Silly-ness
This is just a completely silly post so skip if you want xD (Although it includes 'reviews' of a tv show and book series)
Ok, so I am a very silly person (also a geek but that's not important right now). I was reminiscing the other day about my old childhood cartoons. One of them happens to be 'Mummies Alive!' produced by DIC I believe (they've produced 'Liberty Kids' too if anyone cares :P). I was watching the theme song and I sort of realized that I didn't remember much of what it was about so I decided to re-watch the entire series (granted it only aired for one season so it wasn't so bad; which about to 42 episodes). If you want a glimpse into the silliness that is me, watch the video below:
Its a show from the 90s that follows the adventures of 4 resurrected mummies (maybe re-animated is the right term here) protecting the re-incarnation of their prince/pharaoh from Scarab, an evil priest/magician. Ok, the truth is that the only reason why I re-watched the series was because of Ja-Kal, the main mummy dude (he's awesome). I guess I could have skipped all the episodes that weren't directly focused on Ja-Kal, but i didn't because I am obsessive-compulsive that way. Frankly I was surprised that some of the episodes I like most were actually about Rath than about Ja-Kal.
There were some things that sort of irked me about the show:
1. The main character. There are quite a few things that irked me about him.
a)He's sort of bland. Not hate-able but not exactly super totally likeable either.
b) the show doesn't really show much aspect about his life, which I thought was weird. I mean, he's supposed to be the MOST IMPORTANT character in the entire series. You'd think that they would show more aspects about his life. I guess like some normal day problems that get complicated by the fact that he has four mummy bodyguards and some crazy 3000 year old dude after him. I guess you see a glimpse of it in the show, but I feel that they could have expanded on it. I would have liked to see more of his friends besides Walter (I mean I doubt the kid has only one friend)
c) the reincarnation. I mean I feel that the show's version of re-incarnation sort of differed from what I originally thought reincarnation is. I mean isn't it rebirth? Not having some extra dude sharing your body, which sort of separates Presley (the main character) and the pharaoh as two separate entities. The other part of this that sort of irked was that the mummies are supposed to protect the pharaoh, which made me feel that they didn't care for Presley so much as they could have (this is sort of complicated and it would get too long if I were to explain my reasoning to this)
2. The bad guy. I mean he isn't bad but he isn't all that good either. I mean he's hardly menacing. And I also thought it was weird that his armor turns him into some sort of beetle-like creature. I mean I know his name is Scarab, but that doesn't mean he has to resemble a scarab as well. That and he's pretty silly as well.
3. And of course the typical mistakes that kids' shows are subject to which includes: inconsistency, lack of logic or distorted logic, historical inaccuracy, some inaccurate portrayal of egyptian culture and etc. Which isn't a bad thing when you think about it. I mean it is a kids' show so I'm not going to hold some of these things against it.
4. Its portrayal of the Egyptian gods. I mean, ugh they just kind of butchered them. I don't hold a grudge over it because they don't appear enough to really make a difference but i do think that they butchered some of them (poor Anubis). Although, I do like the portrayal of Set. It seems suiting.
The show still has a lot good things about, which in my opinion, make it a good show.
1. Yes, it is a kids' show, but the one time I liked about it was how consistent it was in its story line. I mean there are no obvious or annoying plot holes in this story, which to me is a huge accomplishment for any show.
2. It has a unique/interesting story line. I mean maybe you can compare it to the Mummy movies and the failed Mummy animated series but I do think this series came before any of the Mummy movies came out.
3. Characters. I mean there are some interesting characters in this show. The Mummies are interesting and not all of them fall into the stereotypical characters (ok the fat one and the leader can). I mean I found Rath's character to be so refreshing. He's snubbly, arrogant, intelligent and reasonable. What I really liked though was how the show went about revealing the characters' past lives, piece by piece.
4. Ideas it presents. Since its the mummies' duty to protect the prince/pharaoh, they have to sacrifice some things in their own lives in order to fulfill this duty, and you can see how deeply it affects them. I mean, first off, they all sacrificed their lives to protect the pharaoh/prince and have COME BACK FROM THE DEAD to protect him again. And for some of them, it even goes beyond that. Ja-Kal sacrificed his life and his own duties to his family in order to fulfill his obligations to the pharaoh/prince. This is most evident in the Family Feud episodes where Ja-Kal is on the verge of losing it because of how much he has lost because of fulfilling his duty to the pharoah/prince. I think that's a pretty deep theme, one that carries out throughout the series.
Overall, I think its a decent series. It has its faults but what show doesn't? Sure, it suffers from some predictability but I really do think that its good points make up for its bad points. I really hate how it was canceled before it had a chance to properly end, but it had low ratings/views. But it had some very good episodes and if you ever feel the need to go back and revisit the 90s then I recommend giving this show a chance. If you like egyptology, then chances are you'll like this show.
Onto some book series. Ok, it can be reasonable that watching Mummies Alive! made me want to read some Egypt-related books, which reminded me of an old series I read a few years back. The series as a whole is called Oracle Prophecies by Catherine Fisher which is a trilogy (N.A versions: The Oracle Betrayed, The Sphere of Secrets, Day of the Scarab; UK editions: The Oracle, The Archon, The Scarab) following the adventures and troubles/schemes and conspiracies revolving around the Archon, the god on earth.
Ok, right now, I know some of you are wondering why Mummies Alive! reminded me of this series, which in the way I described it, does not resemble anything egyptian in the least. I was getting to that. The world of OP resembles a mixture of Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece. There are some Greek aspect to it but not much. If you start reading, you do get this wonderful 'Ancient Egypt' vibe from it. It takes place in something like Ancient Egypt with limited technology and in a desert-like landscape resembling that of Africa. They also have pyramids and scribes. Anywho, onto to my opinion on the plot, characters and world.
Unfortunately, I read this series like a few years back so the details of it are a little fuzzy. From what I remember, there weren't too many bad things about it. It was a unique story and Fisher created her own world which sort of let her off the hook for historical inaccuracy and such but its still such an interesting story. Since the story revolves around the Archon, you get a real glimpse into the religion and politics of the world. Since the main protagonists also come from the working class so you also get a glimpse into the working class, how difficult it was to climb the social ladder and what kind of classes made up the social ladder and so on. Personally I really liked it, then again I really like Ancient civilizations. The story is unique and the world is different but not so different that you wouldn't be able to understand it. It also does this nice thing by looking through two different perspective, you can really get a glimpse into the Archon's mind and world and the world of humans. I especially like Alexos, the new Archon, simply because he's what I think a god on earth would be like. He's young and playful, but also menacing when angered and well, sometimes unpredictable. I mean he's a god and I really like that unreadable quality of his, like you can never really tell what he's REALLY thinking, you can only assume. I think that's probably how a god should be.
There is only ONE thing that I remember disliking about the series and that is the way it ended. I mean its a good ending but it doesn't completely resolve all the tensions and loose ends that exist. You can argue that in life there is no happy ending and that sometimes things are left unresolved, and I'll grumble and nod and agree but that still doesn't mean that I'm completely satisfied with the ending. I mean A likes B and B likes A, I just would have liked that they both admitted to each other that they liked one another before it ended. I mean its fairly obvious to the audience (I mean I got it and I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, here) and I would have been content with just a confession. They wouldn't even have to kiss or anything. But oh well, that's how Fisher decided to end the story and I'll just grumble to myself how it should have ended and move on.
Overall, the series is a good one. I'm kind of sad by how little attention it gets. I blame the covers for the first two books; they look ancient :P But the cover for the third book is nice and new looking. That and probably because reading is dying out and so is interest in Egyptology, I guess. Or maybe because its a kids' series. Whatever the reason, this series is pretty good in my book and if you like Egyptology then I'm sure you'll like this book too.
Ok now, I'm going to review another series as a whole. The series, as far as I know, doesn't have a uniform title. Oh wait, I found it. Its apparently titled 'The Queen's Thief' but I wouldn't search the series by that title. The series also is well, unfinished as far as I know. Its written by a Megan Whalen Turner. The first book in the series also won a Newbery Honor Award, which means something I guess. In my opinion it doesn't mean anything since I've read other Newbery Honor Award winners and some of them didn't make much of an impression on me (Although 'Crispin' traumatized me ;o;). If you guys know something about children's literature then you'll realize that this series is a children's series. I would consider it maybe YA? But I don't decide the ratings on these things.
Those are the covers for the first two books. There are four books in the series so far. The third is titled 'The King of Attolia' and the fourth is 'A Conspiracy of Kings' To be honest, I actually started reading the series with the third book, thinking that it was just a single story novel. As you can see from these covers, there is no indication that the book is a continuation of another. I also managed to bring the book with me on my spring break vacation even when my mom had told me not to since it was a library book and I could have lost it. What really caught my eye was the pretty cover of the third book. It was very nice and if you've seen the horrible covers of the old versions of the thief and the queen, you'd know what I mean. I'm not sure if my reading out of order made an impression on me. It did leave me more confused than I probably should have. After I read the third book, I read the first two (in the correct order) and then re-read the third one. The newest book came out this year actually and I saw it on one of the shelves when I was working at the library. Ok enough about my experience, let's move on to the actually story, characters and plot.
To be frank, I dont remember all the details about the plot of each book since its been a while since I've read them. The overall story is just basically following the life of Eugenides, a thief. That's basically it. The first book covers his adventures with the heir to the throne of Sophos, his tutor, his bodyguard and another dude (who was a complete brat) on their journey to find something (I don't remember exactly what it was nor why Euginides came with them. I think he was supposed to be their captive or something). I actually liked the first book. Its a nice adventure story with its twists and turns and betrayal, all that good stuff. I would definitely recommend the first book. As for the rest of the series...There are actually quite a few problems with the series.
After reading the first three books, I found that the format that Turner writes the series is somewhat predictable. There's the normal story and then at the end a twist! Revealing new information and probably some things you didn't know about the characters. I mean that's fine and maybe why I liked the first book was because it was the first book, it was o.k. for Turner to do that once. And then when I read the rest of them...oi, she does the same thing again and again. I mean I have no problem with twists at the end but I just feel that she shouldn't end all the stories in the same series with a twist. It makes the format of the story a little predictable. I mean you won't know what the twist is or what it's going to reveal but you'll know that the twist is coming. I guarantee that the fourth book probably also ends in that format. I mean there's nothing wrong with that but I just feel it sort of dampers the experience of a twist. I mean i think the whole point of a plot twist is that, well, it caught you by surprise and you didn't see it coming. I guess its not so bad but I personally do think its a downside.
Also the main character. I mean I like Eugenides but he's sort of glorified. I'm not going to expand what I mean by that because that would mean I would need to reveal how and why he is glorified which would probably ruin some of the twists of the story. I have no problems with him being glorified but glorification of the main character in general is kind of annoying (to me, at least).
PROBLEM THREE: THE ENTIRE THIRD BOOK. I can honestly say that the whole third book seems to be almost completely filler. And I think that's not an overgeneralization. I mean I haven't read the fourth book so I don't know exactly what parts of the third book would actually go anywhere to further the plot. And also the inclusion of some random body-guard as a main character. I mean I don't mind it but it gives me the expectation that he's going to remain a main character later on or that he's now involved in the main plot and I really doubt that he is. It's also a very strange way to tell the story. I mean I know she can't use Euginedes perspective because otherwise we would know about what's he's planning but I found her alternative choice to be rather odd. It's not bad but it is odd and its seems a little awkward to me.Turner does manage to get her point across so I guess it doesn't matter that she chose someone odd to be the main character.
One thing that bothered me/ what I found unrealistic was the romance between Eugenides and the Queen. Maybe its just me but I wasn't really all that convinced that she liked him. I mean I could believe that he could fall in love with her but her with him? No. I didn't buy it but in the third one, its clear that she loves him. It's not bad but I just feel that Turner maybe skipped over how the Queen herself fell in love with Eugenides with left me with the impression that it was unrealistic.
Last thing that I was having a problem with is how she ends the stories. I mean, they all end with the twist and then this weird dialogue. I mean its not bad but I feel it isn't the right approach to end the stories. I mean she kind of has to leave it with something unfinished so that we know that there's more to the story and I find that ending the story with dialogue isn't the way to accomplish that. I mean its not a bad way to end it but I find that the topics they talk about aren't exactly 'hey, this is the end of the book' topics. Its the kind of dialogue that I think two cops would have in a movie after they caught that serial killer. I mean if I was a director and I choose to end the movie with dialogue I would have it slowly pan out and have the audio dimming as we get a view overhead and fin. The point is that in that movie you don't want to hear what the cops are talking about. Its all over. What they say is not important which is why the audio is dimmed out and stuff. But with Turner's approach I feel like maybe she's trying to be whimsical or something. I don't know what's she trying to do. I just feel that its not the right way to end a story, especially if you plan to continue it. I mean, I didn't even know that there was even going to be a fourth book.
Overall, I do recommend the first book. Its pretty good in my account. As for the rest...well, if you can tolerate or overlook its faults then you can go ahead and read it. I mean the series isn't bad. Its a fantasy world taking place in a sort of medieval times. The world is interesting, although I don't think Turner does much to develop it, which isn't a bad thing. I mean for me it is, because I want to know. I want to know about the courts and the lowly people and the politics and the geography and religions of all the kingdoms they mention. I mean the story and world are interesting enough for me to want to read what happens next. I know I'm reading the fourth book at some point in time.
I think that's enough for one post. I'll catch you guys next time.
Up Next: Reviews of Gregory Macguire's work or what I think of Wicked
Au Revour~
colourbine
Ok, so I am a very silly person (also a geek but that's not important right now). I was reminiscing the other day about my old childhood cartoons. One of them happens to be 'Mummies Alive!' produced by DIC I believe (they've produced 'Liberty Kids' too if anyone cares :P). I was watching the theme song and I sort of realized that I didn't remember much of what it was about so I decided to re-watch the entire series (granted it only aired for one season so it wasn't so bad; which about to 42 episodes). If you want a glimpse into the silliness that is me, watch the video below:
Click to viewIts a show from the 90s that follows the adventures of 4 resurrected mummies (maybe re-animated is the right term here) protecting the re-incarnation of their prince/pharaoh from Scarab, an evil priest/magician. Ok, the truth is that the only reason why I re-watched the series was because of Ja-Kal, the main mummy dude (he's awesome). I guess I could have skipped all the episodes that weren't directly focused on Ja-Kal, but i didn't because I am obsessive-compulsive that way. Frankly I was surprised that some of the episodes I like most were actually about Rath than about Ja-Kal.
There were some things that sort of irked me about the show:
1. The main character. There are quite a few things that irked me about him.
a)He's sort of bland. Not hate-able but not exactly super totally likeable either.
b) the show doesn't really show much aspect about his life, which I thought was weird. I mean, he's supposed to be the MOST IMPORTANT character in the entire series. You'd think that they would show more aspects about his life. I guess like some normal day problems that get complicated by the fact that he has four mummy bodyguards and some crazy 3000 year old dude after him. I guess you see a glimpse of it in the show, but I feel that they could have expanded on it. I would have liked to see more of his friends besides Walter (I mean I doubt the kid has only one friend)
c) the reincarnation. I mean I feel that the show's version of re-incarnation sort of differed from what I originally thought reincarnation is. I mean isn't it rebirth? Not having some extra dude sharing your body, which sort of separates Presley (the main character) and the pharaoh as two separate entities. The other part of this that sort of irked was that the mummies are supposed to protect the pharaoh, which made me feel that they didn't care for Presley so much as they could have (this is sort of complicated and it would get too long if I were to explain my reasoning to this)
2. The bad guy. I mean he isn't bad but he isn't all that good either. I mean he's hardly menacing. And I also thought it was weird that his armor turns him into some sort of beetle-like creature. I mean I know his name is Scarab, but that doesn't mean he has to resemble a scarab as well. That and he's pretty silly as well.
3. And of course the typical mistakes that kids' shows are subject to which includes: inconsistency, lack of logic or distorted logic, historical inaccuracy, some inaccurate portrayal of egyptian culture and etc. Which isn't a bad thing when you think about it. I mean it is a kids' show so I'm not going to hold some of these things against it.
4. Its portrayal of the Egyptian gods. I mean, ugh they just kind of butchered them. I don't hold a grudge over it because they don't appear enough to really make a difference but i do think that they butchered some of them (poor Anubis). Although, I do like the portrayal of Set. It seems suiting.
The show still has a lot good things about, which in my opinion, make it a good show.
1. Yes, it is a kids' show, but the one time I liked about it was how consistent it was in its story line. I mean there are no obvious or annoying plot holes in this story, which to me is a huge accomplishment for any show.
2. It has a unique/interesting story line. I mean maybe you can compare it to the Mummy movies and the failed Mummy animated series but I do think this series came before any of the Mummy movies came out.
3. Characters. I mean there are some interesting characters in this show. The Mummies are interesting and not all of them fall into the stereotypical characters (ok the fat one and the leader can). I mean I found Rath's character to be so refreshing. He's snubbly, arrogant, intelligent and reasonable. What I really liked though was how the show went about revealing the characters' past lives, piece by piece.
4. Ideas it presents. Since its the mummies' duty to protect the prince/pharaoh, they have to sacrifice some things in their own lives in order to fulfill this duty, and you can see how deeply it affects them. I mean, first off, they all sacrificed their lives to protect the pharaoh/prince and have COME BACK FROM THE DEAD to protect him again. And for some of them, it even goes beyond that. Ja-Kal sacrificed his life and his own duties to his family in order to fulfill his obligations to the pharaoh/prince. This is most evident in the Family Feud episodes where Ja-Kal is on the verge of losing it because of how much he has lost because of fulfilling his duty to the pharoah/prince. I think that's a pretty deep theme, one that carries out throughout the series.
Overall, I think its a decent series. It has its faults but what show doesn't? Sure, it suffers from some predictability but I really do think that its good points make up for its bad points. I really hate how it was canceled before it had a chance to properly end, but it had low ratings/views. But it had some very good episodes and if you ever feel the need to go back and revisit the 90s then I recommend giving this show a chance. If you like egyptology, then chances are you'll like this show.
Onto some book series. Ok, it can be reasonable that watching Mummies Alive! made me want to read some Egypt-related books, which reminded me of an old series I read a few years back. The series as a whole is called Oracle Prophecies by Catherine Fisher which is a trilogy (N.A versions: The Oracle Betrayed, The Sphere of Secrets, Day of the Scarab; UK editions: The Oracle, The Archon, The Scarab) following the adventures and troubles/schemes and conspiracies revolving around the Archon, the god on earth.
Ok, right now, I know some of you are wondering why Mummies Alive! reminded me of this series, which in the way I described it, does not resemble anything egyptian in the least. I was getting to that. The world of OP resembles a mixture of Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece. There are some Greek aspect to it but not much. If you start reading, you do get this wonderful 'Ancient Egypt' vibe from it. It takes place in something like Ancient Egypt with limited technology and in a desert-like landscape resembling that of Africa. They also have pyramids and scribes. Anywho, onto to my opinion on the plot, characters and world.
Unfortunately, I read this series like a few years back so the details of it are a little fuzzy. From what I remember, there weren't too many bad things about it. It was a unique story and Fisher created her own world which sort of let her off the hook for historical inaccuracy and such but its still such an interesting story. Since the story revolves around the Archon, you get a real glimpse into the religion and politics of the world. Since the main protagonists also come from the working class so you also get a glimpse into the working class, how difficult it was to climb the social ladder and what kind of classes made up the social ladder and so on. Personally I really liked it, then again I really like Ancient civilizations. The story is unique and the world is different but not so different that you wouldn't be able to understand it. It also does this nice thing by looking through two different perspective, you can really get a glimpse into the Archon's mind and world and the world of humans. I especially like Alexos, the new Archon, simply because he's what I think a god on earth would be like. He's young and playful, but also menacing when angered and well, sometimes unpredictable. I mean he's a god and I really like that unreadable quality of his, like you can never really tell what he's REALLY thinking, you can only assume. I think that's probably how a god should be.
There is only ONE thing that I remember disliking about the series and that is the way it ended. I mean its a good ending but it doesn't completely resolve all the tensions and loose ends that exist. You can argue that in life there is no happy ending and that sometimes things are left unresolved, and I'll grumble and nod and agree but that still doesn't mean that I'm completely satisfied with the ending. I mean A likes B and B likes A, I just would have liked that they both admitted to each other that they liked one another before it ended. I mean its fairly obvious to the audience (I mean I got it and I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, here) and I would have been content with just a confession. They wouldn't even have to kiss or anything. But oh well, that's how Fisher decided to end the story and I'll just grumble to myself how it should have ended and move on.
Overall, the series is a good one. I'm kind of sad by how little attention it gets. I blame the covers for the first two books; they look ancient :P But the cover for the third book is nice and new looking. That and probably because reading is dying out and so is interest in Egyptology, I guess. Or maybe because its a kids' series. Whatever the reason, this series is pretty good in my book and if you like Egyptology then I'm sure you'll like this book too.
Ok now, I'm going to review another series as a whole. The series, as far as I know, doesn't have a uniform title. Oh wait, I found it. Its apparently titled 'The Queen's Thief' but I wouldn't search the series by that title. The series also is well, unfinished as far as I know. Its written by a Megan Whalen Turner. The first book in the series also won a Newbery Honor Award, which means something I guess. In my opinion it doesn't mean anything since I've read other Newbery Honor Award winners and some of them didn't make much of an impression on me (Although 'Crispin' traumatized me ;o;). If you guys know something about children's literature then you'll realize that this series is a children's series. I would consider it maybe YA? But I don't decide the ratings on these things.
Those are the covers for the first two books. There are four books in the series so far. The third is titled 'The King of Attolia' and the fourth is 'A Conspiracy of Kings' To be honest, I actually started reading the series with the third book, thinking that it was just a single story novel. As you can see from these covers, there is no indication that the book is a continuation of another. I also managed to bring the book with me on my spring break vacation even when my mom had told me not to since it was a library book and I could have lost it. What really caught my eye was the pretty cover of the third book. It was very nice and if you've seen the horrible covers of the old versions of the thief and the queen, you'd know what I mean. I'm not sure if my reading out of order made an impression on me. It did leave me more confused than I probably should have. After I read the third book, I read the first two (in the correct order) and then re-read the third one. The newest book came out this year actually and I saw it on one of the shelves when I was working at the library. Ok enough about my experience, let's move on to the actually story, characters and plot.
To be frank, I dont remember all the details about the plot of each book since its been a while since I've read them. The overall story is just basically following the life of Eugenides, a thief. That's basically it. The first book covers his adventures with the heir to the throne of Sophos, his tutor, his bodyguard and another dude (who was a complete brat) on their journey to find something (I don't remember exactly what it was nor why Euginides came with them. I think he was supposed to be their captive or something). I actually liked the first book. Its a nice adventure story with its twists and turns and betrayal, all that good stuff. I would definitely recommend the first book. As for the rest of the series...There are actually quite a few problems with the series.
After reading the first three books, I found that the format that Turner writes the series is somewhat predictable. There's the normal story and then at the end a twist! Revealing new information and probably some things you didn't know about the characters. I mean that's fine and maybe why I liked the first book was because it was the first book, it was o.k. for Turner to do that once. And then when I read the rest of them...oi, she does the same thing again and again. I mean I have no problem with twists at the end but I just feel that she shouldn't end all the stories in the same series with a twist. It makes the format of the story a little predictable. I mean you won't know what the twist is or what it's going to reveal but you'll know that the twist is coming. I guarantee that the fourth book probably also ends in that format. I mean there's nothing wrong with that but I just feel it sort of dampers the experience of a twist. I mean i think the whole point of a plot twist is that, well, it caught you by surprise and you didn't see it coming. I guess its not so bad but I personally do think its a downside.
Also the main character. I mean I like Eugenides but he's sort of glorified. I'm not going to expand what I mean by that because that would mean I would need to reveal how and why he is glorified which would probably ruin some of the twists of the story. I have no problems with him being glorified but glorification of the main character in general is kind of annoying (to me, at least).
PROBLEM THREE: THE ENTIRE THIRD BOOK. I can honestly say that the whole third book seems to be almost completely filler. And I think that's not an overgeneralization. I mean I haven't read the fourth book so I don't know exactly what parts of the third book would actually go anywhere to further the plot. And also the inclusion of some random body-guard as a main character. I mean I don't mind it but it gives me the expectation that he's going to remain a main character later on or that he's now involved in the main plot and I really doubt that he is. It's also a very strange way to tell the story. I mean I know she can't use Euginedes perspective because otherwise we would know about what's he's planning but I found her alternative choice to be rather odd. It's not bad but it is odd and its seems a little awkward to me.Turner does manage to get her point across so I guess it doesn't matter that she chose someone odd to be the main character.
One thing that bothered me/ what I found unrealistic was the romance between Eugenides and the Queen. Maybe its just me but I wasn't really all that convinced that she liked him. I mean I could believe that he could fall in love with her but her with him? No. I didn't buy it but in the third one, its clear that she loves him. It's not bad but I just feel that Turner maybe skipped over how the Queen herself fell in love with Eugenides with left me with the impression that it was unrealistic.
Last thing that I was having a problem with is how she ends the stories. I mean, they all end with the twist and then this weird dialogue. I mean its not bad but I feel it isn't the right approach to end the stories. I mean she kind of has to leave it with something unfinished so that we know that there's more to the story and I find that ending the story with dialogue isn't the way to accomplish that. I mean its not a bad way to end it but I find that the topics they talk about aren't exactly 'hey, this is the end of the book' topics. Its the kind of dialogue that I think two cops would have in a movie after they caught that serial killer. I mean if I was a director and I choose to end the movie with dialogue I would have it slowly pan out and have the audio dimming as we get a view overhead and fin. The point is that in that movie you don't want to hear what the cops are talking about. Its all over. What they say is not important which is why the audio is dimmed out and stuff. But with Turner's approach I feel like maybe she's trying to be whimsical or something. I don't know what's she trying to do. I just feel that its not the right way to end a story, especially if you plan to continue it. I mean, I didn't even know that there was even going to be a fourth book.
Overall, I do recommend the first book. Its pretty good in my account. As for the rest...well, if you can tolerate or overlook its faults then you can go ahead and read it. I mean the series isn't bad. Its a fantasy world taking place in a sort of medieval times. The world is interesting, although I don't think Turner does much to develop it, which isn't a bad thing. I mean for me it is, because I want to know. I want to know about the courts and the lowly people and the politics and the geography and religions of all the kingdoms they mention. I mean the story and world are interesting enough for me to want to read what happens next. I know I'm reading the fourth book at some point in time.
I think that's enough for one post. I'll catch you guys next time.
Up Next: Reviews of Gregory Macguire's work or what I think of Wicked
Au Revour~
colourbine