Dorothy Must Die

Age Group: YA

Genre: Fantasy

Pub Date: April 2014

Publisher: HarperCollins

                                                                                                               

Let’s start with a really shallow observation: I loved this cover. It really hit the spot with what the book was truly about; a cultural icon gone bad. I normally complain about books having a great premise and then never living up to its full potential. I’m pleased to report this is not the case with Dorothy Must Die.

Amy Gumm is a girl from Kansas (of course). Unwanted and feeling like she doesn’t belong, Amy is waiting for the day she can escape. Which she does. Through a tornado. Amy ends up in Oz with, her version of Toto, a rat called Star. But Oz is not what the Julie Garland film portrayed it to be. Gone are the chirpy munchkins and the Technicolor dreamland, replaced with darkness and despair, under the malevolent rule of Dorothy. Amy gets recruited by the Revolutionary Order of the Wicked for one task. That’s right, you guessed it, Dorothy Must Die.

Paige has altered the original world into is a fascinating one. The twists on all the well-known characters are clever, especially how the Wizards gifts have altered the Tinman, Scarecrow, and Lion. For some reason, Paige decided to overtly-sexualise Dorothy, probably a cheap shot to damage your childhood a bit more, but I’ll let that slide. It was all brilliantly twisted and morphed, from the freakish Perm-a-Smile (giving you a plastic grin) to the Tinman’s brutal army. 

The obvious comparison would be with Wicked (which I have not read, but I’ve seen the musical). While Wicked is more of a clever backstory to the Wizard of Oz, Dorothy Must Die is a whole new ballgame. The plot borders on a horror, with graphic scenes of violence, and this is a way Oz has never been imagined before. For a novel that was heavily borrowing on someone else’s world, it was really original.

Unfortunately the exceptional detail is also the books biggest downfall. It’s too long. 450 pages are way too many for this sort of novel. It felt like she was stretching it out for an unknown reason. Parts which made the novel so good, started to become wearisome.

Take Amy, I liked Amy. She was cool, and had an interesting voice. She had her flaws and she had her charms. She was well-rounded, compared to a lot of female characters I sometimes see. However after 300 pages, she started to grate on me. The sarcastic-I’m-a-fighter voice soon became I’m-trying-too-hard-by-being-sarcastic. The other issue with the writing was that there was so many colloquialisms in Oz from American culture, that made no sense for it being there. “Oz History 101” for example. Unless Oz is taking part is following the American educational system, which I doubt.

Overall I liked Dorothy Must Die. If you’re a fan of the Wizard of Oz or Wicked or just really cool retellings, and don’t mind some waffle, this book is for you. 

Rating: 8/10

I received this copy from Harper 360 in exchange for an honest review

Maleficent (2014)

Director: Robert Stromberg
Producer: Joe Roth
Writer: Linda Woolverton
Starring: Angelina Jolie, Sharlto Copley, Elle Fanning
Rating: PG
                                                                                                             
Angelina Jolie is a force to be reckoned with in Disney’s new spin on its classic tale of Sleeping Beauty. Disney has stuck to its recent theme of that there are no heroes and villains, although with a darker tone than Frozen.

Meet young Maleficent, a fairy who is not as evil as her name suggests. She whizzes around on her awesome wings, and all is fine and dandy in the incredibly CGI’d magical forest. Until she meets Stefan, a young boy who has snuck into the forest. And since this is Disney, they grow up together and fall in love. Stefan grows into ambitious adult Stefan, and due to his greed, he betrays Maleficent in a gut-wrenching scene where he drugs her and cuts off her wings. Soon Stefan is king and about to have a baby, and in a fit of rage Maleficent… Well we all know they story from there.

The visuals were spectacular. Director Stromberg is a well-known special effects artist; his past credits include Alice in Wonderland and Avatar, and he did not let fans down in this respect. The forest glittered and unfurled magically before your eyes; strange creatures whirled and snarled, and even the CGI on Jolie’s face looked bizarrely believable.

This was a one-woman-show at heart, that woman being Jolie, and with piercing cheekbones and glint in her eye; she swept sweet Elle Fanning’s Aurora and tormented Sharlto Copey’s King Stefan away. Maleficent was a women of few words, but that didn’t stop all eyes on Jolie, whose angry roars, heart-wrenching sobs, and knowing smirks says all.

Though the film may have benefited from some more words. Or plot. The obvious comparison to Maleficent is Wicked, the retelling of the story from the villains perspective, where we find out that they are not as evil as they seem. But while Wicked leaves you in awe of the cleverness and richness of the story, Maleficent is severely lacking in this area. Maleficent is betrayed, Maleficent becomes angry, Maleficent regrets her actions. Disney desire to stick rigidly to the 1959 original has caused this retelling to revert to a darker live-action version replica. And considering Linda Woolverton also wrote classics such as Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King, the standard of plot is sub-par.

It’s hard to not initially be bowled over by Maleficent, whose world it is too easy to be absorbed into. The film taps into truths of real life, from love and betrayal, to friendship and fear. But once the magical dust has settled, and your eyes are exhausted from the visual assault, the sour taste of disappointment remains.

Rating: 6/10

Updates and YA mini-reviews

You may have noticed that I have been absent from the internet recently. You may have not. If so, I’m not offended. So where have I been? University! Wooo!

I have been having a fantastic time. Such a fantastic time, that I now have no time. Between the 22 hours of contact time, the lab reports and coursework (this is what you get for choosing science), friends and extra-curriculars, I’m finding it to keep up, and I’ve just been lazy when it’s come to updating this blog and my Youtube channel. But with New Year’s around the corner, I am now determined to a better job of keeping up this blog and (hopefully) my Youtube channel. I say hopefully for Youtube because the walls in my halls of residence are so thin! So if anyone has some advice for me please let me know below.

I have also been a lazy reader. In the 3 months I was at university, I read three books one of which was on the train to and from London. To say I’ve been in a reading slump is to put it mildly. Luckily, the Christmas holidays have snapped me out of it, and I am on a roll.

So here’s the first part of my mini-reviews of what I’ve read.

Geek Girl and Geek Girl (Model Misfit) by Holly Smale

Geek Girl has been floating around the blogging circuit for a while and I now know why, it’s amazing! It’s funny and quirky (and not in a look-at-me-I’m-so-hipster kind of way). Harriet Manners is a geek (as you may guess from the title) and somehow ends up as a model, which of course is followed by several mishaps. I loved Harriet, especially once you peel off all the layers of facts and knowledge she was a normal, teenage girl. Geek Girl doesn’t take itself too seriously, but has a lot of heart.

I received Model Misfit from NetGalley 

Rating: 9/10

Heist Society by Ally Carter 

Heist Society had an interesting concept, as we follow Kat, a retired teenage thief whose father has been framed for a crime he didn’t commit. As much as I found the plot interesting, I felt like there wasn’t much to the characters. Kat was emotionless and lacked much of a personality, and I found it hard to connect to her. Even the plot, though fast paced and clever in places, required too much suspension of belief for me to take it seriously. It was fun to read, but ultimately left me feeling let down.

 Rating: 6/10

Clockwork Angel by Cassandra Clare 

You may have noticed that I may be a tiney-winey (ok, massive) fan of The Mortal Instruments. So shockingly, I had not read the spin-offs. The reason for wanting to avoid them is that I’m not the biggest fan of historical fiction. Eventually I gave in and picked them up. I wanted to love it. Really, I did. And I did. Sort of. I really enjoyed the steampunk Victorian setting and the fast paced plot complete with a slippery villain. I loved all the characters, from book-loving Tess, to calm Jem, to strong Charlotte. The only problem I have is that I’m getting sick of love triangles. But I have high hopes for the rest of the series!

 Rating: 9/10

I have a lot of things coming up for this blog and I will get back into the swing of things, so stick around!

Throne of Glass by Sarah J. Maas

Age Group: YA

Genre: Fantasy Romance

Pub Date: August 2012

Publisher: Bloomsbury

                                                                          

I had mixed feelings coming into Throne of Glass, mostly because I had been hearing a lot of different opinions about it. My conclusion is: I totally get why people love or hate it, and I really can’t decide how I feel.

Celaena Sardothien is an assassin in slavery until the Crown Prince, Dorian, pulls her out to become his champion in a competition held by his father to find the new royal assassin. Along the way, she is trained by the handsome Captain of Guard, Chaol, whilst trying to fit into the royal court. Yes, it’s a little ridiculous, but sometimes you have to shove away logic and sit back and enjoy the ride.

Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: the love triangle. Shockingly, I am not opposed to love triangles, as over-used as they are, as long as they are done well and this wasn’t the worst one I’ve read. I liked both of the male characters, and it wasn’t blatantly obvious which one Celaena was going to pick, so my issue wasn’t with the triangle itself, but more with the number of clichés used. Up-close-and-personal-training, masquerade balls, childhood-friends-turned-love-rivals… Do I need to go on? I quickly stopped reading this as a fantasy book with a healthy dollop of romance, but as a romance with a fantasy background. Which is fine, as long as the writer knows what she’s writing.

I found both the plot and writing jumpy. It felt like Maas couldn’t decide if she wanted to write a riveting romance or an action novel, and the book wasn’t long enough to accommodate both. I found the stark contrast between cute and real romance, and grisly murders really bizarre. And the writing was painful to read. It was melodramatic, over-written, and sometimes made no sense. “Her blood grew warm and glittering” is an example of the problems I had.

Once I got past the writing and accepted the crazy premises, I actually enjoyed reading the book. I really loved the characters: Dorian was fun and Chaol serious, but most importantly both seemed like they had some depth to them. As for Celaena? I liked her character, but I didn’t feel like it fitted with her story. She was cool, witty, confident, and smart, but she didn’t strike me as an assassin. As much as I liked this version of Celaena, I wanted her to be darker and grittier, as the only way I kept on remembering that she was an assassin was because everyone kept on saying it.

Throne of Glass was a guilty pleasure for me. It was good in a bad way, and I understand why so many people love it. Despite it all, I found it really addictive and fun to read. However, if you’re looking for a more meaningful read about a teenage assassin, I would look elsewhere.

Sum It Up: Romantic fantasy, which is at sometimes a bit contrived and far-fetched, but really fun to read.

Rating: 6/10

Monsters University (2013)

Director: Dan Scanlon

Producer: Kori Rae

Screenwriters: Daniel Gerson, Robert L. Baird, Dan Scanlon

Starring: Billy Crystal, John Goodman, Steve Buscemi

Rating: U/ G

I have a strong feeling that my nostalgia for Monsters Inc. is going to bias this review, but I’ll say it anyway, I loved this film! There, I said it.

Monsters University is the prequel to Monsters Inc. and follows Mike and Sully before they became the scare duo of the original film, back to their “collage” years. Mike and Sully are initially enemies, due to Sully’s lazy attitude, and Mike’s lack of scariness. After nearly getting expelled, they are forced to compete in the “Scare Games” together, where they bond and discover what a great team they are.

Mike and Sully are as great as they were in the original. They contrasted each other and reflected a little bit of everyone. Pixar really tapped into everyone’s love of the underdog, and the supporting cast of Oozma Kappa was hilarious. Helen Mirren’s first voice acting role deserves a mention, as she was definitely the scariest monster of them all.

It’s very predictable up till the end, and for once I don’t care. Because Monsters University has all the charm, character, and wit of the original. It reminded me off my childhood love of Pixar, and the universality of its stories. Or maybe it has a little to do with me going to university this year… Was it the best Pixar film ever made? No. But Pixar’s bar is pretty high. The entertainment for adults as well as children was showcased through the film, with plithy remarks that were sure to skim over children’s heads but into adult mind. Most importantly, it tugged at your heart-strings. I genuinely cared about all the characters, and although I could guess at the ending, it didn’t make the journey any less enjoyable.

What I liked the most about the story was the message it sent out. In a society where a university degree seems like everything, and the attitude of “ you can do whatever you want to”, Monsters University took a daring stance on it. Despite studying his hardest, Mike was not cut out to be a scarer like he dreamed off, but he found out that there was something he was better at instead. The ending also showed that you don’t need a university degree to achieve what you want, but hard work and effort.

As for the animation? Pixar is upping its game with each production. Fur was a breakthrough back in 2001, but now the backgrounds are starting to look more like film clips from the real world. For me, the real testament of Pixar’s true ability was in the six-minute short film The Blue Umbrella before the main film, which not only showcased Pixar’s astonishing skills (for the first minute I honestly thought there was real world shots), but its ability to make you feel things you never thought you could.

Pixar may not be quite back to its former glory, but this film is a step closer to it, and gives me faith for Finding Dory, its next sequel.

Sum It Up: Funny and sincere, Pixar’s film will appeal to children, older original watchers of Monsters Inc. and adults. So really, it’s just for everyone.

Rating: 9/10

The School for Good and Evil by Soman Chainani

Age Group: Middle-Grade

Genre: Fantasy

Pub Date: May 2013

Publisher: HarperCollins

I really wanted to love this book. Really. I saw in in a bookshop and immediately fell in love with the cover and concept, and I was over the moon when I saw it was available on NetGalley (thank you Netgalley and HarperCollins for this copy). But I didn’t love this book. It was one of those cases of “concept much better than execution”, and left me unimpressed in the way it carried out its so-called messages.

The School for Good and Evil follows Sophie and Agatha, and their entrance into the title’s School for Good and Evil. The school is to train villains and heroes to star in their own fairy-tales. Sophie is beautiful and seems like a perfect princess, and Agatha is ugly and should be a witch. Shock horror, Sophie lands in Evil, and Agatha lands in Good. The rest of the book follows them taking part in classes, and trying to get to where they belong.

Let’s start with the good points: the plot and writing. Despite the issues I had with the rest of the book, I found it an engaging read, and well written. Chainani created a brilliant world, and despite the parts I found confusing, I kept on wanting to keep reading on. He is also a great writer, with enough description to make me see the world, witty one liners, and lots of colourful and fun ideas.

Sadly, that is not enough to carry the book.

I found this book preachy and confusing. Whatever message it was trying to give was erased a few chapters on by a contradicting idea. The problem was that Chainani was dealing in extremes: pure good and pure evil, making it very hard to see what was a statement and what was exaggeration. For one, the Evers (“Good”) vanity was constantly criticised, which I find pretty preachy, yes being overly vain is a bad thing, but wanting to indulge in grooming and make up surely isn’t. Yet, there was no middle ground covered, except when Agatha got a makeover to find out nothing had happened except she was beautiful all along. This seemed to contradict his message that beauty is a not essential to be good, and I would have preferred to have seen Agatha come to terms with her looks that didn’t involve a fairy godmother. But was this all exaggeration?  Also it did not offer any clear reasons for why people were good and evil. Were they just born like that? I kept waiting for a reason for Sophie’s actions, but never got one.

That was another issue, the inconsistency in Sophie. Agatha I liked, she was a well-rounded character, funny and flawed, and more importantly I understood her. She wasn’t pure good, but just good enough. Sophie was a mess. As I said before, I could not understand anything she did. Everything seemed to boil down to an obsessive need for Happy Ever After and vanity. Yet the only explanation was that she read a lot of fairy tales and wanted to get out her hometown. One moment Sophie was desperate to prove how good she was, the next she was the Ultimate Evil. This made her a good plot device, but an awful character.

Was this a good middle-grade book? I probably wouldn’t give it to an 11 year old. If you want to offer a good fairy-tale twist, there are better things out there (check out Cathrynne Valance). I found it confusing and I was way above the age-range. Nevertheless, it was exciting, fun, and sometimes very clever, so I guess my summary of this is just as inconsistent as the book itself.

Sum It Up: An erratic story with a fairy-tale twist. It makes an interesting read, but don’t expect anything too deep.

Rating: 5/10

*I received this copy from HarperCollins via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review*

The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making by Catherynne Valente

Age Group: Middle-Grade
Genre: Fantasy
Pub Date: May 2011
Publisher: Much-in-Little

I first came by this book while I was walking along in Foyles. It immediately caught my eye with its deliciously illustrated cover and eccentric cover, but unsure, I walked on.

I couldn't get it out of my head though. There was something intriguing in the long name I couldn't quite remember, the vague promises of travelling to a faraway land, and eventually I gave in and bought it on my kindle. Best decision I made.

The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making is a throwback to the time of fairytales with underlying commentary of a modern society. Toss in some lovely illustrations at the beginning of each chapter, and you have a book that will entertain all ages. 

The story is about September, a lonely girl who get's whisked away to Fairyland, where she sets out to retrieve a wooden spoon from the Marquess, and then gets entangled in a plot created by the Marquess herself. On her journey she meets Ell the wavererly (a cross between a wyvery and a library, don't ask), an utterly funny character. She stumbles across fairyland, encountering all sorts of creatures, which is told through a brilliantly self-aware narrator voice.

On the surface, this book may remind you of Alice in Wonderland (which I have to say, was the book of my childhood). However, where AiW was a book purely for the story, and without the meaning or morals that came with books of that era, TGWCFiSoHOM (too long?) is teeming with them. Whether it's commenting on the loss of childhood innocent and the cruelty of children and childhood, or death and the future, or indeed modern society with its layers of bureaucracy that disguise the people in powers hidden motives, TGWCF (better?) has meaning to it.

And that makes it special.

I think Valente wrote the book with the idea that parents would read it with their children, thus layering the meaning under the fun, but as a teenager I would recommend it too. It was nice, reading a book where a message could be conveyed in an entertaining way that wasn't layered with sex, drugs and violence. And even without all of that, it remained just as thought-provoking

Sum It Up: A brilliant take on a fairy tale that will enrapture all ages. Totally amazing!

Rating: 10/10