Asta
Very much what I've come to expect from Emily Henry, now with an added side-story that brought more meat into the usual arc. Not as good as some of Henry's earlier books, but I cried at the end of it all the same.
However I must pick on one detail in particular: it's sex even if there isn't intercourse. I'm sorry this isn't clear to a 33-year-old writer.
Very much what I've come to expect from Emily Henry, now with an added side-story that brought more meat into the usual arc. Not as good as some of Henry's earlier books, but I cried at the end of it all the same.
However I must pick on one detail in particular: it's sex even if there isn't intercourse. I'm sorry this isn't clear to a 33-year-old writer.
Interesting but a bit too focused on the author's own life.
Interesting but a bit too focused on the author's own life.
The first half of this was on par with the first two books, even though Pip's insistence on "being fine" was just frustrating. Go to the effing doctor you idiot.
Then the last half, even the last two hours, happened and everything fell apart. There was potential for a good ending, and while I have to give Jackson points for not taking the expected route she will not get any for what she did instead. It was cringe, overly dramatic and just plain selfishness under the pretence of self-sacrifice. Was that on purpose? Was I supposed to hate Pip by the end of it all? I don't know, but I sure did!
It really feels like the author had the first two part planned very well, and then the last one was done in a hurry. There were points in the beginning, such as Josh casually mentioning a man who's watching the house???, that felt like they were put in to have meaning later in the book, but just never did. What's the point of giving someone a new character trait if it's not actually used in the plot?
There was also WAY too many conveniently empty streets. I don't know about the small towns you all lived in, but I grew up in a tiny one and there's NO WAY all that could happen without someone seeing something.
That ending made me mad, how dare you Holly Jackson.
The first half of this was on par with the first two books, even though Pip's insistence on "being fine" was just frustrating. Go to the effing doctor you idiot.
Then the last half, even the last two hours, happened and everything fell apart. There was potential for a good ending, and while I have to give Jackson points for not taking the expected route she will not get any for what she did instead. It was cringe, overly dramatic and just plain selfishness under the pretence of self-sacrifice. Was that on purpose? Was I supposed to hate Pip by the end of it all? I don't know, but I sure did!
It really feels like the author had the first two part planned very well, and then the last one was done in a hurry. There were points in the beginning, such as Josh casually mentioning a man who's watching the house???, that felt like they were put in to have meaning later in the book, but just never did. What's the point of giving someone a new character trait if it's not actually used in the plot?
There was also WAY too many conveniently empty streets. I don't know about the small towns you all lived in, but I grew up in a tiny one and there's NO WAY all that could happen without someone seeing something.
That ending made me mad, how dare you Holly Jackson.
A strong sequel, more so than I'd expected! There was some similarities to the first part, but it was just on the good side of making things feel familiar rather than repetitive. There were, again, some red herrings that made very little sense since they were never actually explored further, but less so than in the first part.
I appreciated the planning ahead that Jackson had done for this plot, and I felt for Pip's struggling with right and wrong and the unfairness of the justice system. Interestingly the heavy themes walked hand in hand with very chaste relationship-building (an I love you and what felt like a first kiss, what?), which kind of threw me off. Sure, YA stuff can absolutely be heavy, but surely it's okay to mention the fact that an 18-year-old might have a sex life with her - gasp - boyfriend?! It just felt very off, tone-wise. (Twilight-vibes anyone?)
I did tear up a little at the end and hope that Pip can finally have some peace in her life.
A strong sequel, more so than I'd expected! There was some similarities to the first part, but it was just on the good side of making things feel familiar rather than repetitive. There were, again, some red herrings that made very little sense since they were never actually explored further, but less so than in the first part.
I appreciated the planning ahead that Jackson had done for this plot, and I felt for Pip's struggling with right and wrong and the unfairness of the justice system. Interestingly the heavy themes walked hand in hand with very chaste relationship-building (an I love you and what felt like a first kiss, what?), which kind of threw me off. Sure, YA stuff can absolutely be heavy, but surely it's okay to mention the fact that an 18-year-old might have a sex life with her - gasp - boyfriend?! It just felt very off, tone-wise. (Twilight-vibes anyone?)
I did tear up a little at the end and hope that Pip can finally have some peace in her life.
I've listened to a few of Jackson's YA thrillers and it's clear why this is the most popular! Well paced and makes you feel closer to the characters than in others (possibly because there's less of them?) with a well built mystery. Naturally the MCs insistence of doing everything herself gets rather painful at times, but that's just the burden of the genre.
On the bad side the main character supposedly has a friend group of five, only one of which gets to have an actual personality, the "say no to drugs and alcohol" -message is very blatant but apparently littering is completely okay and doesn't deserve even a guilty conscience and some of the "suspects" keep being brought up but are never actually looked into, which makes their inclusion feel rather forced.
As a whole a good listen, but not quite worth five stars.
I've listened to a few of Jackson's YA thrillers and it's clear why this is the most popular! Well paced and makes you feel closer to the characters than in others (possibly because there's less of them?) with a well built mystery. Naturally the MCs insistence of doing everything herself gets rather painful at times, but that's just the burden of the genre.
On the bad side the main character supposedly has a friend group of five, only one of which gets to have an actual personality, the "say no to drugs and alcohol" -message is very blatant but apparently littering is completely okay and doesn't deserve even a guilty conscience and some of the "suspects" keep being brought up but are never actually looked into, which makes their inclusion feel rather forced.
As a whole a good listen, but not quite worth five stars.
Read(sounded?) very much like a debut book in the worst possible way. There was a lot going on and a lot of it could've been cut out without losing anything of importance. I might've forgiven all this if the ending had been satisfying at all, but instead it was rushed and made very little sense, WHY was the six-year-old alone at the cliffs right after the nanny was kicked out?
Just so many things were flat out bad, if I had been reading a physical copy I'm sure I would've DNFd. As an audiobook it made for tolerable background noise.
Oh, and apparently having any kind of mental illness equals to seeing and hearing things. I'd expect this sort of thing from a book published in the 1800s, not 20-bloody-20.
Read(sounded?) very much like a debut book in the worst possible way. There was a lot going on and a lot of it could've been cut out without losing anything of importance. I might've forgiven all this if the ending had been satisfying at all, but instead it was rushed and made very little sense, WHY was the six-year-old alone at the cliffs right after the nanny was kicked out?
Just so many things were flat out bad, if I had been reading a physical copy I'm sure I would've DNFd. As an audiobook it made for tolerable background noise.
Oh, and apparently having any kind of mental illness equals to seeing and hearing things. I'd expect this sort of thing from a book published in the 1800s, not 20-bloody-20.
Added to listOwnedwith 3 books.
The author tried to add too many things into one book, ended up with a mess that was confusing and contradicted itself. The inclusion of the connection to Scarlet Letter felt like it was shoved in in an attempt to get more people interested in the book rather than genuine interest on the authors part, and it was mentioned occasionally as if put in after the book had already been finished. I also found the constant criticism of Dawson's "co-author" to be petty and the author herself to be quite self-indulgent.
I didn't realise this was the same author who wrote "American Sherlock" before she mentioned it in the book. I DNFd that one and won't be trying Dawson's books again.
The author tried to add too many things into one book, ended up with a mess that was confusing and contradicted itself. The inclusion of the connection to Scarlet Letter felt like it was shoved in in an attempt to get more people interested in the book rather than genuine interest on the authors part, and it was mentioned occasionally as if put in after the book had already been finished. I also found the constant criticism of Dawson's "co-author" to be petty and the author herself to be quite self-indulgent.
I didn't realise this was the same author who wrote "American Sherlock" before she mentioned it in the book. I DNFd that one and won't be trying Dawson's books again.
The author tried to add too many things into one book, ended up with a mess that was confusing and contradicted itself. The inclusion of the connection to Scarlet Letter felt like it was shoved in in an attempt to get more people interested in the book rather than genuine interest on the authors part, and it was mentioned occasionally as if put in after the book had already been finished. I also found the constant criticism of Dawson's "co-author" to be petty and the author herself to be quite self-indulgent.
I didn't realise this was the same author who wrote "American Sherlock" before she mentioned it in the book. I DNFd that one and won't be trying Dawson's books again.
The author tried to add too many things into one book, ended up with a mess that was confusing and contradicted itself. The inclusion of the connection to Scarlet Letter felt like it was shoved in in an attempt to get more people interested in the book rather than genuine interest on the authors part, and it was mentioned occasionally as if put in after the book had already been finished. I also found the constant criticism of Dawson's "co-author" to be petty and the author herself to be quite self-indulgent.
I didn't realise this was the same author who wrote "American Sherlock" before she mentioned it in the book. I DNFd that one and won't be trying Dawson's books again.
