Review: Treasures of the Snow (novel)

Hard to believe this is the last review of 2019 😮 As a child I loved this book. As an adult... not so much.

Treasures of the Snow is Patricia St. John's second novel, first published in 1950. It's been adapted into a film, an anime, a stage show, and at least one audiobook.

The story is set in Switzerland and revolves around three children: Annette Burnier, her brother Dani, and Lucien Morel. Dani breaks his leg in an accident Lucien caused, Annette tries to get revenge for it, and Lucien tries to make amends. By the end Lucien learns to be a better person and Annette learns to forgive.

Overall I like this novel. Its innocence and clear distinction between right and wrong are a breath of fresh air when almost every story nowadays is obsessed with being "realistic" and "morally grey" -- usually at the expense of having any characters for the reader to root for. The characters actually grow and change from beginning to end. Their actions have consequences, and they have to suffer those consequences just like in real life. And eventually there's a happy ending that makes perfect sense and doesn't feel contrived or implausible.

There's just one problem. It often descends into the trap of preaching at the reader. When I read a novel, I don't expect or want a sermon. (That's one of the reasons I avoid stories written solely to convey a moral.) There were several passages so unbearably preachy that I skim-read them until I reached the actually interesting parts of the story.

If you don't mind the preachiness and can focus on the rest of the story, you might like this book. It's aimed specifically at children, but don't let that fool you into thinking adults can't enjoy it too.

Is it available online?: Not as far as I know.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: A Christmas Carol (novel)

🎵We wish you a merry Christmas, we wish you a merry Christmas, we wish you a merry Christmas, and a happy New Year.🎵 What better work to review today than this one?

A Christmas Carol is an 1843 novella by Charles Dickens. It's one of his best-known works and has been endlessly adapted into every sort of media imaginable.

Everyone knows the plot: cruel, miserly Ebeneezer Scrooge meets three ghosts at Christmastime and becomes a much better person. If you're like me you probably knew it long before you heard of Charles Dickens or even realised where the story came from. No matter where you look at Christmas you'll see yet another new version of it. And that's why it's my second-least-favourite Dickens work. (My least favourite is Oliver Twist, if you're wondering. But that's a review for another time.)

In many ways this novella is nothing like the rest of Dickens' work. It's so short that there are no subplots and surprisingly few characters. Instead of a main character who's honest and decent from the start, Scrooge starts out a complete jerk. And then there are the ghosts. For some reason Dickens' short stories often have ghosts, while his longer ones never do except in stories the characters tell.

But the main reason I dislike this story is its sheer ubiquity. Maybe "dislike" isn't the right word. I'm just tired of it. It's everywhere, even in places it has no business being and where you'd never expect to see it. (The Muppet Christmas Carol, anyone?) By the time I read the book I already knew the whole plot. Most disappointing of all, there were no really surprising twists in the book. The story everyone knows is more or less the book's story. I was left feeling like I'd wasted my time and hadn't read anything new for my trouble.

There's nothing wrong with this book. I would like it more if there was a break between adaptations and references to it. Please, filmmakers, seriesmakers, etc. Stop adapting the same story again and again. Something more original would be appreciated.

Is it available online?: Yes, on Gutenberg.

Rating: 4/10.

(Not Really a) Review: Films I Watch at Christmas

🎵It's the most wonderful time of the year...🎵 And I'm so busy with Christmas preparations that I haven't time to write a proper review. So instead I'm doing a short list: my five favourite films to watch at Christmas. (Note that I didn't say "Christmas films". They're so trite and repetitive nowadays that I hardly bother watching any films specifically called Christmas films.)

It's a Wonderful Life (1946) is at the top of almost everyone's list of favourite Christmas films. And with very good reason. Sure, it's unrealistic and often silly. But it's so cute and heartwarming that I love it anyway.

Mickey's Christmas Carol (1983) is a bit of an oddity. It's an adaptation of A Christmas Carol, obviously, with Uncle Scrooge as Ebeneezer Scrooge (what a surprise!) and other Disney characters as everyone else. By all logic I shouldn't like it at all. I've never been able to like A Christmas Carol. But it's entertaining, and surprisingly sad in parts. So I enjoy it much more than I'd expect.

Prancer (1989) is one of those films that I love mainly because I watched it as a child. Rewatching it as an adult I can see it's not nearly as perfect as I used to think it was. But nostalgia means I still watch it every Christmas.

No, this isn't even remotely a Christmas-y film. But Beauty and the Beast (1991) is my all-time favourite Disney film and one of the best fairy-tale adaptations ever made. That's a pretty good reason to watch it at any time of the year.

What do you mean, this isn't a Christmas film? It's right there in the title! The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) is a wonderfully creepy film that I love watching all through the year. At Christmas and Halloween I just watch it even more than usual 😄

And now, "Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night"!

Review: Rob Roy (novel)

Believe it or not, it's possible (but very rare) for a book's plot to be implausible, contrived and poorly-thought-out... and for the book to still be interesting and enjoyable. This is one of those books.

Rob Roy is an 1817 novel by Sir Walter Scott. It's part of his Waverley series (which isn't a series in the modern sense; the books have similar settings and themes, not the same characters or stories). Several films with the book's title have been made, but none of them are actual adaptations of it.

Despite being the title character, Rob Roy isn't the narrator or the main character. He doesn't even appear until a quarter of the way through. Instead the main character is Frank Osbaldistone. A disagreement with his father leads to Frank being sent to stay with his uncle, while his sinister cousin Rashleigh takes his place in his father's business. Unsurprisingly Rashleigh turns out to be a crook, and Frank ends up fleeing to Scotland in search of some way to undo the damage Rashleigh's done. Along the way he meets and is helped by Rob Roy, and falls in love with the mysterious Diana Vernon.

The plot, as already mentioned, is by far the weakest part of the story. The characters aren't much better. Rob Roy is the only one who truly leaves an impression. Frank was so dull that I couldn't even remember his name after I finished the book. Diana is an interesting character but an unconvincing love interest. And Rashleigh, the main villain, is offstage (off-page?) for most of the story.

Most irritating of all are the frequent -- and lengthy -- paragraphs written entirely in a nigh-incomprehensible Scottish accent. You'd need a translator to understand half of what Andrew Fairservice says.

Yet in spite of all these drawbacks, I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this book. The story is so exciting that you hardly notice how contrived the events are. I knew at the start that it was going to end with Frank marrying Diana and Rashleigh getting his just desserts, but it was still entertaining to see how that happened.

If you don't mind wading through the elaborate prose (to say nothing of the Scottish accents) and just want to read a fun historical novel without too much plot, this is the book for you!

Is it available online?: Yes, on Gutenberg.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: Barchester Towers (novel)

At the start of 2019 I barely knew who Anthony Trollope was. Now he's one of my favourite authors. Shows how much can change in a year!

Barchester Towers is an 1857 novel by Anthony Trollope. It's the second in the Chronicles of Barsetshire series, but -- like The Eustace Diamonds -- I read it without realising it was part of a series. It was adapted in a miniseries, The Barsetshire Chronicles, in 1982.

I started the book expecting to be bored. It was at the top of every "Anthony Trollope novels you should read" list I saw, many other readers wrote positive reviews of it, but I honestly couldn't see how anyone could make a story about clerical disputes interesting. Oh boy, was I wrong.

The story revolves around a bishopric and a hospital wardenship (is that a word?). Archdeacon Grantly expects to become bishop, Bishop Proudie actually gets the bishopric, Mrs. Proudie is the one really in charge, Mr. Harding expects to become warden, and Mr. Slope interferes in everything. It's a lot more interesting than it sounds.

In some ways this book reminds me a lot of Cranford (novel. not series). It doesn't have much of a plot; it's mainly about the people who live in Barchester and their efforts at working with or against each other. It's a much funnier book than I expected, with some very memorable characters. Who could ever forget the loathsome Mr. Slope, or the very intimidating Mrs. Proudie? 😄

Most of the book can be understood without reading The Warden, the first book in the series. There are only a few references to earlier events that I didn't understand, but the story still makes sense without knowing about those events.

If you've never read an Anthony Trollope novel before, this would probably be a good one to start with!

Is it available online?: Yes, on Gutenberg.

Rating: 10/10.

Review: Ashes of Love

Some Cdramas, for reasons known only to the translators, have multiple titles. This causes headaches for people trying to decide which title to use. So I'd better make it clear from the start: this is a review of the series that is called both Ashes of Love and Heavy Sweetness, Ash-Like Frost.

Ashes of Love, AKA Heavy Sweetness, Ash-Like Frost, AKA 香蜜沉沉烬如霜, AKA Xiāng Mì Chén Chén Jìn Rú Shuāng is a 2018 Chinese series. It's based on the novel of the same name (the Chinese name, that is) by Dian Xian.

I only recognised three actors:
Yun Xi Luo (Rong Qi in Princess Silver) as Run Yu
Yu Qi Chen (Tuoba Di in The Princess Wei Young) as Liu Ying
Yi Fei Wang (Xiao Qing in The Untamed: The Living Dead) as Sui He

The series starts off a comedy. It doesn't stay one for long. Jin Mi finds an injured bird and rescues it. The bird turns out to be Xu Feng, son of the Heavenly Emperor and Empress, who was attacked by a mysterious assassin. Jin Mi decides she really wants to see the Heaven Realm. So Xu Feng takes her back with him. While there she meets his half-brother, Run Yu, and the three of them get dragged into a love triangle. Meanwhile, the Heavenly Empress is determined to get rid of everyone she doesn't like... including Jin Mi and Run Yu.

Chinese dramas, especially fantasy and historical ones, are rather like Dickens novels. Attempting to explain their plots and subplots would take hours. So I'll move on to a different subject: the characters.

Jin Mi

Jin Mi is, to put it bluntly, an idiot. Her habit of jumping into things without knowing what she's doing causes endless trouble for herself and everyone else. But unlike some idiotic characters, at least she's an entertaining idiot. She provides a lot of the series' humour, even when it becomes less outright comedic.

Xu Feng

Xu Feng is one of those characters who never made much impression on me. I don't like him or dislike him. He's just... there.

Run Yu

And now, a character who definitely did make an impression on me! Run Yu became my favourite character almost as soon as he appeared. The flashbacks to his childhood are heartbreaking 😢 Honestly, I cheered him on when he finally had enough and lashed out against his father and stepmother. At the same time I really wanted to slap some sense into him, because why did he insist on marrying Jin Mi? When it was so obvious she wasn't happy?! 😒

This is one of the few series where I don't ship either part of the love triangle. (In fact, I've seen so many series with love triangles that I'm sick of them. Find more original love stories, series-makers! Enough angst and indecision about which love interest the main character will choose!) Jin Mi and Xu Feng are frankly dull. Jin Mi and Run Yu? No, no, no. They could never make each other happy. Not to mention Run Yu treating Jin Mi like a possession he can "reclaim" by fighting Xu Feng 😒 This series would honestly have been better without a romance subplot at all.

I liked some of the series. Other parts of it infuriated me. That mortal realm subplot bored me so much I skipped almost all of it. At least the scenery and the music are always beautiful. There were times when I completely forgot about what was happening in the story because the scenery was so pretty! 😄

Is it a bad series? No. But it's also not my favourite. I'd recommend it mainly for people who like fantasy and don't mind love triangles.

Is it available online?: Yes, on YouTube with English subtitles.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: And Then There Were None (2015)

I have a confession to make, one that will amaze anyone who knows me in real life: I've never read any of Agatha Christie's books. Someone is probably thinking, "How can you be a bookworm and not read her books?" Good question. I want to read some of her books, but I've never got around to it yet. So I was one of the few people to watch this series with only a vague idea of the plot.

And Then There Were None is a 2015 miniseries adapted from the book of the same name by Agatha Christie. It's the first miniseries adaptation, but there have been at least four different film versions. I wrote this review while watching the series, so it's basically a list of my thoughts as I watched it.

There are several recognisable actors.

Anna Maxwell Martin (Esther in Bleak House 2005) as Mrs. Rogers

Charles Dance (Mr. Tulkinghorn in Bleak House 2005) as Wargrave

Burn Gorman (Mr. Guppy in Bleak House 2005) as Blore

Douglas Booth (Pip in Great Expectations 2011) as Marston

Sam Neill (Dr. Grant in Jurassic Park) as MacArthur

Miranda Richardson (Lady Van Tassel in Sleepy Hollow 1999) as Miss Brent

Aidan Turner (Kíli in The Hobbit) as Lombard

The opening credits are, not to put too fine a point on it, ugly. I hardly noticed any of the names at first. I was too busy trying to figure out what on earth those hideous green things were supposed to be. The first scenes aren't an improvement. The constant cuts between apparently-unrelated events left me wondering what the heck I was watching.

The series finds a creative way to introduce all the characters. We start with a woman being offered a job she didn't apply for -- something that would have warned most people there was something suspicious going on. Then we abruptly jump to letters being sent to other people, interspersed with those people going about their days. Creative, but confusing.

I like the music; it's suitably ominous. So is the incredibly bleak island the characters go to. What sort of island has massive cliffs in the middle of it?!

Is this an island or the Loch Ness Monster?

Imagine trying to write a tourist brochure for this island! An idyllic destination for anyone who likes to spend their holidays terrified of falling. If you don't have a fear of heights already, this place will give you one.

Ugh, the hideous green things reappear. Now I'm fairly sure they're supposed to be statues. Statues that look like the first attempts of a clumsy amateur statue-maker who made them while blindfolded 😒

What are those servants up to? At first I thought they were Mr. and Mrs. Owen in disguise. I'm trying very hard not to look up the book's plot, but the series takes ages to explain anything. At this rate I'll have to consult Wikipedia just to understand what's happening.

None of the characters are admirable, but Lombard stands out as a disgusting creep 😠

Love the scene where darkness literally covers the island! It's incredibly eerie, and the symbolism is obvious without being obnoxious.

The flashbacks to the murders are chilling 😨 I was wrong when I said Lombard's a disgusting creep. He's a complete monster 😱 I know enough of the plot to know most of the people on the island die. But I didn't expect the first death would happen so suddenly 😨

Episode two begins with two dead guests and two missing statues. (Thank goodness there are two less of those eyesores!) Sometimes this series feels more like horror than mystery. The way the camera lingers on the axe is honestly terrifying.

Some parts of the plot remind me a lot of Murder on the Orient Express. Most notably when everyone realises the killer is one of the guests.

As if the whole thing isn't creepy enough, the series just has to go the "dark and stormy night" route. Complete with lights going out, windows blowing open, and the moon going behind a cloud. And another murder, of course. Possibly the goriest yet 😱

Hiding a key and a gun in a bearskin rug? What a weird place to hide anything. Though I guess it worked; no one found the key. Yet.

It took me until the opening credits of episode three to realise that title card isn't just a mass of cracked statues; it's in the shape of the island and the house. Now I feel stupid for not noticing it earlier.

Someone clearly thought there wasn't enough horror in the series, so they showed some of the guests imagining their victims are in their rooms. I'm not sure if those are supposed to be hallucinations or if we're meant to believe they're actual ghosts. Either way, they're terrifying. Especially the hand in the sink 😨

Oh, for goodness' sake. A horror/mystery series is much better off without a romance subplot, but they just had to shoehorn one in here anyway. Not only does it interrupt the suspense, it's utterly out of place. And between the most despicable guest and the closest the series has to a main character, too. I don't know if it was in the book. Even if so, it should have been left out of the series.

What on earth? The bearskin rug came to life?! That had better be another hallucination 😒

I suspect the director wanted Lombard's death to be sad. The "romance" earlier only makes sense if you think it's meant to turn later events into a tear jerker. Unfortunately, Lombard was such a vile character that I didn't feel sorry for him at all. And the way Vera shrieked and hopped around just looked silly.

THE JUDGE WASN'T DEAD?????? And he was behind the whole thing? ...I should probably have guessed. Any character played by Charles Dance is practically guaranteed to be a villain.

The final scene is possibly the most disturbing in the whole series. Even if anyone finds all the bodies, they'll have no idea what really happened or who the killer was. Creepy.

Overall I quite enjoyed this series. I don't know how faithful it is to the book, but as a story in its own right it's fairly good. My main problem with it is how utterly despicable all the characters are. I know that's the point of the series, but I prefer stories with at least one relatively decent character.

Is it available online?: I doubt it.

Rating: 6/10.

Review: Belgravia (novel)

Happy December! I hope my readers had a far less stressful November than I did 😄

Belgravia is a 2016 novel by Julian Fellowes, creator of Downton Abbey. (Which does not bode well for its quality or historical accuracy.) Next year it will be adapted into a miniseries.

The main plot takes place in 1840s London. But it's shaped by events that happened years earlier, in Belgium shortly before the Battle of Waterloo. The story revolves around a scandal involving two very different families, and the different ways they try to deal with it or cover it up.

I started this book not expecting much. Everyone knows how Downton Abbey turned into a train-wreck, and honestly that "From the author of Downton Abbey" logo on the cover made me reluctant to read it. When I finished the first chapter I thought, "Well, it's not too bad so far. Might as well continue." I continued to read. I finished the book. And when I finished it I was left with a new conviction: Julian Fellowes is unable to write anything consistently good.

Belgravia, much like Downton, starts out a fairly decent period drama. It's not the greatest, but it's not absolute trash. I enjoyed the first two or three chapters. Then, like Downton, the quality deteriorates. Rapidly. Before long the plot became a shambling mess, the characters lost any realism they had, and I only read on to see how it ended. I skipped whole scenes to get to the resolution.

Surprisingly the book manages an unforeseen and actually interesting twist near the end: the discovery that the scandal didn't actually exist. Not in the way everyone thought it did, anyway. That was the only thing I didn't see coming. Everything else was predictable. A predictable plot isn't always a bad thing, but it's certainly not going to keep a reader interested for long.

The resolution of the villains' subplots is the part I hated most. John tried to murder Charles, and he gets off scot-free. All right, so he's in financial difficulties, but that's hardly any retribution for all his vileness. Susan outright gets rewarded for her sins. Oliver is an absolute idiot who stirs up trouble out of petty jealousy... and he gets rewarded too. Argh!

I can safely say I will never reread this book. And it's extremely unlikely I'll bother to watch the miniseries. There are far better period drama to read and watch.

Is it available online?: Not as far as I know.

Rating: 2/10.

The Curious Case of the Disappearing Reviewer

...Or, why this blog has been so quiet lately.

Sorry for not posting any reviews for a few weeks! I was so busy trying to finish NaNoWriMo that I had no time for anything else. Now that NaNo's over for another year, I finally have time for the blog again! Reviews will restart as normal on Wednesday.