Princess Eva Rose

Special Princess, avid reader, fear reviewer and lover of romantic story arcs.

Just okay

Captivated by You - Sylvia Day

Some good moments, some boring ones, a whole lot of frustration and annoyance. This book is a curve ball alright, at times it felt like a lot of things where piled together in order to compile a fourth book and some points it flowed really well.

The dual POV help in shedding light on some issues with Gideon and some people that surround him got more attention which help to understand them a bit. It got annoying how much he thought of Eva and how much he loved her, he obsessed over her a lot. Eva was as usual consumed by Gideon all the time and nothing really happened in this book.

At least I was entertain somewhat.

Reblogged from SnoopyDoo's Book Reviews

Plain dumb book

RUIN (The RUIN Series Book 1) - Deborah Bladon

I picked up this book because I was very bore with my life this saturday. This book was really stupid but its saving grace is that it is not rage inducing.

Kayla has just broken up with her boyfriend and in her fly back home she meets this dude and she has sex with him. The problem with his scenario is that very little prelude is given before they have sex and it ends up reading forced and mechanical. The characters have no personality and everyone is basically carboard cutout.

The plot is the dumbmest crap, it reads like a really, really bad episode of Days of Our Lives. You have the feuding brothers, the friends who fall in love with the guys, the family drama from hell that is so badly paced and written you just yawned.

This book is so lame, I'm glad it was cheap.

I liked some parts

Forgotten Sins - Rebecca Zanetti

I have mixed feelings over this book, I like some scenes and felt the concept was good but there was just... too much going on. We had at least four different plot points going on at once and they sort of competed for attention.

 

I also do protest the way the heroine was kidnap so much, it would have nice to have some sort of other scenario but as it stands she is kidnap like 3 times in the book and two of those times where one after the other. I dunno if I will read the rest, it would probably come down to price.

The pacing was a no show in this book

Fluency - Jennifer Foehner Wells

God! I wanted this to work so bad but this is most boring book I have laid eyes on yet, seriously, it sounds lovely and fun in the blurb but you read it and it is sure to make you sleepy with all the stuff that is NOT happening. I am in serious need of a GOOD female led sci-fi but those are far and few in between all the male dominated series that annoyed me to hell and back.

So, so ending

Reasonable Doubt: Volume 3 - Whitney Gracia Williams

It was an okay ending, I didn't feel Andrew and Aubrey's relationship or that they loved each other. Everything read choppy and forced but I guess there was very little material left to work with.

I burned for real!

Burn for Me - Ilona Andrews

Okay, drop everything you are doing or reading because Ilona and Gordon have done it AGAIN, ladies and gentlemen!

This book was an awesome, wild ride the likes of which I haven't read in a looooonnnnggg time when it comes to PNR. Every other major author out there has so far managed to screw up their start to their PNR series this year but not Ilona and Gordon, they delivered like nobody's business in this book.

While I have been anxiously awaiting this book this year, I do confess to having doubts that I wouldn't like it quite as much, all of us seasoned readers know of the disappointment that can come from too high and expectation. I gotta say however, I was truly, sincerely, insanely impressed.

This is one awesome start to this series and while I do have a few bones to pick they are minor compare to the grand scheme of things. People worry that it was going to be 'romance-y' need not have doubts, while we do have a few paragraphs waxing over Rogan's hotness and perfect bodies and lyrically written sentences steeped in cheese, they are actually less than what is found in most PNR. While the sexual tension between the main couple, Rogan and Nevada, is thick we do not get insta-love and over the top declarations of devotion. We do get a flowering bond between our romantic twosome and it is enough to leave you wanting more but at the same time not enough to make gag.

Regarding the characters, when it comes to Mad Rogan, Ilona and Gordon made about as crazy as I have read a character in a while. He is honestly a psychopath, he has no regard for rules and peoples lives until they serve some sort of purpose. How do you like or fall in love with a man like that? Well, you don't at first, you dislike him and wondered what the hell is wrong with Nevada that she likes him so much. I actually didn't even start to like him until 75% of the way through when I finally started to warm up to him.

There is a slight problem with the pacing in the first half but if you persist you will find the issue fixed and quite an amazing second half of the book that really makes this first instalment. The ending was quite amazing, really over the top, it felt like Ilona and Gordon went down the road of go big or go home.

I CAN'T WAIT FOR BOOK 2!

“Just Say Hale No To The Taliban”

Trout Nation takes on Deb Smith's horrendous case of foot in mouth. Really, an infection that virulent should be quarantined.

Reblogged from Spare Ammo

Disclaimer/Product warning

How about this as a disclaimer on all of my reviews from here on out:

 

Disclaimer: I hope you enjoyed my review, whether it was positive or negative. In the interest of transparency, you should know that I am not actually an owl, in spite of fact that my avatar (usually) shows a picture of one. Also, I frequently read during the day, and under conditions that include various sorts of incandescent and fluorescent lighting.

 

Warning: I write reviews for fun. I claim no special expertise in books or reviewing, and this review is not intended to represent the opinion of anyone other than myself. Should my review infuriate, or otherwise inflame your passions, I find that chocolate usually helps. If you decide to stalk me, I will help you out. I live on an acre in rural Oregon, I have dogs, and myself and most of my neighbors are armed. With guns. Because, you know, redneck Americans. Creeping around in my neighborhood is like to get you shot. Thanks!

Reblogged from Moonlight Murder

The Richard Brittain case

So, there's another story going around involving another reviewer getting physically attacked. There's also some question as to the veracity, so i'm just going to put all the stuff I know here, and you guys can make up your own minds.

 

1. The review:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1056564898 (which mentions the attack at the end)

 

2. A longer, more detailed explanation (this isn't a case of two previously unknown people, they have some history of interaction, albeit unpleasant, on wattpad)

http://www.wattpad.com/75997400-what-really-happened

 

ETA: The comments here provide even more information. Brittain was detained and has been released on bail. Paige says they have strong evidence it was in fact him, and from our discussion in the comments, the incident was probably caught on CCTV. (Thanks Lora, Bettie and Dor for the more info.)

 

3. Some really scary (really, don't click this link if blood bothers you) photos of the injuries sustained.

http://paigeylou.tumblr.com/post/100322554795/why-we-should-be-far-more-careful-online

 

4. The author accused of this, explaining his own bad behaviour (although not mentioning this incident) and the fact he's now seeking treatment for mental health issues. It does however mention that he went to Scotland.

http://richardbrittain.wordpress.com/2014/10/16/a-statement-of-remorse/

 

5. The author accused of this, explaining his own extremely disturbing stalking behaviour (which resulted in the post in #4)

http://richardbrittain.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/a-re-evaluation-of-romance/

 

6. Some newspaper coverage on some of this:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/countdown-champion-richard-brittain-writes-chilling-blog-post-about-stalking-woman-1469962

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/wacko-british-game-show-champ-admits-stalking-crush-article-1.1973629

 

 

My conclusion: 

These two have history, for sure. He's quite certainly dangerous. And someone fitting this guy's description cracked Paige across the head and left her needing a substantial amount of stitches. She's pretty sure it was him, but that is yet to be proven in any kind of legal fashion.

Reblogged from Krazykiwi @ Kiwitopia

#HaleNo

We are making this official and we hope you'll take this stand with us.

We as book bloggers will not give Kathleen Hale any publicity. No book tours, no interviews, no cover reveals, no reviews, not a shred of work from us. What she did is heinous and we can fight back in our own way. She has a new book coming out next year. Let's ignore it completely. 

Please join us. Come to Twitter & declare #HaleNo. Say No to Kathleen Hale.

 

(Credit to Cuddlebuggery for the epic tag)

Reblogged from The Book Lantern

Petition to Goodreads: Safety First - Improve Privacy Options For Reviewers!

Sign & pass it along! 

Reblogged from The Book Lantern

An Open Letter to Kathleen Hale & Guardian Books: Stalking Is Not Okay.

Kathleen Hale stalked a reviewer who gave her book 1 star. She defamed her, harassed her and turned up at her house, claiming she was 'catfishing' her.

 

What she did is not okay. It's never okay, and it wasn't okay for the Guardian to let her brag about it.

 

Oh, and she also cites Stop The Goodreads Bullies.

 

Read more on the site.

Reblogged from The Book Lantern

And today our crazy author is: Kathleen Hale

Unbelievably scary and creepy stuff...

Another author whose works I will not touch...ever.

Reblogged from Susana "Lost in Fantasy Land"

Olga Filina of The Rights Factory Threatens Legal Action to Silence Me

Yesterday, I made a post about my rather unfortunate experiences as the client of one Olga Filina of the Rights Factory. Today, I received a rather unsettling email. Behold:

 

 

That's right, "legal options." I'm not entirely sure what she could justifiably sue me for, but that's not the point.

 

The point is that my immediate reaction was fear, and that's what this email is about. Look how she brings up my career and how I could "sabotage" it. (Note: Shotgun submissions can sabotage a person's career. Having your damn manuscript in the hands of fifty people at once can sabotage a person's career. You'll excuse me if I don't really think her concern is for me here.) 

 

What she wants is for me to be silent. To retract my post. To hide the truth. I'm not going to lie; this scares the bejeezus out of me. We don't have the money to deal with a lawsuit. I suppose I could just fold, just let her censor me. But no one ever speaks out against TRF's behavior. We're all afraid of exactly this, and not only do I not want people to have that kind of power over me, but I don't think I could live with myself if I went silent and allowed other people to put themselves in the line of fire. Because my silence means other people will be treated this way by TRF. 

 

I won't let other writers be hurt, no matter what the consequences for me. Hell, I'm not sure I want much to do with the industry after this, anyway. 

 

I have to wonder, what is she so afraid of? What did I say that could possibly bring TRF's law department down on me? After all, I'm just some nobody on the internet. 

 

This is a warning for all writers. Avoid The Rights Factory. One thing is for damn sure: They don't give a flying fuck about your rights.

 

(If you have the time and inclination, please signal boost. Writers deserve to know what sort of shenanigans are going on here.)

Reblogged from Kaia

Pedophiles, pornography and prison: a not-so-brief response to John Grisham

Trigger warning: This post includes a rather blunt discussion of child sexual abuse.

 

In a recent interview with the Guardian, the entirety of which can be found here, John Grisham said this:

 

"We have prisons now filled with guys my age. Sixty-year-old white men in prison who've never harmed anybody, would never touch a child," he said in an exclusive interview to promote his latest novel Gray Mountain which is published next week.

 

"But they got online one night and started surfing around, probably had too much to drink or whatever, and pushed the wrong buttons, went too far and got into child porn."

 

I stumbled onto this controversy when I saw this post by The Wicked Witch of East Anglia. Without even reading the article, I knew precisely what had happened to rock John Grisham's world: some friend of his had been prosecuted for possession of child pornography. 

 

I've mentioned this before, but for my new followers and people who have forgotten, I have been a child abuse prosecutor since 1996. In the last eighteen years, I've prosecuted hundreds of men who were hands-on offenders, who sexually abused infants, toddlers, preschoolers, elementary school children and beyond. I've also prosecuted more than my fair share of men who were in possession of child pornography. I know a lot about this subject.

 

A great deal more than John Grisham, as it happens.

 

There is a lot to unpack in Grisham's statement, but let me begin with the obvious problem: he is not objective. He is drawing all of his conclusions about fairness/unfairness based upon his personal opinion of what happened to his friend, and his personal discomfort with the fact that it is men who are just like him - "sixty year old white men" - who are in prison for possession of child pornography. This, my friends, is what we call entitlement.

 

It's a variant of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. In other words: this man is like me, I am not a criminal, ergo this man is no true criminal. Corollaries of this fallacy include the "why don't you go after real criminals" fallacy (i.e., my friend/family member is a good guy. Good guys are not criminals, therefore why don't you go after real criminals - no matter what the crime might have been that he committed), and the "he just needs help" fallacy (i.e., my friend/family member is a decent man. Decent men don't do things like this unless they are having a mental breakdown. Ergo, he just needs help. Again, no matter what crime he has committed).

 

I will wager, right here, right now, a stack of John Grisham books that John Grisham has no freaking idea what kind of pornography his friend was actually downloading. Because here is the other thing that I know from years of prosecution - he got all his information from his friend. He has not actually seen the images/videos that were located on his friend's computer. How do I know this? Well, duh. The police don't - can't in fact - show anyone the content of the images seized. Because to do so is a crime in and of itself. Only members of law enforcement, the prosecution team, or the defense team are permitted to view the images. He is relying on his friend's statement about what he did to inform his judgment on how fair it is.

 

Let me let you all in on a secret. Sometimes criminals lie about what they did. They minimize. They are desperate, and being honest about the gravity and the heinousness of their crimes is not in their best interest. If I had a nickle for every guy who went to prison for raping an eight year old who told his friends that "she was sixteen, and she came on to me," I'd be a wealthy woman indeed.

 

I've been doing this a long time. I can count on zero hands the number of prosecuted offenders who just a few images of individuals in their late teens on their computers. Zero hands, as in zeee-fucking-ro. This is for a couple of reasons: 1) establishing that the offender "knew" that victim was under 18 is an element of the offense; and 2) establishing that the victim actually was under 18 is an element of the offense. So, if you believe that you are viewing pornography of a 16 year old, but it turns out she is actually 24, that's not a crime. And if you believe that you are viewing pornography of a 24 year old, but she is actually 16, that's not actually a crime either. It is only when the offender is "aware" that he is viewing pornography of someone who is underage AND she is actually underage that it is a crime.

 

Is it possible that there are a few cases in which this occurred. Sure. But it is far more likely that his friend had ten thousand images of child pornography on his computer, including torture porn, bondage porn, and, even, animal porn, with children who are elementary school age or younger. Because, for the most part, prosecutions occur when men download images/videos of very, very, very young children who cannot be mistaken for adult females. Or it means that the image is of an identified victim - one whose name we know and the date on the image is verifiably her before she turned 18.

 

This whole idea that we are imprisoning unsophisticated old white guys who just stumble upon a website where there is a seventeen year old girl nekkid girl, consensually cavorting about with men her own age, yeah, that's some bull shit right there.

 

I have had the misfortune, because of my job, to view a damned lot of child pornography. It is terrible stuff, especially the videos. Sometimes they have audio, and one is confronted with the visceral reality that these children are crying, and begging not to have to do it. It will burn into your brain and it will not let go. Sometimes they are drugged, and are barely conscious. Sometimes they are hit and beaten. Often the children in them have the empty eyes of the emotionally broken and dead, and the bruised, skinny bodies of the neglected and hungry. The normal human response to those videos is horror, and pain, and a deep sadness and empathy for the children in them.

 

Calling it "child pornography," actually, diminishes its awfulness and gives it legitimacy because, when they think of it at all, people who are unfamiliar with the reality mentally picture it as looking just like adult pornography, but involving smaller participants. Calling it kiddie porn, as we so often do, trivializes it, especially since we have culturally decided to expand the meaning of the word "porn" to include things like food porn (images of extremely delicious looking food) and fashion porn (images of beautiful women wearing gorgeous clothes) and book porn (images of mouth-wateringly beautiful libraries) Porn - that word - it has a modern meaning, and that meaning is all positive. Porn = desirable.

 

Child pornography looks nothing like adult pornography. It looks like exploitation. It looks like violence.

 

These videos glorify the rape of children. They are images of terrible, horrifying crimes. They document the murder of the soul of a child. The idea that men get off on this stuff is vile and nauseating. In addition, no one is "entrapping" these guys into going out onto the internet and playing hide and seek with law enforcement. They know that what they are doing is wrong. They know that what they are doing is disgusting, and is likely to end with them in prison.

 

Anyone who thinks that viewing child pornography is a victimless crime needs to read this: In Court, A Victim Gives Voice To Sex Abuse. John Grisham needs to read it. The young woman about whom the article was written was sexually abused by her father. He was sentenced to 30 years for sexually abusing her. He filmed his crimes, which have been uploaded to the internet, and which are referred to by child protection experts as the "Vicky" series. Vicky is not her real name, but the videos of the Vicky series are everywhere. They cannot be controlled. They will never be wiped from this earth. This is what she says about knowing this:

 

“I wonder if the people I know have seen these images,” the woman wrote, according to the statement, which was read by a senior assistant district attorney, Kateri A. Gasper. “I wonder if the men I pass in the grocery store have seen them. Because the most intimate parts of me are being viewed by thousands of strangers, and traded around, I feel out of control. They are trading my trauma around like treats at a party, but it is far from innocent. It feels like I am being raped by each and every one of them.”

 

John Grisham's friend got three lousy years for his behavior. She, and the other children whose images he, and people like him, watched, and masturbated to, and I'm sorry for being blunt, but we all know that is exactly what was going on while he watched those images, those victims got a life sentence of horror from the abuse itself and a life sentence of knowing that, even when they are all grown up and can't be hurt anymore, all over the world, legions of men that they have never met will ejaculate while watching them plead with their rapists to please not make them do it.

 

So, yeah, three years in prison sounds like a pretty small price to pay for that shit.

Reblogged from Moonlight Murder

Nina Rose's my-precious book montage

The Eternity Cure
The 5th Wave
What Kills Me
Angelfall
Origin
Night Blade
Easy
Froi of the Exiles
Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon, Vol. 1
Eon: Dragoneye Reborn
The Immortal Rules
Fragments
Blade Song
Twice Tempted
Magic Slays
Eona
Cursed
The Iron Knight
Quintana of Charyn
Magic Bleeds


Nina Rose's favorite books »