Book Recommendation: Steelheart

Summary: How far would you go for revenge if someone killed your father?

If someone destroyed your city?

If everything you ever loved was taken from you?

David Charleston will go to any lengths to stop Steelheart. But to exact revenge in Steelheart’s world, David will need the Reckoners—a shadowy group of rebels bent on maintaining justice. 

And it turns out that the Reckoners might just need David too.






Recently, I've been getting more and more into the superhero genre. It's fun to think about people with awesome skills or superpowers--and often, the narrative of a vigilante with a hidden identity raises interesting moral questions. The superhero genre, when handled right, contains a wealth of storytelling possibilities. This book--and its sequels--explores one of the lesser-seen possibilities, and boy is it enthralling.

The premise of Steelheart is that at some point twelve or so years in the past, a weird astronomical event called Calamity occurred--and people all over the world started gaining superpowers, bending and breaking the laws of physics. And then all of these superpowered people (called "Epics") decided that what they really wanted to do with these powers was take as much power as they could for themselves, and subjugate anyone too weak to fight back.

That's the setup for the novel's main story. This certainly isn't the first book to feature a story where people with superpowers go bad instead of good and try to take over the world. But this book takes the idea further than most. In a sense, this is an anti-superhero story: here, the people with powers are the villains, the monsters, the evil ones. The only heroes here are the ordinary people with the courage and cunning to fight back.

In fact, the more I think about it, this story is the antithesis to stories like X-Men, where people with powers are oppressed solely because they have powers. In this story, author Brandon Sanderson takes the idea of "superpowers" to its logical extreme. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If ordinary people really did start gaining superpowers out of nowhere, who's to say they wouldn't all become tyrants?

Of course, the sequels muddy this philosophical bent quite a bit. But the books still have a very interesting and thus far underused premise. In addition, the characters are all sympathetic and complex, and the plotting of the books is a thing to behold. Seriously, Brandon Sanderson has a knack for weaving an action-packed mystery and revealing a plot twist at the very end that changes everything. He's also good at coming up with intriguing settings; each book takes place in a different city that's been transformed since the coming of the Epics. Each place is unique and drives the action in its own way.

In short, the Reckoners Trilogy--of which Steelheart is the first book--is an amazing series, and I'm glad I had the chance to read it. I would highly recommend it to others looking for a short series to get into, especially if superheroes are your thing.

I give Steelheart four stars out of five (though the Reckoners Trilogy as a whole is more of a 4.5/5).

Book Review: Fate of Flames

Summary: Four girls with the power to control the elements and save the world from a terrible evil must come together in the first epic novel in a brand-new series.

When Phantoms—massive beasts made from nightmares and darkness—suddenly appeared and began terrorizing the world, four girls, the Effigies, each gained a unique power to control one of the classical elements: earth, air, fire, and water. Since then, four girls across the world have continually fought against the Phantoms, fulfilling their cosmic duty. And when one Effigy dies, another girl gains her power as a replacement.

But now, with technologies in place to protect the world’s major cities from Phantom attacks, the Effigies have stopped defending humanity and, instead, have become international celebrities, with their heroic feats ranked, televised, and talked about in online fandoms.

Until the day that New York City’s protection against the Phantoms fails, a man seems to be able to control them by sheer force of will, and Maia, a high school student, unexpectedly becomes the Fire Effigy.

Now Maia has been thrown into battle with three girls who want nothing to do with one another. But with the first human villain that the girls have ever faced, and an army of Phantoms preparing for attack, there isn’t much time for the Effigies to learn how to work together.

Can the girls take control of their destinies before the world is destroyed forever?



First off, a disclaimer: Fate of Flames is scheduled to be released this November. The copy of it that I read is an ARC, which I obtained at Barnes & Noble's Book-Fest. Legally, I am not allowed to quote this book, only review it in my own words. That's what I always do, but I felt I should note this somewhere in the post.

Now, onto the review.

Fate of Flames is sort of a weird book for me. First, it's a contemporary fantasy about a girl who gains special powers. There are certain tropes and clichés associated with such a story, and Fate of Flames plays right into some of those. There are others that it plays with or subverts, which makes the book as a whole both conventional and inventive at the same time.

On the conventional side, it's a coming-of-age story about a high school girl--Maia Finley--who gains the ability to control fire. As the Fire Effigy, she's thrown into a world where she's expected to team up with three other Effigies--her personal heroes--and fight the monsters that have been attacking the world since the 1800's. But there's a twist--Maia is terrified of fire, ever since a house fire killed her parents and twin sister. And there's something suspicious about the death of her predecessor...

The story itself, at least for three fourths of the book, is pretty conventional. Coming of age story--check. Relatable teenage protagonist--check. Mysterious hot love interest man--check. Shadowy governmental organization--check. Monsters the world must be defended from--check.

But that's not all there is to the book, and that's the part that makes it unique. Yes, it's a coming of age story--but it's one that doesn't shy away from the psychological effect constant fighting has on teenaged soldiers. The relatable teen girl protagonist has many weaknesses and genuinely doesn't know what's going on a lot of the time--there's no way she could've made it through the plot of the book without the help of the other three Effigies (Belle, Chae Rin, and Lake). All three of these other girls also have their own flaws and weaknesses, yet none of them are demonized or set up as one-dimensional rivals for Maia. In the end, they find strength by working together. The mysterious love interest guy is a member of the shadowy governmental organization--and as it turns out, both of them were probably lying to Maia all along. There are only three prominent male characters in the book, and one of them is a government agent with nasty secrets, one of them is a government agent with zero morals, and one is a villain with multiple personalities in his head. He's able to control the monsters that have been attacking the world for over a century.

So there's a lot going on in this book. The plot and characters are a smooth blend of the cliché and the atypical. That sort of threw me in the first half of the book--I never knew what to expect, even when I thought I did. But by the second half, I got to liking it. Fate of Flames is a well-written book with good characters and a lot of interesting concepts. And it's the first in a series, so I'm definitely looking forward to seeing where the story goes.

So that's my opinion of the book. I've still got one more thing to add: back by popular demand, it's the star rating system that I used to use for movies. I'll be using it to rate this book, and presumably a few more books after it; if like it or think I could use a better system, please let me know!

I'm giving Fate of Flames three and a half stars.

Fate of Flames hasn't been released yet, so I guess there aren't a lot of people out there to discuss it with me. But suffice to say, it's a good book and I'm looking forward to enjoying the rest of the series. In my opinion, any author who can blend cliché and originality with this amount of skill is someone whose books I'll be keeping up with. 

Book Review: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Summary: Seconds before the Earth is demolished to make way for a galactic freeway, Arthur Dent is plucked off the planet by his friend Ford Prefect, a researcher for the revised edition of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy who, for the last fifteen years, has been posing as an out-of-work actor.

Together this dynamic pair begin a journey through space aided by quotes from The Hitchhiker's Guide ("A towel is about the most massively useful thing an interstellar hitchhiker can have") and a galaxy-full of fellow travelers: Zaphod Beeblebrox--the two-headed, three-armed ex-hippie and totally out-to-lunch president of the galaxy; Trillian, Zaphod's girlfriend (formally Tricia McMillan), whom Arthur tried to pick up at a cocktail party once upon a time zone; Marvin, a paranoid, brilliant, and chronically depressed robot; Veet Voojagig, a former graduate student who is obsessed with the disappearance of all the ballpoint pens he bought over the years. 

Where are these pens? Why are we born? Why do we die? Why do we spend so much time between wearing digital watches? For all the answers stick your thumb to the stars. And don't forget to bring a towel!


The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is without a doubt one of the most bizarre books I've ever read. It's almost--but not quite--seems like a parody of the space opera genre. It takes advantage of the imagination and suspension of disbelief inherent in science fiction, and runs wild with outlandish concepts and absurd plots. I sometimes think fiction could use more absurd stories, suspension of disbelief being what it is, so Hitchhiker is sort of a breath of fresh air in that respect.

One of the main themes of the books--Hitchhiker is the first book in the a series--is insignificance. It comes back to that a lot, in both explicit and implicit ways. "Everything is meaningless," it seems to say at points. "The Universe is so infinitely huge that nothing matters, because what can one insignificant being with a  lifespan of maybe ninety years do in a universe so big?" It's a solidly atheistic viewpoint--although I wouldn't say it's more atheistic than most sci-fi, like say Star Trek or Starship Troopers. It's just more honest about it.

That being said, Hitchhiker isn't a philosophical work of fiction in the same way Starship Troopers is. It's a story first and foremost, punctuated by interludes from the Hitchhiker's Guide itself. These interludes always tie into the story, and describe the larger galaxy in an oft-familiar way. Douglas Adams's galaxy is a lot like Earth in a lot of ways, albeit with much greater scale. And the titular Guide takes hardly any of it seriously--it often doesn't even take itself seriously, thanks to a collection of frustrated, underpaid, and self-serving editors. So we're left with a book--a fictional book and an actual book--that's absurd and irreverent and hilarious. It's not to everyone's taste, certainly. It's a wild ride, even when you know what's coming. But, well--it's fun. It's got elements of depth and shallowness at the same time. It's an almost dizzying spectacle, but it's fun, and since that's its primary aim, it's enjoyable. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it, because it's definitely not to everyone's taste. But if you like some of the weirder aspects of sci-fi, well, it just might be worth checking out.

Book Review: On Basilisk Station

Summary: Having made him look a fool, she's been exiled to Basilisk Station in disgrace and set up for ruin by a superior who hates her. 

Her demoralized crew blames her for their ship's humiliating posting to an out-of-the-way picket station. 

The aborigines of the system's only habitable planet are smoking homicide-inducing hallucinogens. 

Parliament isn't sure it wants to keep the place; the major local industry is smuggling; the merchant cartels want her head; the star-conquering, so-called "Republic" of Haven is Up To Something; and Honor Harrington has a single, over-age light cruiser with an armament that doesn't work to police the entire star system. 

But the people out to get her have made one mistake. They've made her mad. 

My SF reading streak continues with On Basilisk Station, the first book in the Honor Harrington series by David Weber. This book had some similarities to the last book on my reading list (Starship: Mutiny, which I reviewed here.) It's a military SF, set in the Navy, and it starts with the protagonist with stationed on the fringes of the galaxy, in what's clearly a attempt at banishment. The difference is that Starship: Mutiny builds up the main character's disillusionment with the Navy and culminates in his desertion. On Basilisk Station builds up the main character's determination and stubbornness in the face of adversity, and culminates with her triumph and promotion. It's easy to see that these two series are heading in very different directions.

I probably enjoyed reading this book a little more than I did Starship: Mutiny. To begin with, this book's protagonist is a woman who's coded as being mixed race, and if you've spent any amount of time on my blog you know that that's my jam. And more than that, Honor Harrington is just a great main character: she's fearless, smart, ingenuitive, and stubborn. Once she realizes what needs to be done in a certain situation, she'll go to any lengths to do it, and that's both her biggest strength and weakness. She never lacks the determination to get the job done, but sometimes that determination tips over into stubbornness: she will do whatever it takes to complete her mission, no matter the cost or strain.

I mentioned in my previous review that the main character of Starship: Mutiny reminded me a little of Horatio Hornblower. I'm getting that feeling again here, the protagonists of these last two books are so similar, personality-wise. However, I think that the Honor Harrington series is more likely to follow the Hornblower series in terms of overall plot and structure. The Starship series probably isn't, since the first book ends with the main character becoming a pirate.

Overall, I really enjoyed On Basilisk Station and I would recommend it, but it had some quirks that might keep it from being unilaterally enjoyable. For one thing, there's a fair amount of politics interwoven with the plot here. I didn't mind that, because I actually love sci-fi politics. (I blame the Star Wars prequels for that.) But it could be considered distracting from the main story. There's also a few places where the author breaks off in the middle of, say, a spaceship chase scene to talk about how faster-than-light travel works in this universe. There's context for those types of tangents, and they only happen a couple of times, and only go on for a couple of pages, so I was okay with it. But it is a little jarring and, again, could very easily be considered distracting.

I also feel the need to give a couple of content warnings. There are instances of strong language throughout the story, and a few fairly detailed descriptions of battlefield gore in the last third of the book. There's also mention of and rumination upon an (unsuccessful) attempted rape in a character's backstory. (That's actually one of my only major pet peeves with this book. I wish the author had found some other way to set up conflict between a male character and a female character, because the whole "attempted rape" backstory felt kinda forced and really unnecessary.)

On the whole, though, I really enjoyed this book and look forward to reading more of the series. If you like science fiction that has action, politics, economical intrigue, and well-thought-out scientific explanations for faster-than-light travel, then this just might be the book for you.

Book Review: Starship: Mutiny

Summary: The starship Theodore Roosevelt is fighting on the far outskirts of a galactic war, its crew made up of retreads and raw recruits. A new first officer reports, Wilson Cole, a man with a reputation for exceeding his orders (but getting results). He's been banished to the Teddy R. for his actions, but once there he again ignores his orders. ...

This is the first of five novels about the starship Theodore Roosevelt. The next four will be, in order, Pirate, Mercenary, Rebel, and Flagship.


So, this is the first book in a series, and as far as I can tell, it’s more of an origin story than anything else. Exterior conflict, generated by the enemy Federation, is present, but it’s minimal and not the focus of the story. Most of the book’s movement is focused on developing and showing Wilson Cole’s disillusionment with the Navy he serves.

That’s not to say it’s a boring book. There isn’t one big overarching conflict with the enemy, but there are enough battles and skirmishes to keep things interesting and advance the plot. (Come to think of it, that’s probably a more realistic structure for a novel set during a war, anyway.) There’s some good worldbuilding, though as far as I can tell it’s pretty standard for a science fiction novel. But what really drives this book are the characters.

This book tells the story of Commander Wilson Cole, and his disillusionment with, and eventual desertion of, the Republic Navy. In a similar vein to Horatio Hornblower, Cole is an extremely smart, intuitive man whose commitment to the Navy is outweighed only by his pragmatism in battle. I liked Cole well enough as a character; he’s sympathetic enough to root for and it’s fun to watch him in action. I do have a bit of a problem with how he’s written, though. Nearly all of Cole’s deductions are correct, and even when they aren’t Cole is always able to turn the situation in his favor somehow. And he doesn’t really have any personality flaws—just good traits that sometimes get him into bad situations. So I think he could have been somewhat better written.

However, on the upside, the author declined to give an in-depth description of Cole’s physical appearance, which means that I was able to imagine him as being played by Idris Elba with no authorial interference whatsoever. That was great.

The secondary characters—other crew members on Cole’s ship—were, on the whole, also enjoyable to read about. My personal favorites where Commander Podok and Christine Mboya. Christine Mboya is the best, and also wasn’t described; in the movie adaptation I’ve already constructed in my head, she would be played by Nicole Beharie. I also loved Podok’s character despite her being an antagonist; I do feel that her actions towards the end of the book were out of character and, without giving out spoilers here, let me just say that I don’t think she would have done what she did. But, well, mischaracterization happens. I’m not super bitter about it. I just think Podok was out of character and I hope she’s better written if she shows up in the sequels.

There are sequels. Four of them, to be exact. Remember how I said this is basically an origin story? Well, to be more specific, it’s a space pirate origin story. That’s my jam, and you can bet that I am going to be reading this entire series and reviewing. Whether it gets better, gets worse, or stays at the same quality level, I’m in.

As for Starship: Mutiny itself, it’s a good book. It’s not the most original thing I’ve ever read, but it’s a solid story with likable characters and a nice backdrop. There’s a solid feel to the story, and I really am looking forward to reading the sequels. I’d say that if you like old-style or classic science fiction, or the military SF sub-genre, then you’ll probably enjoy this book.

Book Recommendation: Under a Painted Sky

Summary: Missouri, 1849: Samantha dreams of moving back to New York to be a professional musician--not an easy thing if you're a girl, and harder still if you're Chinese. But a tragic accident dashes any hopes of fulfilling her dream, and instead, leaves her fearing for her life.
With the help of a runaway slave named Annamae, Samantha flees town for the unknown frontier. But life on the Oregon Trail is unsafe for two girls, so they disguise themselves as Sammy and Andy, two boys headed for the California gold rush.

Sammy and Andy forge a powerful bond as they each search for a link to their past, and struggle to avoid any unwanted attention. But when they cross paths with a band of cowboys, the light-hearted troupe turn out to be unexpected allies. With the law closing in on them and new setbacks coming each day, the girls quickly learn that there are not many places to hide on the open trail.


I'd heard about this book in passing on a list of Diverse YA Books, something I'm always interested in finding more of. When I found out that my local library had it, I thought, "Well, hey, why not?" and checked it out. Back at home, I started reading it...

...And fell in love.

This is one of those books that has everything I could ever possibly want in a novel. It's historical fiction! But with a diverse cast! The leads are teenaged girls of color! It's got a nice mix of humor and serious topics! The plot twists and turns and keeps you on your toes and the characters are wonderful and this is just a great book. I would highly recommend it.

I could just leave it at that, but let's break down why I'm so in love here.

The book is all from Samantha/Sammy's point of view, and she is definitely the most central character. She's unapolegetically Chinese, but she's also American--she was born in the U.S. to immigrant parents and has never known anywhere else. I really, really loved Sammy's narration, because it strikes a perfect balance as the words of someone who's sort of grown up in two worlds. Even so, she's relatable--as someone who hasn't been through a ton of hardship before the events of the book, she kind of allows the reader get acquainted with the Wild West at the same rate she does.

The rest of the characters aren't quite as fleshed out as Sammy, but they're very appreciable all the same. I especially appreciated Petey--actually, I just really loved the book's wholehearted acknowledgement of the fact that the inhabitants of the West during the cowboy/Gold Rush era were very diverse. You had all types of people: men, women, black people, white people, Mexicans, a ton of immigrants from everywhere from China to Ireland... Historical fiction is great, guys, and it gets better when the writer is willing to acknowledge that people of color existed in the past, too.

Besides having a diverse cast, the book has a solid, compelling story, and some great twists toward the end. There's also a little bit of romance, which isn't my cup of tea, but it's subdued enough that it didn't ruin the overall experience for me. Without giving too much away, the ending is bittersweet and gives you just enough closure, while still leaving it open for the characters to live the rest of their lives. And while the book doesn't shy away from serious topics and events, its tone never becomes too dark.

So, in conclusion, I greatly enjoyed this book and I would highly recommend it, particularly to anyone who enjoys historical fiction. If I end up doing another "Recommended Books of the Year" post this December, Under a Painted Sky by Stacey Lee will definitely be on it.

Gracias, y adiós!

The Comparison - Part 4

*Warning: Spoilers. Probably nothing that I haven't yet spoiled in the rest of this series, but you never know.*

Well, here we are, in the final installment of The Comparison--where I finally get around to the actual comparing of the two things I set out to compare. I've talked about Treasure Island (in two separate installments, no less!) and about its less-well-known adaptation, Treasure Planet. I've given an overview of opinion on both pieces of media, and now I'm going to compare and contrast them. As with both of the preceding reviews, this will be divided up into Plot, Characters, and Setting. So here we go with the thrilling conclusion...

***

First up: Plot.

As I mentioned in the last post, Treasure Planet is a movie, and not a particularly long one, so it didn't have the space to really stretch the story out the way the book did. This is actually a common thing; most book-to-movie adaptations have to cut some details for the sake of time. (Unless you're Peter Jackson, in which case you add details in order to take up more time. I'm still bitter.) Generally the question isn't whether the adaptation cut anything, but what they cut and how well they did it. 

In this case? I think Treasure Planet did a good job of condensing the plot. 

For one thing, they cut out the overly-long beginning, which I was really glad for. In the movie, Billy Bones shows up, he gives Jim the map (actually gives it to him!), mutters a vague warning about "the cyborg", and dies. Bam, we have kickstarted the plot.

This continues throughout the movie: everything that happens happens for a reason, to advance the plot somehow. Either it contributes to what's going on, or it gets cut. And it works.

Probably the biggest difference of all from book to movie is that the movie added an emotional subplot/arc that was not there in the book. This actually tied in well, I think, with the direction the adaptation was going. See, if you'll remember, back in my first Treasure Island post I talked about how Long John Silver's betrayal doesn't seem to have a lot of emotional effect on the characters. I also mentioned how the author didn't seem sure of how he was trying to portray Silver/build up the betrayal. Of course, both of these things were done fairly well, and I think in the context of the longer book they worked out. However, these creative decisions wouldn't have worked for a simplified, faster-paced version of the story, and I think the screenwriters knew this. Thus, I really like how it worked out in Treasure Planet.

You see, in the movie, the first mention of Silver we hear is Billy Bones telling Jim to "beware the cyborg" just before he croaks. Shortly afterward, we see a mysterious cyborg-looking shadow lead a group of pirates in burning the Benbow Inn. Thus, when we first meet John Silver, he's already been established as a very shady, if not outright villainous, character. That makes it all the more touching/suspenseful to watch him and Jim form a father-son bond, and that, in turn, makes his subsequent betrayal all the more terrible.

As a side note, in the movie, I feel like Mr. Arrow's death was tied into the greater plot in a way that made more sense. In the book, as I've said, Arrow is a drunk loser who falls overboard during a rainstorm and nobody cares. In the movie, Mr. Arrow is an upstanding first mate--a good friend and confidant of the captain--who is killed by Scroop, who then makes it look like it was indirectly Jim's fault. This ties into Jim's arc and his relationship with Silver, but it also establishes just how far Scroop is willing to go as a villain, and it's a genuinely tragic moment, since Arrow was such a great guy.

And of course--spoiler warning here--the ending of the movie is vastly different from the book. Flint's trap is a big difference (that wasn't present in the book), as is the treasure being destroyed and the last-second escape from the treasure horde place.

Silver still gets away from the good guys and escapes justice in the book, though.

(There you go. I just told you the whole ending. Now you don't have to watch the movie.)

Next up: Characters.

The characters in Treasure Planet are mostly similar to those in the book. However, there are some differences here worth talking about, so here we go.

First up: Jim Hawkins. Jim Hawkins, in the movie, is older than his book counterpart. (He's fifteen in the movie, if I'm remembering correctly.) He's very smart, but he's also reckless and sullen, feeling he has no future worth considering.

The main difference with this character is probably his recklessness. As I said in my first Treasure Island post, I feel like Jim's impetuousness wasn't a very consistent character trait. This isn't the case in the movie; Jim is very reckless and while it sometime helps him or works out in his favor, other times it's purely self-destructive. It's also part of his character arc: over the course of the movie he learns to harness his impulsiveness and think through his actions more.

Next is Dr. Delbert Doppler, who as far as I can tell is a composite character, a cross between Squire Trelawney and Dr. Livesey from the book. He's got Trelawney's naivete about the workings of the world, but he's also got Livesey's intelligence and doctorate. (He's not a medical doctor in the movie. So that's different.) He occasionally functions as comic relief, but he's also a character in his own right. (He's also, in the movie, an alien that kinda looks like a dog. It's a little weird.)

I already talked about Captain Amelia, who's different enough from her book counterpart that she counts as her own character. I don't want to repeat myself, so all I'll say is: I really like Captain Amelia and I'm glad she's in the movie. She's a great character.

The other female character in the movie is Jim's mother, Sarah Hawkins, the sole proprietor of the Benbow Inn. Yes, that's right: the movie removed the character of Jim's father, and they did it for a few good reasons. A) Jim's dad doesn't do much in the book other than get sick and die in the beginning. B) Jim's abandonment issues concerning his father tie into his emotional arc and the relationship he has with Silver. C) It's just all around a more economical use of a character. In my opinion, anyway.

And then, of course, there's Silver, the villain.
Silver is... well, he's actually pretty similar to his book incarnation. He's smart, fast-talking, eloquent, ambitious, murderous, and he hides it all under an exterior that's kind, friendly, and respectful of authority. However, in the movie, his relationship with Jim is a lot more pronounced, and a lot more integral to the story. Also, as far as I can tell, he never knew Captain Flint personally in the movie.

And... I think that actually wraps it up for the Characters section. I'm running short on space here, so let's move along to Setting.

The settings... well, whether you're in the book or the movie, the settings are beautifully imagined and communicated to the audience. The scale is much larger in the movie (they're travelling between planets, through space), but that comes with the territory in a sci-fi film. Obviously the movie is inherently more visual, but if you've read the book you know that Robert Louis Stevenson held nothing back in his descriptions of his settings. (Especially the island itself.) So I actually think the book and movie are pretty similar in that respect. And I think it's somewhat indicative of the overall spirit of the adaptation: there are several changes in terms of aesthetic and scale, but the overarching plot and characters are pretty similar to those in the book.

***

So that's The Comparison! I have to say, I'm glad this series is over, but I haven't regretting writing it. (Remember, folks, this was originally all supposed to be one post.) Actually, I'm largely glad this is over so that I can get to posting about other things. I've got some good things in the works, including a book review and a particularly relevant history post. So stay tuned for that stuff... and feel free to come bug me over at my newly minted Facebook and Twitter pages! And as always, feel free to leave any thoughts, questions, or critiques in the comments section.

Until next time: adiós!

Treasure Planet - The Comparison, Part 3

*Warning: Spoilers. You guys know the drill by now.*

Aaaand we're back, with part three of the comparison! It's been kind of a crazy few days since I last posted, but the good news is that my library request came in, I watched it, and now I'm ready to review Disney's 2002 sci-fi adaptation of Treasure Island.

So here we go.

***

To start: Treasure Planet is one of Disney's early-2000's movies, and it isn't well known for a few reasons. For one thing, the premise is a little weird and doesn't appeal to everyone. (It's Treasure Island, but in a setting that's a cross between Pirates of the Caribbean and Star Wars. Like I said, weird, and that's coming from someone who really likes it.) Another reason is that it did terribly at the box office, meaning Disney didn't have much incentive to spend a lot on post-release merchandising or a sequel. 

All that said, it's a weird, mostly unknown, pretty underrated movie, but the writing is pretty solid and the visuals are gorgeous. 

First up for me to talk about is the writing, otherwise known as the plot. Treasure Planet is a movie, and not one of those crazy three-hour movies, so the screenwriters naturally had to compress the story somewhat. And, in my opinion, they did it well; overall, the story is tight, with a logical, emotional character arc, and with plenty of action. It doesn't drag at all. (Remember when I was complaining about the beginning of the book being too long? Yeah.)

The story is still presented from Jim's point of view, with a few deviations. (And by deviations, I mean scenes that are used to establish the villain and maintain tension.) Also, everything that happens to move the plot happens for a reason; there's a nice tension between characters making choices and movements for themselves, and characters being forced to move because of something the villain(s) did. 

The movie also remedied the lack of tension in the latter third of the story. (Remember that? Where there was pretty much no chance that the pirates were going to win?) In the movie, it looks like the pirates might just win, right up until they trigger the trap that starts destroying the treasure. 

Also, everything in the plot moves faster from a physical standpoint, because space travel. 

Moving on: Characters!

Treasure Planet maintains most of the main characters from the book, with the caveat that most of them are aliens or robots (or both). This is because of the setting. It's a little strange at first. Whether you get into it or not as the movie goes on is up to you. This is where the movie deviates from the book a good deal; I'll reserve my thoughts on that for the next and final installment in this series. For now, since you've heard my thoughts on most of the characters, I'll just talk about the original(ish) characters that the movie added/played around with. 

The most prominent original-ish character is Captain Amelia, who replaces Captain Smollett in the story. (Also, as a note, the ship's name in the movie is the Legacy, rather than the Hispaniola. Make of that what you will.) Amelia basically serves the same purpose as Smollett: she doesn't like the crew, she's an iron-willed leader who helps fight the mutineers, she gets wounded and sorta taken out of commission during one of the fights. The main things that make her distinct and original are a) she's an alien, b) she's involved in a romance (of which there was none in the book), and c) she's the only main female character in the story (this is related to point b). This is refreshing because in the book, the only female character was Jim's mother (who is also in the movie, and is a bit more fleshed out). I guess you could say that Amelia is proof that you can have female characters in your story without compromising the way you were planning to characterize them.

The other character that was pretty much just made up for the purposes of the movie is Scroop, a.k.a. the really unsympathetic guy you're supposed to hate because he's a terrible person. (Most movies have one of these. On one hand, I know it's often a necessary storytelling technique, but on the other hand, it just bugs me so much. No one in real life is that one-dimensional!)

Anyway, Scroop is a spider-like alien who, as far as I can tell, is a composite of several one-off, villainous pirates from the book. He largely exists to create extra conflict and to do the stuff that would make our sympathetic villain look bad. (Like killing people.) He also ends up dying, in a manner suspiciously similar to the way Israel Hands from the book died, which leads me to believe that that's his closest counterpart. But again, it's debatable, since Scroop is probably a combination of several. 

So that covers the semi-original movie characters. 

Finally, we have Setting, and this is the part where I'm really going to rave about the movie. (So if you really didn't like it or something, you can skip this part. I guess.)

Treasure Planet was made as Disney was beginning to experiment with 3-D animation, and it's revolutionary in its own way, in that it's one of the first movies where 2-D and 3-D animation were blended. You can still tell where the 3-D animation is, but for the most part the two styles mesh very well and don't distract from the story. And the designs--the designs for everything, but especially for sets and backgrounds, are breathtaking and gorgeously animated. From the busy spaceport of Montressor to the Legacy itself to the titular planet, everything is wonderfully designed and animated. What's most impressive to me is the design for Long John Silver, who's a cyborg in the movie. He's mostly animated in 2-D, but his cyborg parts--a leg, an eye, and an arm--are all 3-D, and they're seamlessly animated. Seriously, this is one of those movies that you could watch on mute just to look at how beautifully it was done. 

Additionally, the scope of the story is expanded in the movie, which is a normal thing in sci-fi. Rather than various geographic locations, the different settings are planets. I think this expansion was particularly well-handled in the case of Treasure Planet itself. The fact that it's an entire planet rather than--I don't know, a moon, or something--factors nicely into the plot.

As a final point, event though the movie has a sci-fi setting, it still has many of the trappings of the traditional 18th Century Piracy genre. The Legacy looks and acts like an 18th Century sailing ship, with modifications for space travel. (A warning: almost nothing in this movie is scientifically accurate.) It even has barnacles, cannons, and longboats. The stationary settings, like the Benbow Inn and Montressor spaceport, also look a lot like 1700's locales, but they're populated with aliens and have just enough futuristic tech to support the sci-fi image.

So that's the setting. In my opinion, Treasure Planet is high on the list of Disney's beautifully designed films, and the way both kinds of animation were used is truly impressive.

***

That more or less concludes my review of Treasure Planet. You'll notice that it's shorter than my review of Treasure Island. This is because I'm saving a lot of my opinions for the straight-up comparison of the two, which will be in the next post. In the meantime, I highly recommend that you at least try watching Treasure Planet. (It's unfortunately no longer available to stream on Netflix, but it is available in DVD format. Also try your local library.) If you like Star Wars, there's a good chance you'll like it. And if you don't, you might also try muting it and enjoying the animation and design. 

So that's Treasure Planet. Tune in next time for the thrilling...ish... conclusion of the ridiculous and long comparison series. Adiós!

(To Be Concluded...)

Treasure Island - The Comparison, Part 2

*Warning: The following post contains spoilers for Treasure Island, which was first published in 1883. Thank you.*

Hola! Last time in the Treasure Island comparison series, I introduced Treasure Island, the original book, and talked about the plot and main characters. Today I'm going to review the minor characters and setting of the novel.

So here we go--Treasure Island review part two, under the break.

***

In my last post, I reviewed the main characters of Treasure Island: Jim Hawkins, Dr. Livesey, Squire Trelawney and Captain Smollett, and Long John Silver. 

Now I'm going to talk about the minor characters. 

First up: Billy Bones, and Ben Gunn. These two are more secondary characters, but still very important to the plot. Billy Bones, of course, is the grizzled, retired pirate who winds up at the Admiral Benbow Inn and spends a month or two there drinking and intimidating everyone he comes in contact with (except for Dr. Livesey). As I stated in Part 1, I don't think this part of the book needed to be as long as it did; we really didn't need to know that much about Bones, or spend that much time with him. Of course he was an important character, seeing as he pretty much set up the entire plot and got Jim involved in the first place, but some of the scenes with him seemed unnecessary. 

(I also just realized something: Bones didn't even actually give the treasure map to anyone! The only reason Jim got a hold of it was because he and his mother decided to go through Bones's stuff after he died. 

...It makes sense in context.)

Then there's Ben Gunn, a former pirate marooned on Treasure Island. I personally think Gunn was handled a lot better--he's vitally important to the plot, but his involvement isn't dragged out. Also, interactions he has with Jim and Dr. Livesey serve the characterization of those characters. In particular, they serve to demonstrate some of Jim's growth as a character, and Dr. Livesey's thought processes and ability to strategize.

The crew of the Hispaniola is mostly skipped over, with good reason: there'd be far too many characters if the author tried to flesh out every member of the crew. However, a few of the crew are developed as characters, and they are: Israel Hands, Job Anderson, and Mr. Arrow.

Job Anderson is the bosun and one of the mutineers. That's literally all I remember about him. I'm pretty sure he died (as opposed to being marooned). Israel Hands is Flint's and later Silver's gunner; he's killed by Jim in self-defense, after Jim retakes the Hispaniola. I thought this part of the book further served to demonstrate how much Jim grew as a result of the mutiny. He didn't trust Hands throughout the interaction, and he was able to get the upper hand in their conflict through cleverness and quick thinking.

Mr. Arrow, the first mate of the Hispaniola, is the only character where I honestly can't tell why he was included in the story. Like... I'm thinking about it now and I still can't tell why Stevenson decided to do away with the first mate in the way he did. It doesn't contribute to any of the other characters' arcs, and it doesn't really foreshadow anything in the plot, either. (Other than the bit where Jim realizes that Silver must've been the one giving Arrow alcohol.) None of the characters even react to Arrow's death in the narrative. It's just glossed over, like, "Yeah, the first mate fell overboard one night. It was bad. Anderson took over for him and then we kept going." It just doesn't have a lot of bearing on the plot!

The last characters I'm going to talk about are the minor villains: Black Dog and Pew. These characters only really play into the plot at the beginning of the book. They kick the plot off and also sow seeds of mystery in their dealings with Billy Bones. To be fair, they're pretty scary as villains go; they serve to juxtapose the intimidating but mostly harmless demeanor of Billy Bones with the actions of a real pirate/villain. My only complaint is that while Pew does die, Black Dog gets away with everything he does and sort of... disappears from the plot. The last we see of him is when he hurriedly leaves Silver's tavern.

(Come of think of it, how handy that both the blind guy and the amputee... both the disabled characters... are both villains... I mean sure, John Silver isn't the worst person in the book, probably, but he's still a villain... hmmm.)

So anyway, that's minor characters. I've almost certainly left out somebody, so yell at me in the comments if I missed someone important.

Next up: Setting.

Treasure Island was written fairly close to the time period it portrays, so in terms of period-appropriate authenticity and suchlike, it rates pretty high. In terms of place, there are three main settings: the Admiral Benbow Inn, the Hispaniola, and the titular island itself. The port of Bristol functions as a more minor fourth setting that isn't lingered upon.

I've already talked about how the segment spent at the Benbow could've been shorter, so I'll spare you that rant again. As for the other settings, I really liked the time spent on the Hispaniola and the island. The island, in particular, is lovingly described by the author. In fact, the island is almost as much an antagonist as the pirates are, seeing as it has malaria, heat, and intransigent ocean tides.

My only complaint--and I covered this briefly in the Plot section--is that soon after the Good Guys reach the island, say, probably around the point where they take the stockade--the problem is that at that point, the odds start to tip in the Good Guys' favor disproportionately. It becomes clear that the pirates have no advantages--they don't have the map, they don't have good supplies, eventually they don't have the Hispaniola--and even when they do get the map and the stockade, it's clear that they won't get the treasure (thanks to something Ben Gunn says earlier in the book).

That's more of a plot complaint that just happens to overlap with setting, though. The settings in this book really are great--they're gorgeously described and really add to the story.

***

So that's Treasure Island. Like Around the World in Eighty Days, it's a classic book that still holds a ton of story and appeal, and which I would heartily recommend. It might drag a bit in some places, but overall it's a very solid and entertaining story.

And that's my review! Tune in next time, for when I (hopefully!) review the Disney adaptation of this book! (Assuming I actually get a hold of it in the next week or two.) As always, if you have any thoughts or alternate takes on the book, leave a comment, and I'll see you next time. Adiós!

Treasure Island - The Comparison, Part 1

*Warning: Numerous spoilers for Treasure Island are contained in the following post.*

Hi, everyone! I recently finished reading (or, technically, listening to), Treasure Island by Robert Louis Stevenson. I was going to just review it, since it definitely merits some reviewing, but then I decided on something new: I'm going to review Treasure Island, and then compare/contrast it to its Disney movie adaptation, Treasure Planet. 

This was originally going to be all one post, but since that would have been too long, I'm going to review the book and the movie separately, and then do a final post with the bulk of the comparison.

So that's the setup here. Also, rather than go with my standard pro/con format for reviews, I'm going to break this down into sections for plot, characters, and setting, plus some extra thoughts, because I have a lot to say.

And so, without further ado, I give you: Treasure Island.

***

To start, Treasure Island is probably the defining work in the 17th-18th Century Piracy genre. It introduced and codified a lot of the pirate tropes and clichés that are still around today. These include, but are not limited to: disabled pirates (particularly those missing a leg), pirates with parrots, X marks the treasure, treasure maps, and the stereotypical "pirate accent". And it's not for nothing; despite being old, this is a solid book that moves pretty fast and is fairly easy to get through. 

Actually, that brings me right to the first section: Plot. Treasure Island is a very plot-driven novel. Its main conflict is pretty well-known by now: there's a map to a pirate's treasure hoard buried on a secret island, and a competition between good men and pirates to get to that treasure. But I'm going to break it down further.

First off: the only part of this book that really drags on at all is the beginning. I honestly do not believe that we needed to hear as much as we did about Billy Bones. He wasn't that important of a character! Well, in the sense that it was he who gave Jim the map and got the ball rolling, yeah, he was important. But I'll talk more about that in the characters section; the point is, I don't think the beginning of the novel needed to be so drawn out. Frankly, the whole thing with Pew and Black Dog could have been shortened. Black Dog could probably be cut out entirely. But anyway...

Despite the somewhat iffy beginning, once the plot gets moving, it stays moving. It's fairly well paced, too. Stevenson doesn't spend too much time in any one location or on any one event. The twists are well thought-out, and when the story needs to switch points of view, it does.

As a note, I like how the story is presented. It's told in first person, with the pretense being that Jim is writing the story down years later. This takes some tension out of the more suspenseful parts of the story, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing, and it enables Stevenson to really build the story-world--having Jim reference other characters, and having Dr. Livesey take up the story to tell certain relevant parts.

My one complaint about the plot--and this sort of overlaps into the characters section--is that some of it seems to be driven only by Jim's impulsiveness. Which isn't necessarily bad--I'm all for impulsive characters, as long as it's a consistent character trait. But... well, I'll talk about this more in the character section. Suffice to say, I don't think that quite so many plot points should've been driven by Jim's sudden recklessness.

Actually that's not true--I have more than one complaint about the plot. My other problem is that in the last, let's say, third of the book, it becomes clearer and clearer that the "good guys" are going to win. The pirates' advantages dip lower and lower until they're all but gone, and while it's an interesting narrative choice, it kinda kills the tension, in the last third.

Other than that, though, I really did like the plot.

Next up: Characters!

The main character, as most people probably know, is Jim Hawkins. I don't think his age is told in the novel; based on what I know, I think he's about twelve or thirteen. Anyway, Jim lives and works at his parents' inn, where he meets retired pirate Billy Bones. Through an extended sequence of events, Jim ends up with Bones's treasure map, which kick-starts the plot.

I get the feeling that Jim is supposed to be sort of impulsive, impetuous character, but he doesn't do a ton of impulsive stuff until really the second half of the novel. This could just be me, but it feels like a bit of an inconsistent character trait. On the upside, though, Jim is definitely not a reactive protagonist. He has an active role in the plot, and his more consistent character traits include being brave, quick-thinking, and honorable, especially as the story goes on.

Next up is Dr. Livesey, a medical doctor who helps finance the trip to look for the treasure, and acquaintance (friend?) of Jim's family. Livesey is level-headed, smart, and very fair-minded. I actually relate to Livesey somewhat--he's both honorable and pragmatic, sort of striking a balance between the very honorable Squire Trelawney and the more pragmatic Captain Smollett. Livesey looks out for Jim a lot, probably feeling responsible for him, and helps mastermind some of the plans that get him and the other good men off of Treasure Island alive.

Livesey takes up the narrative of the story for a few chapters in the second half (chapters 16-18, to be precise). I liked this, as it gives a new dimension to the story, which is mostly told by Jim. I also appreciated that the author brought out Livesey's voice in that section, making it distinct from Jim's.

I already mentioned Squire Trelawney and Captain Smollett above. These two characters are more minor; but they're given a fair amount of characterization, as Jim interacts with both of them quite a bit. Trelawney is less level-headed and street smart than most other characters, but still proves himself competent; Captain Smollett is, for lack of a better term, a hardnose, but still a good man.

And then there's the villain: Long John Silver himself.

Personally, I thought Silver was by far the most interesting character. He's an extremely smart, quick-thinking man, not to mention eloquent, and it's clear that he has a genuine soft spot for Jim. On the other hand, he's more than willing to lie, cheat, and kill to achieve his goals, whatever those happen to be.

As the story goes on, we learn that Silver, a seemingly upright man, was once part of the crew of Captain Flint, the notorious pirate who buried the titular treasure. He's also determined to get that treasure for himself, and willing to go to great lengths to do it. If I remember correctly, the only characters in the book that Silver doesn't harm or attempt to harm are Jim, Ben, and Dr. Livesey. (Although he does threaten Jim. A lot. The way it's set up it looks like most of his threats were lies, but it sorta makes him scarier.)

I really liked Silver as a character and a villain. My only problem with him is that the author doesn't seem sure of how he's trying to present the character at first. You see, at the beginning of the book, Billy Bones warns Jim to be on the lookout for a one-legged seafaring man. Jim, being an impressionable kid, builds this one-legged man into a nightmarish figure in his head. This clues the audience in that the "one-legged seafaring man" is important, scary, and to be on the lookout for such a character later on. But then, when Jim does meet a one-legged man--Silver--he immediately dismisses him, outright telling the audience that such a nice, upstanding man couldn't possibly be the monster Bones was on the lookout for. After all the buildup and fact that Jim actually had nightmares about "the one-legged man", I found this turnaround to be a little sudden.

Then, even as Stevenson tries to convince us that Silver is a pretty good guy, he doesn't show us a ton about it. Sure, Silver is well-liked by the crew and is friends with Jim and everything, but since the book skips over most of the actual voyage, we don't see him and Jim interacting a ton. Thus, when Silver inevitably betrays the good guys and leads a mutiny, the betrayal feels a little hollow. Sure, we heard about him being a friendly person, but we didn't see it. And it doesn't seem to affect Jim much either. Sure, he feels betrayed and all, but he gets over it fairly quickly.

That aside, though, I really did like Silver as a character and as a villain.

***

Alright, so this ended up being a lot longer than I originally thought it would be, so I'm going to cut it off here. In the next post I'll talk about the minor characters and the setting. So until then, adiós! (And if you've read Treasure Island, feel free to chime in with you thoughts in the comments!

2015 Recommended Books List

Well, guys, 2015 is drawing to a close. It's been kind of a wild year--then again, what year isn't wild?--and lots of stuff has happened. Some of that stuff has involved me reading books. And some of those books were good. So, without further ado, I present to you: the AJ Gonzalez 2015 Recommended Books List. Seven books that I loved and think you should read. (All summaries are written by me.)

***

1. Illusive by Emily Lloyd-Jones

Summary: Ciere Giba is one of a tiny percentage of people given superpowers by a vaccine to a deadly virus. For such people with "adverse effects", there are only two options: work for the government, hunting down others like yourself, or be branded a traitor and be locked up. Of course, a few of the effected--including Ciere--have taken a third option: a fast-paced, dangerous life of crime.

So, it's a little hard to summarize both the premise and the plot of this book--but the book itself does a great job of setting up the premise and keeping the plot moving. It's been described as a cross between X-Men and Ocean's Eleven, and honestly that's a pretty accurate description. Besides having an interesting, almost-plausible premise (I read this while the Ebola crisis was in full swing, and boy did that make it more convincing), this book has awesome, fascinating characters and some amazing twists and turns. I thoroughly recommend it. (And I just found out there's a sequel. I know what's going on my reading list for next year!)

2. Zahrah the Windseeker by Nnedi Okorafor-Mbachu

Summary: Zahrah Tsami was born with dada locks--vines growing in her hair that are supposed to be a sign of special powers. Zahrah doesn't know anything about that; she feels normal, despite what others think. But when her best friend's life is threatened, Zahrah is forced to harness all her courage and all her power to save him. 

I have to say: this book is basically everything I've ever wanted in a YA fantasy novel. It's very well-written with an unusually diverse cast. (All of the characters are black. All of them.) The main character is a twelve- or thirteen-year-old girl with realistic emotions, motivations, and character growth. There's no shoehorned romance (actually there's no romance at all). Additionally, the world-building is incredible. You can tell that the author put thought and imagination into the world she's crafted here. In short: this book was a delight and I highly recommend it. 

3. By Darkness Hid by Jill Williamson

Summary: Achan Cham is a stray, the lowest of the low in the land of Er'Rets. Vrell Sparrow is a noblewoman, disguised as a common boy to avoid a forced political marriage. Neither of them expect to attract the attention of Kingsguard knights--but they do, setting in motion events that eventually culminate in the revelation of a shocking secret. 

So, this probably isn't the most original book I've ever read, but as far as fantasy goes, it is good. It plays out a lot of the common tropes and plot points of fantasy without being too predictable or derivative. It's also one of the few overtly Christian-themed fantasies I've read. The sequels aren't quite as good, in my opinion, but the second one, at least, is still worth reading. (I haven't yet gotten around to the third.) Even if you decide against the sequels, I'd say By Darkness Hid is at least worth a read. 

4. Around the World in Eighty Days by Jules Verne

Summary: Wealthy, mysterious Englishman Phileas Fogg and his French valet Passepartout attempt to circumnavigate the world in eighty days on a bet--but unbeknownst to them, they are pursued by a detective determined to arrest Fogg for bank robbery. 

Yes, this is an old, classic book. (It was first published in 1873.) Yes, I'm still recommending it, because I re-read it this past year and absolutely loved it. It's not hard to read, as some classics are; the characters are all well-defined and keep the plot moving along. Additionally, there are some wonderful descriptions of travel in a pre-airplane world, not to mention the locales that the characters travel through. So it's just a good book overall, and I highly recommend it.


5. The Memory Key by Liana Liu
Summary: In a world ravaged by a viral form of Alzheimer's Disease, Lora Mint is just like everyone else: she has a "memory key", a computer chip implanted into her brain that keeps her memories functioning properly. But when an accident causes her key to malfunction, an old memory resurfaces--indicating that her mother's death years ago was no accident. Lora determines to find out what happened, but with part of her brain on the fritz, the search may only drive her crazy.

So, this book is a little weird, because it has all the makings of a hardcore dystopian thriller, but in reality it's more of a mystery with a few futuristic trappings. Still, it's a good book--the plot keeps you turning pages, since you want to find the answer to the mystery as much as the main character does. It's also pretty clean as far as language and sexual content, which can be unusual for a YA book. I would certainly recommend it.


6. Grandmaster by David Klass
Summary: Daniel Pratzer is eager to prove himself as a member of his school chess club. But he's only a novice, and as far as he knows his father never played a game of chess in his life. Then the club invites the both of them to a week-long father-son tournament, and Daniel learns that his father was once a world-class grandmaster, until he quit chess for the sake of his sanity. As the tournament goes on and tensions rise, Daniel is forced to question if the acceptance he craves is worth it.

I picked this book up at the library because it looked like an easy read, and because I'd never seen a novel about chess before. I was right on both counts: this is a page-turner that's really fast-moving for a book about chess, and the author definitely knows how work a plot that has chess--and a father-son relationship--at its center. It's also pretty clean, which is always nice.


7. Carry On, Mr. Bowditch by Jean Lee Latham
Summary: Told in novel format, this is the story of Nat Bowditch, 18th Century mathematician and nautical wonder, chronicling his life from childhood to the captaincy of his own ship.


This is the only non-fiction book on this list; but it's here for a reason. Despite being entirely non-fiction, it's written and paced like a story. It has some very hard-hitting emotional moments, and all of the setting are very well described. It's clear the author did her research, but also knew how to incorporate it into an engaging story. So yes, this is non-fiction, but I still enjoy reading it, and I highly recommend it.

***

So there you have it: seven books and I read or re-read this year and loved. If you've read any of these, or end up reading them because of me, feel free to comment or email me about it and we can chat. Feliz Navidad and a Happy New Year to everyone!