fancylibrarian's review
4.0
Charlie Outlaw is a television celebrity who has problems. He’s said some extremely honest (and therefore embarrassing) things in an interview, angering the showrunner, his fans, and most of all his girlfriend Josie Lamar, who ends up dumping him over it all. Charlie decides to escape by going on a vacation on a far-away tiny island when he finds that he has real, serious problems, namely that he is kidnapped, unsure if he will ever make it our alive.
More review here:
http://fancylibrarian.com/2018/03/15/what-you-dont-know-about-charlie-outlaw-by-leah-stewart/
More review here:
http://fancylibrarian.com/2018/03/15/what-you-dont-know-about-charlie-outlaw-by-leah-stewart/
madilynhasto's review
5.0
I loved this book. I was shocked to see the low rating! I think it’s because it’s a very stream of consciousness, inner monologue heavy narrative mixed with a plot that develops slowly, so it could be perceived as boring. I just loved the way that we live through the characters, everything feels very close and present and real. I will not forget about this book anytime soon!
jmooremyers's review
2.0
Objects are magical even in our real-life world, containing as they do the magic of our creating thoughts, the conjurations wrought by our insistent feelings. (J, p 40)
Does Charlie know that this is his prison? Deep, deep down he knows it. But sometimes the things we know take quite some time to understand. (C, p 46)
We breathe life into art, and then we reverse the flow. (J, p 305)
It takes an enormous act of will to be other than we are, which is perhaps what we mean by fate. (p 308)
Does Charlie know that this is his prison? Deep, deep down he knows it. But sometimes the things we know take quite some time to understand. (C, p 46)
We breathe life into art, and then we reverse the flow. (J, p 305)
It takes an enormous act of will to be other than we are, which is perhaps what we mean by fate. (p 308)
goodcook07's review
2.0
Mildly entertaining. I kept reading it because I expected some great action, romance or suspense. It never got there. There is nothing redeeming in this read, but it's better than staring at clouds out the window of your airplane.
usbsticky's review
1.0
1 star = "I did not like it" by GR's rating system.
I found this book verbose, bland, slow and boring. A lot of words were written without the story moving forward. I also dislike alternating POVs. There are some books that draw you along and some that you make yourself read. This was one that I had to make myself read and also not to fast forward the slow parts. Glad I'm done with it.
I got this book as a free ARC.
I found this book verbose, bland, slow and boring. A lot of words were written without the story moving forward. I also dislike alternating POVs. There are some books that draw you along and some that you make yourself read. This was one that I had to make myself read and also not to fast forward the slow parts. Glad I'm done with it.
I got this book as a free ARC.
rsnow11's review
3.0
Some parts dragged but the inclusion of acting techniques and what it means to be an actor were an interesting addition.
nnowels's review
3.0
This took some time to get immersed in the story and the writing style. That being said, I felt like (in spite of their celebrity) it was surprisingly easy to relate to the characters.
courtspitz's review
1.0
Literally never read this even if someone wants to pay you to do so. Terrible. Had to force myself through this one and it took over a year, simply because I cannot abandon a book. I wish I had. Didn’t give a shit about the characters or the ridiculous plot which seemed to be unsure of itself.
ms_aprilvincent's review
3.0
3 stars, leaning towards 4
My main gripe is with the writing style, which is omniscient present tense, like the narration on Jane the Virgin, giving peeks into the future while focusing on the immediate present. It’s weird, and sometimes off-putting, and maybe a little tell-not-show.
The good stuff, however, is about actors and acting, and the strange in-between of being yourself but not being yourself, and observing yourself doing that, and then analyzing your observations. Stewart does a good job of showing the process, the doubt, the constant mental revisions.
The story’s good, if far-fetched (and, at times, a bit too Three Stooge-y), but it was engaging and I enjoyed it.
My main gripe is with the writing style, which is omniscient present tense, like the narration on Jane the Virgin, giving peeks into the future while focusing on the immediate present. It’s weird, and sometimes off-putting, and maybe a little tell-not-show.
The good stuff, however, is about actors and acting, and the strange in-between of being yourself but not being yourself, and observing yourself doing that, and then analyzing your observations. Stewart does a good job of showing the process, the doubt, the constant mental revisions.
The story’s good, if far-fetched (and, at times, a bit too Three Stooge-y), but it was engaging and I enjoyed it.
mmeggann's review
1.0
Ugh.
I got 60 pages into this book and it was going NOWHERE. If ever I've read something so pointless, so "first world problems" and so unknowing of the subject matter that's being talking about... It's this book
Considering I chose it because the cover looked nice, maybe I should consider the whole don't judge a book by its cover.
This story may very well get better but since I feel like I've wasted my time reading 60 pages when that time couldve been spent reading something I love, I'm giving up.
I got 60 pages into this book and it was going NOWHERE. If ever I've read something so pointless, so "first world problems" and so unknowing of the subject matter that's being talking about... It's this book
Considering I chose it because the cover looked nice, maybe I should consider the whole don't judge a book by its cover.
This story may very well get better but since I feel like I've wasted my time reading 60 pages when that time couldve been spent reading something I love, I'm giving up.