Review: The Fault in Our Stars

I've heard mixed things about the cover
I actually really like it.... but then again I am
a sucker for minimalist things.

Like a lot of people I was waiting for The Fault in Our Stars with baited breath. So when I finally got my hands on my copy I dropped my life (school and everything) and read the book in under four hours. And it was beautiful.

There were certain points in the novel that were hard to read, but I pushed forth because I was in love with the characters. Even though everything looked grim and I thought there was no way Hazel Grace was going to get her happy ending, I pushed through because I loved her. I loved her and I loved Augustus Waters and I didn't want to leave them behind. I needed to see the story through.

The novel follows Hazel Grace, a sixteen year old girl who also happens to be a cancer patient. Her parents force her to go to support group where she meets Augustus Waters. The rest of the book follows their story together and how they support each other and just how deeply Augustus affects Hazel's life. Saying anymore would be to spoil the book, which I don't want to do (I mean look at my summary of the book, it leaves so much out), because I want you to read it. This book is not a Twilight book, yes, there is a romantic element, and yes Augustus does change Hazel's life, but the love story in this novel is just right. Hazel is not cured because he loves her, Hazel grows from her experiences and meeting Augustus just happens to be one of them.

John's writing style is hard to describe. Read, when she finished the book described it as "the writing of that kid in school who managed to absorb everything that they ever taught you." This is pretty true. John references philosophy, literature, religion and many others. You would think that this would sound pretentious, but it does not. John Green's voice (and that of Hazel's) has this extremely human quality to it.

John Green manages to write a story about cancer, where cancer is not the central character, central plot point and it does not invoke emotions because it's expected to. This book feels real, like it could have happened or one day might.

Thank you John, thank you for writing this.

REVIEW: World War Z

World War Z by Max Brooks

To start this review off, I'm going to clear something up about yours truly and zombies. I have a love/hate relationship with them. I love them, but I hate how they tend to keep me up for most of the night staring at my closet with a slight look of concern. I really wanted to read this book, but I didn't know if I would be able to get through it. Lucky enough for me, my lovely Christmas present of a Kindle came preloaded with a bunch of books. I thought what the heck, might as well give this book a try. So here we go:


World War Z is a collection of people's experiences during the Great Panic and the War against the Zombies. The book covers people from many countries, ethnicities and ages. Some of the stories are horrific, some creepy, some heartwarming and all paint an interesting picture of humanity. My view on this book is mixed. I loved the idea of it. It was clever, it wasn't scary, but it was creepy. I did have some wonderful zombie themed nightmares during the process of this book. Some of the stories were more effective then others. 

My major problem with the book was the length. I feel the book could have been a little shorter. I understand what the author was trying to do including all of the stories he did. He wanted to make the reader see as many different view points (from serious to minor) to help make the story believable. The book could easily pass off as a textbook, but even though this is one of the books major strengths, it also is the books major weaknesses. There comes a point as you're reading it when you just think I get the point already.

I like the different interviews, and even though the reader doesn't get to build a complete connection with all the interviewees, their voices are real and their stories help create the Zombie World. 

If you're a Zombie lover, or even if you love a good survival story, this book is a good pick for you. I just recommend you take the story in pieces, read a few interviews at a time. But other than that, it's a good read.

REVIEW: Falling for Hamlet

I'm just going to skip how much
this cover bothers me, okay?

Hamlet is a story of betrayal, dealing with grief, politics and madness. In the play, Shakespeare is able to hit on many themes and emotions, giving actors much to work with leading to some intense performance from talented actors. 

Then there is this book. 

Falling for Hamlet takes the story of Hamlet, sloppily butchers it and stuffs the remaining corpse with teen fiction tropes. The book is told from the perspective of Ophelia and how she is so in love with Hamlet... etc... etc... Hamlet is so hot... etc etc. The usual. The core of the story, the atmosphere and the depth has been removed and sacrificed to make the story flashy and hip. Don't get me wrong, rewrites and novelizations of Shakespearian plays can work (For example, Fool by Christopher Moore) but the author needs to take care with what they are doing and how they approach it. 

In the case of this novel, it is modernized. It takes place in Denmark probably present day. Ophelia is still the daughter of Polonius, an advisor to the King. She has been friends with Hamlet and Horatio forever. She also has dated Hamlet off and on again, recently getting back together with him at the distain of Gertrude Hamlet's Mother. 

So Ophelia? Is she likeable? Meh. Is she relatable? Not in the slightest. On many occasions it is shoved in the Reader's face that Ophelia is hot. She's so hot that she doesn't have to do anything and she will look hot. She's blond, well dressed and lives the celebrity life. But she doesn't want to celebrity life, she wants to be normal. Ophelia is madly in love with Hamlet, which we are constantly reminded of. In the play, Ophelia is a side character. She is in love with Hamlet and Hamlet loves her too, but this isn't that crucial to the story line. Ophelia's purpose is to act as a foil to Hamlet's character and to be a comparison to him and his "decent into madness". In this novel Ophelia comes off as being unbelievable. She reminded me of Bella from Twilight judging her existence on how much Hamlet loves her. Which makes me wonder... Ophelia acknowledges that she is that girl, the girl who drops her friends and her life to run after a boy, does it make it worse that she knows this, or does it make it better in some way? 

Kenneth Branagh as Hamlet in the 1996 film adaptation.
More entertaining then anything....

Then there is Hamlet, as I mentioned earlier, Hamlet is "hot". When we are first introduced to him his main characteristics are that he is hot and he is a great boyfriend. All of Hamlet's story arch becomes unbelievable as his actions are forced. 

What really got to me, was how the author tried to incorporate the soliloquies into the novel. This didn't really work. The speeches lost their power after being translated into modern english. All of the eloquence lost. This novel took the plot strands of Hamlet and stripped it down to the bare minimum (the romance, Hamlet going crazy) and simplified the characters. I understand what Michelle Ray was attempting to do here, but it wasn't effective. This novel would have been much better if it wasn't a direct adaptation, instead stood on its own with different character names and different locations (pulling a Lion King if you will). 

I highly recommend you take a look at the original play.