The only way to describe this book is DINGY (that's din-gee, not ding-y); an old, tired, run-through-the-wash-till-it's-threadbare, piece of collegiatThe only way to describe this book is DINGY (that's din-gee, not ding-y); an old, tired, run-through-the-wash-till-it's-threadbare, piece of collegiate fug.
I've read this type of story in at least 7 different books, but what sets this one apart is that it just doesn't feel *real*. I mean, the characters are fine, or whatever, but they felt like bad D-list actors who deliver canned lines, over(or under)-emote, and feel overly self-important about their big break into the "industry".
So here's the thing: this is a swoony sort of book with no real flaws, but what disappointed me about it, was that the story arc was given away in theSo here's the thing: this is a swoony sort of book with no real flaws, but what disappointed me about it, was that the story arc was given away in the summary and there were really no surprises.
Summaries are tough- balancing between giving too much away or making it so vague it's misleading. And with this one, knowing there was going to be trouble with the old girlfriend just frustrated me waiting for it to inevitably be resolved.
I was pretty annoyed when I realized the book picked up A YEAR after Slammed ended. After reading the first book, the aftermath is all you want to know about, and then the second book just starts off with a recap. I hate it when books do that. Yet I was pleasantly surprised to find that a lot of the stuff we miss in the interim year are detailed throughout Point of Retreat as flashbacks and memories, making them a crucial part of the story. It was an interesting way to do it, especially since Will and Lake talk about their lives not being in chronological order.
I'm not sure I liked this book coming from Will's point of view, either. For one thing, its first person, not third like Slammed. By doing so, I feel like Will's masculinity took a nosedive. His perspective was so obviously female written that I often forgot whether it was coming from him or Lake.
But you know what? It is a sweet story. And having the second book made the first book better. It's a bit cheesy, and almost impossibly happily ever after, but gosh, sometimes you just need the storybook ending. It's a lot like Callum & Harper, really, with the tragic circumstances, the amazingly supportive cast of characters, tender love story, and endless sexual tension (not to mention a couple scenes which are so eerily similar it's uncanny), so if you like one, you'll most certainly like the other.
So yeah, I had some minor grievances, but on the whole, the book, and it's companion, would melt anyone's heart....more
Ok, so it's a cute little story, but nowhere near as EPIC as Callum & Harper.
I never felt a whole lot of affinity for the protagonists: there justOk, so it's a cute little story, but nowhere near as EPIC as Callum & Harper.
I never felt a whole lot of affinity for the protagonists: there just wasn't that much depth. And even though I read C&H last week, I barely remember anything about Tom except the tie-die (and didn't he work in the flower market and have a talent for decorating?), so his new persona didn't help to endear him.
Meanwhile, January from the first few chapters felt totally different than how she came off in the rest of the book.
Neither one makes a meaningful impression, and their story is hardly remarkable, but it's nice enough.
And in case you're wondering, yes, Callum & Harper do make some appearances, but like every other 'series' that brings back former main characters, there's no real satisfaction in it. They seem like cardboard cut-outs of old friends, superficial and strangely lifeless and just a little bit pathetic somehow. It's always a let-down.
So yeah, not necessarily a second book fail, or a fail at all, really--- just not even in the same league as the story of Callum & Harper....more
Not an awful follow up book, but definitely feels a little like one of those this-book-is-full-of-unnecessary-conflict-just-to-stretch-thisGood grief.
Not an awful follow up book, but definitely feels a little like one of those this-book-is-full-of-unnecessary-conflict-just-to-stretch-this-into-a-series.
Unfortunately, the conflict is me hating the characters.
It's annoying to see they have double standards and then be all self-righteous in the meantime. It's painful to see them take dumb risks, obviously setting themselves up for monumental disaster later on. It's just plain awkward to realize I'm kinda wishing they all get called out on it all.
Basically, that's me not rooting for the main characters anymore....more
Update:I just reread this book today, and I don't know what I was thinking 2 years ago when I gave it 4 stars, because it's awful! I'm embarrassed thaUpdate:I just reread this book today, and I don't know what I was thinking 2 years ago when I gave it 4 stars, because it's awful! I'm embarrassed that I liked it, humiliated that I likened myself to the protagonist, confused that I called it "rather clean", and I'm absolutely cringing that two people I'm related to added it to their to-read lists! Consequently, I have deleted my previous review. Now I'm just wondering how many of my other book reviews I need to revisit......more
Really not as bad as I was worried it might be. I mean, the book tells you right on the cover that it's a cheesy romance novel about cheesy romance noReally not as bad as I was worried it might be. I mean, the book tells you right on the cover that it's a cheesy romance novel about cheesy romance novels, but it was a cute premise nonetheless. At any rate, even though these characters are 18, so technically still teens, they are in college, which apparently means a YA book can go from a PG-13 rating to an R....more
I don't know what's worse: the stupidity of this book, or the possibility that it might be accurate.
To be fair, if I were listening to it in audio forI don't know what's worse: the stupidity of this book, or the possibility that it might be accurate.
To be fair, if I were listening to it in audio format, it probably wouldn't phase me. This book is written the way teens talk, and I know all too well that I'm the worst for writing at a much more articulate level than I actually speak. The thing is, seeing it in print, for hundreds of pages, is difficult to digest. Especially when it's things like using 'goes' instead of 'says'. Ex:
'"Hey, Phil," Jason goes.'
'Jason's like, "You can pet him."'
It makes it hard to take these characters seriously at all, even when the rest of the words, spoken or not, are really pretty normal.
Probably what erodes the credibility of the characters more than anything, is their ridiculously shallow thought processes. Not just callous-petty-and-self-serving-shallow, but ditsy-hollow-and-depthless-shallow.
--Lani and her best friend's boyfriend are totally into each other.
--In front of everyone
--Including the best friend
--Who doesn't notice
--And actually encourages them to spend time together
--Not suspicious in the least
--And Lani only feels slightly guilty for any of it
I mean, how could the best friend not care that her boyfriend pairs off to talk to Lani instead of her and they get in a tickle fight on the back porch in the dark?
Easy-- she wants important people in her life to like each other and get along. Duh.
And how is Lani able to justify this complete breach of trust and friendship?
Simple-- her horoscope, her palm reading, dream interpretation, tarot cards, and COINCIDENCE.
Oh my gosh, you like The Little Prince?-- So do I!....What, you have the exact same poster in your room?-- That is so crazy!..... And you've had it since you were 4 years old too?-- NO FREAKING WAY. We are so meant for each other.
You abbreviate words that aren't normally shortened?-- I thought I was the only one!.... Wait, you call it 'abbreve' too?-- I totally thought I made that up! .... You think water tastes like a colored shape, and we both knew this one is an orange rhombus?--- nuh-uh! We are soul mates.
This is all from the book. I kid you not.
The only thing I liked in the story is the occasional, quick-witted, straight-faced banter.
Ok, and maybe I found the subtext conversation amusing: -------------------------------------------------------- "Hey," Jason says.
Subtext: Why are you bothering us?
"So, Lani," Bianca goes. "I was wondering if Erin's going to camp this summer."
Subtext: I need an excuse to come over here, so I made up this lame one.
"Why wouldn't she?" I say.
Subtext: You know she's going to camp because she always goes to camp, so why are you asking?
"I thought she was, but my cousin was thinking about going to camp in Vermont so I thought she could talk to Erin about it."
Subtext: Why are you and Jason sitting together?
I'm like, "You could just ask Erin."
Subtext: Lay off.
"I know, I just thought you might know," Bianca says. "Well.....see ya!"