Scan barcode
dreamy_reader99's review against another edition
2.0
I didn’t hate this book but I’ll forget about by the end of the day. It was interesting enough that I wanted to know how it ended but it was almost a chore. The characters were mostly unlikeable, the main Character Rachelle was very unlikeable and kinda bitchy to everyone else. I feel like the story was almost incomplete like there was basically no world building or depth just the main plot.
chelseatheting's review against another edition
4.0
Great book but struggling to find its connection to Little Red.
briipearl's review against another edition
3.0
Loved the premise - mainly because I crush on anything "Little Red Riding Hood." I guess I just kept waiting for "that" moment but it didn't ever reveal itself. Overall, I loved the character development and the setting with it's forest elements. I actually LIKED the love triangle - where as others have been grossed out, per-say. I found it to be a good contrast. Once we reached the Chateau it was interesting how Hodge tossed politics in. It was SUPER enjoyable and it felt good to get chills at certain moments and smile in others. Would definitely read it again but Cruel Beauty wins out in my Rosamund Hodge category.
huntress_fainne's review against another edition
3.0
I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised by the outcome, seeing as this book is YA, but there are still many things I would have preferred to be different. This book was a spin on two fairytales - one of which is Little Red Riding Hood, a tale that is a favourite of a close friend of mine. I liked how this kept to the original version of the story, and made the MC much tougher than one would normally expect for the heroine of that tale.
Aside from that, I didn't really like her. She was . . . not whiny, exactly, but she was supposed to be "guilty" and "troubled" and "conflicted" and she never really felt like that. We were TOLD that that's how she was far to many times, but it was never shown.
I was almost turned off of the book immediately, because of the prologue and how the first chapter started. It wasn't handled well. The prologue either need to encompass much more, or it need to cut out a lot to fit with the first chapter and not make me go "I'm going to have to read this whole bloody book to get the great yet obvious reveal of what occurred and to have things explained". We either needed more information, so the questions weren't as great and annoying (yeah, I get it, it's supposed to draw you in, BUT ....) or it needed to cut out massive parts of it, and thus leave even bigger holes in one's knowledge of what occurred between the prologue and the first chapter. The way it is written now, does not work very well.
This is the downfall of the book. Far to much telling. I didn't feel like much was real. The only time it worked was in the parts that were another character literally telling a story. Then it was okay. It fit, it felt nice, it was well done. The rest of the time, the telling was bad. I never felt overly invested, or like what the characters felt were real.
I'll move on to what I hate the most: THE ROMANCE. This was just plain bad. It was in there purely because of YA cliches. That's it. I never once felt like the MC and her supposed love interest shared anything. There was one scene that they almost had chemistry, but guess what? IT WAS RUINED BY TELLING US DIRECTLY HOW THE MC FELT. There was no subtly to it at all. It was bad. That scene could have been good, but it was handle rather poorly. The rest of the time, I didn't see any chemistry between them, and the romance was so obvious I knew it would happen even before the characters had learnt each other's names.
The only part of this horrible cliche that was interesting, was the "love triangle" aspect, as that character WAS interesting. Heck, I didn't even expect the twist that was thrown in with him. I felt it was stupid and forced, but if things had been handled differently, it would have been a great twist. They made a villain into an anti-hero. Anti-heroes are great. This is why I enjoyed him, and enjoyed hating him.
Now for more things I hate: that the MC was resurrected. Why did she get this option? No clue! How does their realm of the dead work? No idea! Is there a separate soul and body, are they connected, are they the same thing? Dunno! It made no sense. The mythology of this world was never delved into enough to explain how this could in anything be possible. She should have stayed dead. Would it have sucked for her? Yes. Would it have been a good ending? Yes. Because victory does come at the price of sacrifice, and this book should have kept to that and not given us the "happy, everything will be okay" ending.
I also didn't like this thing at the very end with white threads. What does it mean? No idea. Heck, up until the climax, the red thread seemed like a one-off, very rare occurrence, but it kinda, sorta, wasn't? It was badly explained as to HOW, and the white threads were even more random. It was just a strange, unneeded detail to draw attention to. Could've deleted those bits and nothing would be lost.
Basically, the book had some okay moments, and I liked what it was trying to do, and it was an interesting plot. But the writing was bad, the characters were weak, and the plot had some issues at the ending, but mainly it's the writing and the characters. I liked the plot. The rest was tolerable. I suppose it's not the worst book, but neither is it the best.
Aside from that, I didn't really like her. She was . . . not whiny, exactly, but she was supposed to be "guilty" and "troubled" and "conflicted" and she never really felt like that. We were TOLD that that's how she was far to many times, but it was never shown.
I was almost turned off of the book immediately, because of the prologue and how the first chapter started. It wasn't handled well. The prologue either need to encompass much more, or it need to cut out a lot to fit with the first chapter and not make me go "I'm going to have to read this whole bloody book to get the great yet obvious reveal of what occurred and to have things explained". We either needed more information, so the questions weren't as great and annoying (yeah, I get it, it's supposed to draw you in, BUT ....) or it needed to cut out massive parts of it, and thus leave even bigger holes in one's knowledge of what occurred between the prologue and the first chapter. The way it is written now, does not work very well.
This is the downfall of the book. Far to much telling. I didn't feel like much was real. The only time it worked was in the parts that were another character literally telling a story. Then it was okay. It fit, it felt nice, it was well done. The rest of the time, the telling was bad. I never felt overly invested, or like what the characters felt were real.
I'll move on to what I hate the most: THE ROMANCE. This was just plain bad. It was in there purely because of YA cliches. That's it. I never once felt like the MC and her supposed love interest shared anything. There was one scene that they almost had chemistry, but guess what? IT WAS RUINED BY TELLING US DIRECTLY HOW THE MC FELT. There was no subtly to it at all. It was bad. That scene could have been good, but it was handle rather poorly. The rest of the time, I didn't see any chemistry between them, and the romance was so obvious I knew it would happen even before the characters had learnt each other's names.
The only part of this horrible cliche that was interesting, was the "love triangle" aspect, as that character WAS interesting. Heck, I didn't even expect the twist that was thrown in with him. I felt it was stupid and forced, but if things had been handled differently, it would have been a great twist. They made a villain into an anti-hero. Anti-heroes are great. This is why I enjoyed him, and enjoyed hating him.
Now for more things I hate: that the MC was resurrected. Why did she get this option? No clue! How does their realm of the dead work? No idea! Is there a separate soul and body, are they connected, are they the same thing? Dunno! It made no sense. The mythology of this world was never delved into enough to explain how this could in anything be possible. She should have stayed dead. Would it have sucked for her? Yes. Would it have been a good ending? Yes. Because victory does come at the price of sacrifice, and this book should have kept to that and not given us the "happy, everything will be okay" ending.
I also didn't like this thing at the very end with white threads. What does it mean? No idea. Heck, up until the climax, the red thread seemed like a one-off, very rare occurrence, but it kinda, sorta, wasn't? It was badly explained as to HOW, and the white threads were even more random. It was just a strange, unneeded detail to draw attention to. Could've deleted those bits and nothing would be lost.
Basically, the book had some okay moments, and I liked what it was trying to do, and it was an interesting plot. But the writing was bad, the characters were weak, and the plot had some issues at the ending, but mainly it's the writing and the characters. I liked the plot. The rest was tolerable. I suppose it's not the worst book, but neither is it the best.
skepticbook's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
emmanotfrost's review against another edition
2.0
Eh. It was not bad, but not as great either. People praised it the way they did with Cruel Beauty so I thought I would experience similar wonders when I read it, but it did nothing to me.
SPOILER
Rachelle is a great main character, though. But I can't feel anything between him and Armand. I am happy that they are together but I also don't understand the ending between them. He mourned for her so much when she died and kissed her as soon as she came back to life, but then he did not do much to her afterwards. I understand that he might be confused, but I thought the first thing he would do after all the mess would be asking her about it - if their feelings were still the same.
Also the way she faced the Devourer and killed him... I feel NOTHING about it. It's supposed to be exciting and scary, but I feel nothing. Threads and weaving? What the hell? It was so boring.
Weirdly enough, I feel things towards Erec. He's evil and cruel but he also loves Rachelle deeply and terribly. All he wanted was a life with her and even though I know it doesn't excuse his crimes, it still makes him more interesting than Armand.
This is a really disappointing experience, but maybe I have set my expectations too high after I read Cruel Beauty.
SPOILER
Rachelle is a great main character, though. But I can't feel anything between him and Armand. I am happy that they are together but I also don't understand the ending between them. He mourned for her so much when she died and kissed her as soon as she came back to life, but then he did not do much to her afterwards. I understand that he might be confused, but I thought the first thing he would do after all the mess would be asking her about it - if their feelings were still the same.
Also the way she faced the Devourer and killed him... I feel NOTHING about it. It's supposed to be exciting and scary, but I feel nothing. Threads and weaving? What the hell? It was so boring.
Weirdly enough, I feel things towards Erec. He's evil and cruel but he also loves Rachelle deeply and terribly. All he wanted was a life with her and even though I know it doesn't excuse his crimes, it still makes him more interesting than Armand.
This is a really disappointing experience, but maybe I have set my expectations too high after I read Cruel Beauty.
tatsgill's review against another edition
3.0
I did like this book. But at the same time, it was just OK. It's a good light read with many of the things I enjoy (female protag trying to save the world, romance, magic, court douchery, spies...) but thinking about it weeks later I can barely remember what happened. I also found some of the villainy & violence too creepy - I nearly quit the book after the harrowing prologue. I'm not sorry I read it, it was an entertaining adventure, but it didn't have much impact.
davastewart's review against another edition
4.0
This is an interesting story, in large part because it builds an unusual world. I read a lot of fantasy and am all-too-familiar with the tropes of the genre, this one doesn't exactly break them, but it did take me somewhere unexpected. That could also be because of my own ideas and expectations of what "Great Forest" is.
In this story, there are several types of ... beings, I guess is the best word. There are regular humans, woodwives -- humans who weave charms, deal with herbs, dabble in sort of little magic -- bloodbound -- humans who have been marked by forestborn, and who must kill a human within three days of being marked and are therefore all murderers -- and the forestborn themselves -- bloodbound who have allowed the Great Forest to fully take them over and who have lost their human hearts and who are near-immortal.
The main character is Rachelle, a bloodbound who murdered her Aunt Leonie and is in service to the king. Rahelle's story is intertwined with a myth from her world, the story of Tyr and Zisa, a brother an sister who defeated the force of evil (called the Devourer) a thousand years before Rachelle lives.
The story has faults: I absolutely detested Armand, who is a central character and I didn't particularly enjoy the myth part of the book -- not to mention the amount of "blood seeping" that occurs. There is blood seeping from the bark of trees, blood seeping from between the walls of a cabin, etc. However, it's still well-written and original and I give it credit for those two things. I couldn't really predict what was happening because the whole setting was so odd and unexpected.
If you like stories that blur the lines between fantasy and horror (it's not at all scary, though) you might like this one. If you like stories that are just a bit different, you will probably like this one. If you like stories that have strong but extremely conflicted female main characters, you will probably like this one.
In this story, there are several types of ... beings, I guess is the best word. There are regular humans, woodwives -- humans who weave charms, deal with herbs, dabble in sort of little magic -- bloodbound -- humans who have been marked by forestborn, and who must kill a human within three days of being marked and are therefore all murderers -- and the forestborn themselves -- bloodbound who have allowed the Great Forest to fully take them over and who have lost their human hearts and who are near-immortal.
The main character is Rachelle, a bloodbound who murdered her Aunt Leonie and is in service to the king. Rahelle's story is intertwined with a myth from her world, the story of Tyr and Zisa, a brother an sister who defeated the force of evil (called the Devourer) a thousand years before Rachelle lives.
The story has faults: I absolutely detested Armand, who is a central character and I didn't particularly enjoy the myth part of the book -- not to mention the amount of "blood seeping" that occurs. There is blood seeping from the bark of trees, blood seeping from between the walls of a cabin, etc. However, it's still well-written and original and I give it credit for those two things. I couldn't really predict what was happening because the whole setting was so odd and unexpected.
If you like stories that blur the lines between fantasy and horror (it's not at all scary, though) you might like this one. If you like stories that are just a bit different, you will probably like this one. If you like stories that have strong but extremely conflicted female main characters, you will probably like this one.
elfduchess's review against another edition
3.0
When Rachelle was fifteen, she was good. So good, in fact, that she was willing to risk her soul to save the world.
This story begins with endless night and infinite forest; with two orphaned children, and two swords made of broken bone.
It has not yet ended.
This book was interesting, fun, frustrating and confusing at times. Rachelle has it in her head that she's going to save the world. It's kind of nice, actually, to come across a girl that would literally give up everything to save the world. I don't often come across those type of heroines in YA books. But Rachelle has a problem, she's got a martyr complex. She has to save the world.
Honestly, most of the problems I had with this book are Rachelle's fault. I felt like I never really got to know her because she was always putting on a front. Even by herself, it was as though she kept trying to be this tough girl - and it never really worked for me. While her character started off well enough (and it was even a mistake she made that kicked off the plot) eventually she turned into 'the only one that can save us'. *sigh* There was also the problem that with so many decisions she made, I not only disagreed with them, I couldn't even understand why she made them.
I liked several of the other characters. Armand is a very interesting guy but, while I do like him and find him entertaining, I wanted more information on him. It was almost as though he suddenly sprung into being six months ago because it seems like he's only got one trait from before then.
Amelie is…well, I'm not sure how to describe her. I love that girl and think her and Rachelle's friendship should have been the relationship focus of the book instead of the romance. Because these two girls are beautiful together. They're so different and complement each other perfectly.
But this is completely Rachelle's story. While it's told in the third person, except for the occasional piece of legend interspersed between the chapters, everything is narrated by Rachelle. While I'm usually a fan of third person, I think this book would have been served at least as well in first. (Because I would have given almost anything to get a few chapters from Armand and/or Amelie.)
The world is fascinating. It's very French but the mythology (what with the whole 'devourer of the sun and moon' bit) sounds Egyptian to me. I don't mind. (Seriously, I'd love Rosamund Hodge to get write a fairytale retelling with straight-up Egyptian mythology.) I wish we'd spent a little less time in the court and château and with people that were colorless. (Literally, just one spot of color with their flawlessly pale skin. *shrugs* What can I say? It's French.) But the setting itself is actually kind of cool what with the legend of the Devourer and the historical aspect and the forest.
One thing that I did love was the history/legend. Though this is where the confusing part comes in because, while I understood a good portion of it, some of it still left me scratching my head.
All in all, I did like the book and it would have gotten a slightly higher rating if not for my distance from Rachelle.
I would also like to mention the retelling aspect of this book. While it is marketed as a Little Red Riding Hood retelling, there is very little aspect to that in the book. (Most of it is in the prologue.) There is also a smidgen of The Girl Without Hands and Hansel and Gretel blended into the story.
(Originally posted on my blog: http://pagesofstarlight.blogspot.com/)
This story begins with endless night and infinite forest; with two orphaned children, and two swords made of broken bone.
It has not yet ended.
This book was interesting, fun, frustrating and confusing at times. Rachelle has it in her head that she's going to save the world. It's kind of nice, actually, to come across a girl that would literally give up everything to save the world. I don't often come across those type of heroines in YA books. But Rachelle has a problem, she's got a martyr complex. She has to save the world.
Honestly, most of the problems I had with this book are Rachelle's fault. I felt like I never really got to know her because she was always putting on a front. Even by herself, it was as though she kept trying to be this tough girl - and it never really worked for me. While her character started off well enough (and it was even a mistake she made that kicked off the plot) eventually she turned into 'the only one that can save us'. *sigh* There was also the problem that with so many decisions she made, I not only disagreed with them, I couldn't even understand why she made them.
I liked several of the other characters. Armand is a very interesting guy but, while I do like him and find him entertaining, I wanted more information on him. It was almost as though he suddenly sprung into being six months ago because it seems like he's only got one trait from before then.
Amelie is…well, I'm not sure how to describe her. I love that girl and think her and Rachelle's friendship should have been the relationship focus of the book instead of the romance. Because these two girls are beautiful together. They're so different and complement each other perfectly.
But this is completely Rachelle's story. While it's told in the third person, except for the occasional piece of legend interspersed between the chapters, everything is narrated by Rachelle. While I'm usually a fan of third person, I think this book would have been served at least as well in first. (Because I would have given almost anything to get a few chapters from Armand and/or Amelie.)
The world is fascinating. It's very French but the mythology (what with the whole 'devourer of the sun and moon' bit) sounds Egyptian to me. I don't mind. (Seriously, I'd love Rosamund Hodge to get write a fairytale retelling with straight-up Egyptian mythology.) I wish we'd spent a little less time in the court and château and with people that were colorless. (Literally, just one spot of color with their flawlessly pale skin. *shrugs* What can I say? It's French.) But the setting itself is actually kind of cool what with the legend of the Devourer and the historical aspect and the forest.
One thing that I did love was the history/legend. Though this is where the confusing part comes in because, while I understood a good portion of it, some of it still left me scratching my head.
All in all, I did like the book and it would have gotten a slightly higher rating if not for my distance from Rachelle.
I would also like to mention the retelling aspect of this book. While it is marketed as a Little Red Riding Hood retelling, there is very little aspect to that in the book. (Most of it is in the prologue.) There is also a smidgen of The Girl Without Hands and Hansel and Gretel blended into the story.
(Originally posted on my blog: http://pagesofstarlight.blogspot.com/)