Hey! Hey You!

Our URL is changing! (And by "our" I mean me. I am not plural people.) Next week it is going to become www.i-have-a-book-problem.blogspot.com. Write it on your forehead or something, so you won't forget (at least, you won't forget as long as you're looking in the mirror.)

Legend and Prodigy

I just realized I haven't posted in like 2 months. Sorry 'bout that. High school is trying to kill me.
In the last two weeks, I read Legend and Prodigy by Marie Lu.

(Actually, the cover for Legend in this picture is the paperback edition. I like the hardcover edition better because it makes is look like some fancy seal on something.)

Here's the blurb for Legend from Goodreads.com: "What was once the western United States is now home to the Republic, a nation perpetually at war with its neighbors. Born into an elite family in one of the Republic’s wealthiest districts, fifteen-year-old June is a prodigy being groomed for success in the Republic’s highest military circles. Born into the slums, fifteen-year-old Day is the country’s most wanted criminal. But his motives may not be as malicious as they seem.

From very different worlds, June and Day have no reason to cross paths—until the day June’s brother, Metias, is murdered and Day becomes the prime suspect. Caught in the ultimate game of cat and mouse, Day is in a race for his family’s survival, while June seeks to avenge Metias’s death. But in a shocking turn of events, the two uncover the truth of what has really brought them together, and the sinister lengths their country will go to keep its secrets."

I all honesty, I only read Legend because there was nothing else for me to read. It was... decent. The dialogue is weird, it all sounds a little awkward. Also, I was convinced for half of the book that June was a robot or something. I mean, her brother dies, and she's not even all that sad about it. We don't really see how hard it is for June with Metias gone until 200 pages into Prodigy. When we do see it, yes it's very emotional and sad, but it's kind of too late.

Other than that, Legend is pretty good. I really like the setting of a futuristic, completely militarized Los Angeles. June is probably one of my favorite heroines, mostly because I like her last name (it's Iparis and its super fun to say.) Also, while she may have to emotional capacity of a robot, she's kind of a boss.

I picked up Prodigy a year later because even though I didn't absolutely love the first book, I wanted to know what happens. I won't include the blurb in this post because it's spoilery, but what I'm about to say next, I don't consider spoilers.

If you've ever read any YA book in your life, you can tell that June and Day get together. I mean really. You don't introduce a boy in the blurb of a book and then not have him be the love interest. So yeah, they got together. And, however sad this may sound, my favorite part about June and Day's relationship is how aware they are that they're not in love. So often in YA books we see characters who barely know each other confessing there undying love for one another after they've just met, and the whole time you're sitting there going "YOU TWO HAVE KNOWN EACH OTHER FOR TWO WEEKS. COOL IT." There is one point in Prodigy where Day tells June he loves her, and June says "No you don't, you've known me for a month." I love June for this, because it shows just how smart she is to recognize the reality of the situation, and it also makes the book seem... you know, real. It may be dystopian fiction, but if this were really to happen, this is how the characters would react. And all this may sound really cynical, but you have to realize that just because June and Day don't love each other now doesn’t mean they won't ever love each other, it just means they don't know each other well enough to say "I love you" and really mean it.

At the same time, I hate the way Day views their relationship. In Prodigy, he kind of goes back and forth from "Oh gosh, June is the girl of my dreams" to "She used to be rich so I can't be with her because I'm not rich so she must hate me". It's stupid logic, and I wish he would stop. Not because I want him to just be with June and be happy and all, but because it's just stupid.

Overall, Legend and Prodigy are pretty good. I will definitely say that Prodigy is way more interesting that Legend, so even if you don't like Legend all that much, maybe just try reading Prodigy, because you may actually like it.

Also, fun fact: Marie Lu based Legend off of Les Miserables, specifically the relationship between Jean Valjean and Javert(*swoon*). June is Javert, Day is Jean Valjean.

Does that make Metias Cosette?

Day: A heart full of love, no fear no regret-
June: Slow down there buddy.

Here's the hardcover edition of Legend:

 

It's much cooler.

 

Oh Danny Boyle...

Danny Boyle is a British film director, for those of you who don't know. He does good work, or so I've heard. While I haven't ever seen Slumdog Millionaire or 127 Hours (both his work), even years after their release people are raving about them. He also did the opening ceremonies for the 2012 Olympic games which, if you remember, were fantastic (the ceremonies I mean.) I've been dying to see a Danny Boyle movie since the Olympics.

I was in London recently, where they have this new film called Trance. I knew nothing about it except 1. It starred James McAvoy, and 2. Danny Boyle was the director. Either of these things would be enough to make me see a movie, and put together, I had to. Not only that, but we don't have to film in the U.S (at least, we didn't at the time. We do now) so I thought this might be my only chance to see it.

James McAvoy plays Simon, a fine art auctioneer who gets involved with criminals who steal paintings. One day, Simon steals a painting that was just about to be sold for 27 million pounds, but then he gets hit on the head and forgets what he did with it. In an effort to bring back his memory, he starts to see a hypnotherapist (which is where the title comes from- the hypnotherapist can include trances). And then there's a whole lot of sex and bullets to the head and everyone goes crazy and eventually they blow up a car and everyone lives happily ever after.

Really. I have no idea what happened in this movie. I was so hopeful, too- I mean, it starts off really well. The first ten minutes is James McAvoy giving a very nice monologue in a very cute accent and you can tell it would all be a perfect segue into something if they structured it right. But they do not structure it right, and twenty minutes later, James McAvoy has convinced everyone in the theatre that he is the King of All Jerkfaces and the story has gone from "wow this could be really good" to "ugh what is this?" at least, I think so. It was hard to tell because the explanations are not really explanations, and I had no idea what was going on. Twenty minutes after that, the movie has become less of a story, and is basically just alternating shots of sex scenes and people getting shot and the whole time I'm thinking "that was a waste of a perfectly good monologue."

To be fair, this was an original screenplay, and it was not Danny Boyle's. He did a perfectly fine job as a director on most fronts. Cinematically, it was a decent film (by which I mean, it was quality acting and some pretty good cinematography. Minus all random sex montages.) But he was the one who said he wanted this script, so I'm disappointed with him for that. The dialogue, while being very artistic and at times thought provoking, did nothing to explain the plot, and the confusion kept me from seeing what may have been good moments. He took 8 weeks off from planning the Opening Ceremonies to do this film to "replenish his creative juices" or something. But you can tell he only spent 8 weeks on it.

Overall, I wouldn't recommend it. Unless you have some weird fetish for creepy hypnotherapy, then by all means, go see it.

UK poster:

Slightly more trippy US poster:

 

Happy Hunger Games!

          
You probably don't remember (I do, cuz it was all I talked about for 6 months,) but last week marked one year since the Hunger Games movie came out. To celebrate, I thought I would talk about it on the blog.

I've read the books probably five or six times, and every time I do, I find myself thinking "why is this so good?" When you take a step back and look at it, you realize that Katniss is kinda grumpy, Peeta isn't very helpful, and the writing is good, but it's not incredible.

So why am I obsessed with it?

I guess it's like a car wreck, or apocalypse movies, they're so awful you can't look away. The idea behind the Hunger Games is so sickening; it walks this line between permissible and impermissible. The whole concept of kids killing kids, and then the extensive description an entire book provides, could very easily be deemed "not okay" for people to read. But somehow, Collins had gotten away with it, and once we've read it, we can't stop. It's an idea that some of us would never dare to think, either because it's too awful that we would immediately dismiss it, or because it's so terrible we could never imagine it. To see someone has thought about that, enough to write an entire book based on it, we can't help but be intrigued.

And while Katniss may be grumpy, I can't help but envy her. I think on some level, she's the type of person everyone wants to be: smart, brave, capable, and cunning. Even if we can't be her, she's fun to read about. Throughout the books, Katniss plays with the Gamemakers just as much as their playing with her. She knows that the Games are just a television show, so she plays the part long enough to get the sponsors she needs to stay alive. My favorite part about the book is the contrast between Katniss knowing she needs to stay alive, which has it's own type of logic, and having to beat not only the other tribute, but the Gamemakers as well, which is something completely different.

The character dynamics are also very interesting in The Hunger Games. Many of the characters fit into specific roles, but Katniss's and Peeta's roles seem to be switched. In any other YA book, Katniss would be the quiet, philosophical one, and Peeta would be the one taking out tributes with a bow every other page. Props to Suzanne Collins- it can be hard to present fans with a girl character who has the typical characteristics of a male character, because it's so rarely done, but she's pulled it off without a hitch.

I also want to talk about the movie, because I think it deserves some of its own praise. Often times, the problem we see with books made into movies is that the movie has few accolades to claim its own. While an original screenplay can make its mark with its plot and dialouge, in an adaptation, those praises are usually reserved for the author of the book. I'm not saying that Suzanne Collins doesn't deserve those praises- she totally does- but I think it's important to recognize all the good things Gary Ross (the director) did with his version of the story.

The Hunger Games is a deeply personal novel- we're in Katniss's head the entire time, reading her every thought. Movies can portray important emotions through the actors' expressions, but Katniss's thoughts were actually crucial to the reader. She's grown up watching the Games, she knows how the Gamemakers think. Part of us understanding the book as we do is Katniss explaining this all to the reader. In the movie, this would be very difficult to accomplish without having narration, which can very easily go bad. Adding the Gamemakers' room allowed the viewer to know what was going on behind the scenes, and understand how messed up the Games are (I mean, they are actually trying to kill these kids.) It was a way for us to understand what we needed to in order to fully comprehend Katniss's situation, without risking the cheesiness of narration.

Here's a picture of the Gamemakers' room. It's pretty awesome, I know. The spsecial effects are also amazing in the movie,especially in the Capitol scenes. 

 

Overall, The Hunger Games is an amazing book and movie. And let's be real: who doesn't find Haymitch entertaining? There's something about drunk people that just makes them so funny.

Falling Kingdoms

This week, I read Falling Kingdoms by Morgan Rhodes.

Can we talk about how flippin' awesome this cover is? Seriously. It looks like Assassins' Creed or something. Although, even after reading the book, I have no idea who is on the cover. I think they just put that picture in to make it look cool. If so, mission accomplished.

Here's the blurb from goodreads.com: "In a land where magic has been forgotten but peace has reigned for centuries, a deadly unrest is simmering. Three kingdoms grapple for power—brutally transforming their subjects' lives in the process. Amidst betrayals, bargains, and battles, four young people find their fates forever intertwined:
Cleo: A princess raised in luxury must embark on a rough and treacherous journey into enemy territory in search of a magic long thought extinct.
Jonas: Enraged at injustice, a rebel lashes out against the forces of oppression that have kept his country impoverished—and finds himself the leader of a people's revolution centuries in the making.
Lucia: A girl adopted at birth into a royal family discovers the truth about her past—and the supernatural legacy she is destined to wield.
Magnus: Bred for aggression and trained to conquer, a firstborn son begins to realize that the heart can be more lethal than the sword. . . .
The only outcome that's certain is that kingdoms will fall. Who will emerge triumphant when all they know has collapsed?"


I've heard this is being called the "YA Game of Thrones", so I guess now the question is: why don't I just read Game of Thrones? For the same reason I don't like Lord of The Rings; there are too many characters, I feel like I barely know any of them by the end. Falling Kingdoms has all the high fantasy splendor of Game of Thrones, but Rhodes narrows it down to four characters, and the story switches between their points of views.

What I love about Falling Kingdoms is that it doesn't follow the typical formula of a book using multiple perspectives. We all know it; the characters are apart for a bit at the beginning of the book, but some problem brings them together and they have to band up to fix it. It was my expectation from the beginning that all four characters would wind up being friends.

Nope.

The relationships in Falling Kingdoms are far more complex than that; characters come together one by one, some people like each other some people hate each other. It's really cool because when something goes wrong, it shows both sides of the story. For example, if Cleo does something that makes Jonas really angry, when we read it from Jonas's POV, it portrays Cleo as the bad guy, but when we read Cleo's POV, we see her reasons behind it. It makes it hard to understand who really is the bad guy, but it keeps you thinking, which I like. Also, I love that Rhodes is taking full advantage of having four characters from very different backgrounds, and with very different beliefs/morals. Obviously they're not going to see eye to eye, and having them fight makes the story seem 1. more real and 2. more exciting.

The only complaint I would have about this book is the lack of explanation for a few of the relationships. WARNING: MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD For example, when Theon and Cleo suddenly fall in love, there was no thought process for either of them. In fact, Cleo's entire experience of it was basically "oh look, there's Theon," then "yo he's pretty hot" then "okay, I'll just make out with him now." Also, Magnus and Lucia. Let's talk about them for a second. Incest is some pretty heavy stuff, it doesn't just happen. (For those of you who don't know, Magnus and Lucia are siblings. Magnus is in love with Lucia.) While reading, I was hoping there would be some explanation on Magnus's part on how he rationalizes his love for his sister, but there isn't any. All we know is that Magnus loves her, weird as it may be.

Despite that, I really like Falling Kingdoms. It's very fast paced and exciting, but also very intricate. I'm definitely looking forward to the second one (the cover was just released!It's called "Rebel Spring" click here to see more.)

Mystic City

I am trying to be less of a book snob, so this week I read debut author Theo Lawrence's new book, Mystic City.

       

     

   

The cover is really pretty. That's part of the reason why I chose it.

Here's the synopsis from Goodreads.com: "Aria Rose, youngest scion of one of Mystic City's two ruling rival families, finds herself betrothed to Thomas Foster, the son of her parents' sworn enemies. The union of the two will end the generations-long political feud—and unite all those living in the Aeries, the privileged upper reaches of the city, against the banished mystics who dwell below in the Depths. But Aria doesn't remember falling in love with Thomas; in fact, she wakes one day with huge gaps in her memory. And she can't conceive why her parents would have agreed to unite with the Fosters in the first place. Only when Aria meets Hunter, a gorgeous rebel mystic from the Depths, does she start to have glimmers of recollection—and to understand that he holds the key to unlocking her past. The choices she makes can save or doom the city—including herself"

 

Due to the overwhelming romance theme in the blurb, I knew this was the type of book I would usually try to avoid. But I thought the same thing about The Pledge, and ended up really liking it. So I decided to give this book I try.

I think the main problem in this book is the difference between planning and execution. Lawrence obviously had a really creative and beautiful idea for a story, but the portrayal of his ideas is where all that beauty and creativity was lost. A lot of the writing was corny, the characters were unrealistic and annoying, and the plot was extremely predictable. However, there were some very solid parts to the story, so I think it's only fair to separate the good from the bad.

 The Good: The idea behind Mystic City is incredibly imaginative. There are magic-workers (dubbed Mystics) living in some of the larger cities in America, Manhattan included. Years ago, a bomb made of mystic energy was used to blow up a building in an event called the Conflagration. The mystics were blamed, and now their powers are illegal. Twice a year, the government demands they have their powers drained, and then their drained magic is used to fuel the city. One of the interesting things about the book is that Lawrence created an entire history between mystics and humans, and I think he did so accurately. The oppression of the mystics seems like something that could really happen if we ever found magic people living in our society. More importantly, it adds to the world building in a way to make it more believable. The magic in the book is really cool, and has a cinematic like quality (this book would translate really well to film) Also, I love the idea of people living exclusively in skyscrapers. In fact, there's one scene where Aria sees grass for the first time in her life.

 The Bad: The characters are shallow and uninteresting (okay, well, Turk is mildly interesting. Only because he has a Mohawk and a motorcycle though.) They all do things with no explanation as to why they did them. The most important example that comes to mind is Hunter's reasons for loving Aria. I understand why Aria likes Hunter, he's funny, sweet, and pretty, but Aria is materialistic, unintelligent, and she likes boy bands. Why would Hunter ever be interested in her? Also, there were very clear categories that all the characters fits into. I understand the idea of certain characters playing certain roles, but the characters in Mystic City seemed to be YA Fantasy stereotypes. All of the boys just so happened to be really pretty, and all the girls thought about were the boys (seriously, every single girl in the book, even the minor characters, managed to get a word in about how great pretty boys are.) Like romance, those types of characters are good in measured doses, but it's also important to have variety.

The dialogue between characters also ranges from "okay, that's kind of a weird thing to say" to eye-roll worthy to "did he really just say that? Did that actually come out of his mouth?" At one point, there are these love letters that one character writes to another, and for some reason they're written in Shakespearian language, just for the heck of it. This may have been a literary decision on Lawrence's part, but if it is, it's not working.

My biggest problem with this book was how predictable it was. After 15 pages, I felt like I had already read the entire book, because I already knew what was going to happen. Granted, there were a few surprises, but not enough to stop me from putting it down for long periods of time.

All in all, the book is decent. Maybe a little less than decent. I really do think that the world Lawrence creates is interesting, I've never heard of anything like it before, but I think a lot of his good ideas were lost in the execution. However, I feel it's important to acknowledge what he did well, just as much as what he didn't do too well on. I don't think I would reread this book, but I may read the rest of the series just to see where he takes it.

I think I'm going to go back to being a book snob for a while. Next up: Falling Kingdoms by Morgan Rhodes

 

 



Books Worth Rereading: The Girl of Fire and Thorns

I read Rae Carson's Girl of Fire and Thorns about a year ago and didn't think much of it. I recently reread it, and I think I must've just forgotten how awesome it was because this book is REALLY good.

 

 Here's the synopsis taken from Goodreads.com: "Once a century, one person is chosen for greatness.
Elisa is the chosen one. But she is also the younger of two princesses, the one who has never done anything remarkable. She can't see how she ever will. Now, on her sixteenth birthday, she has become the secret wife of a handsome and worldly king—a king whose country is in turmoil. A king who needs the chosen one, not a failure of a princess.And he's not the only one who seeks her. Savage enemies seething with dark magic are hunting her. A daring, determined revolutionary thinks she could be his people's savior. And he looks at her in a way that no man has ever looked at her before. Soon it is not just her life, but her very heart that is at stake.Elisa could be everything to those who need her most. If the prophecy is fulfilled. If she finds the power deep within herself. If she doesn’t die young.
Most of the chosen do"

      

In terms of characters, Elisa is one of the best I've ever read, not just because she's really cool but because she's really well written. Sometimes I find it hard to relate to characters because their circumstances are so different from my own. Obviously the things you deal with are going to affect your personality, and in high fantasy books (like Girl of Fire and Thorn) the characters' world is completely different from your own, so often times it's hard to relate to the things they're dealing with, and the emotions they have. However, Rae Carson does a really great job of finding a few universal themes and giving them to Elisa, which makes her seem like someone who could exist both in our world and in hers, it makes her very relatable. She is self conscious and uncertain in a lot of areas, but there are also some things she knows she's good at, and trusts herself to do. It makes for a nice balance of self depreciation and confidence, which I think accurately represents a lot of teenage girls in today's world.

The book in general is also amazing. It’s high fantasy, so the world in the book is entirely different from our own. In the story, magic is seen as something evil. I love the idea of magic being forbidden, and the paradoxes it creates within the story. For example, magic isn’t good, but Elisa was granted access to magic by God, so if it was given to her by God, is it still bad? The landscape of the world they live in is also incredible. The majority of the first book takes place in the desert, but in the second (if you read it, which you should) takes them all over the world, and some of the places they encounter are just amazing, even if they’re only text on a page. While the blurb focuses mainly of the romantic aspects, the book has a lot more elements. I think romance is good, but only in measured doses. Girl of Fire and Thorn has some romance-y bits, but it also has a lot of fighting, magic-ing, and cleverness. Also, there are enough secrets to keep you interesting. I gasped out loud quite a few times while reading this.

The only complaint I hear about this book is that it's too religious, but I think you have to read it to understand. It's religious because it has to be. Part of Elisa's character is that she feels she has to prove herself not only to her people, but to God. If the "God" part were taken out of that, Elisa would not be half the character she is, and the book would be much less interesting.