too. I’m definitely not a fan of the euphemisms even if it’s virginal Jane describing the scene. However, that doesn’t explain why Oliver would ever refer to his penis as his member (of parliament). And let’s not forget the slight ridiculousness of how their short-lived affair began. It should have been Jane who interrupted them, not the rain.

There’s also something that takes this book a step beyond the typical romance. Milan gives Emily a voice to show just how capable she is and to highlight another less talked of historical fact: Immigration. As surprised as I was to see the time taken to develop this side of the story, it fit well into the rest of the narration.

On a technical level, this is one of Milan’s successes. The text flows and plot is balanced. There weren’t any of those weak moments that plagued The Duchess War.

There weren’t any violent mood swings this time, only some deep laughs, but I loved it all the same.