Rating: 
Summary: Where's the "old" Stephanie?
Review: Stephanie Laurens is usually one of those authors that I buy without even reading the back of the book!!! I have to say that I am terribly disappointed with the last few books she has written!!! I keep buying them thinking that she is just going through a "funk" but, I'm sorry to say, I feel that she has "lost it"!!! I bought this one (On A Wild Night) and, of course its "twin", (On A Wicked Dawn), and all I kept thinking about was: "When were they going to stop having sex and tell a story"? Now, I am definitely NOT a prude! I like a great sex scene the same as the next gal, but, I also need a great story to go with it!! I never felt like there was any plot. I never felt like they were in love. I found I didn't even care what happened to them!!! I did finish both books, and usually I'm sad when I finish a book, but I was just kind of glad when they were over. I also felt this way about "The Secret Lover"!! I bought a brand new hardcover (BIG BUCKS) and couldn't wait to get home to read it! What a let-down!!! Needless to say, I am hesitant to buy the new Bastion series!! I guess I'll be reading the backs of the books -- and the reviews -- from now on!!! Sorry, Stephanie!!! I'll keep hoping for the future!!
Rating: 
Summary: manipulative and tedious
Review: Normally I would not feel compelled to add to the 62 reviews already written but some are deceptively glowing and that's why I decided to try Laurens again (the previous book I'd read also left me cold, but this one was worse). This is 400 + pages devoted to the story of a spoiled brat manipulating a man into telling her he loves her. The hero, who has no emotional depth, demonstrates his feelings, overcoming his solitary, society-shunning bachelor ways which are poorly justified, and admits his willingness to marry the heroine (why, I don't know, she's completely self-centered) in the first 3rd of the book, leaving more than half of the book devoted to manipulating the actual words 'I love you' out of his mouth, which at this point is a foregone conclusion to the reader and the heroine, who knows he loves her but absolutely has to hear it. I read a lot of romances, and repetitive plot lines aren't a problem to genre-afficionados as long as they are emotionally compelling. But there was no emotional reality, so all the same old plot twists we've all seen a thousand times left me feeling used. There are great descriptions of lots of raunchy and completely anachronistic sex (as another reviewer pointed out, no unmarried lady in the 1820's can just regularly spend the night at a man's house), so if that's all you want from a romance novel, go for it. Otherwise, don't waste your time.
Rating:
Summary: Tired series which should have been pensioned off
Review: Amanda Cynster, who with her twin sister has been on the Marriage Mart for five years without finding any man she could envisage marrying, has finally had enough: the type of men who attend balls and parties are not the type of men she would consider marrying. So she decides to go on her own husband-hunt, choosing the sort of location where men go to get away from husband-hunting women. Thus it is that she ends up in a gambling den, challenged to a game of whist by a notorious gamester. A mysterious stranger steps from the shadows and offers to partner her and together they win. It's only afterwards that she discovers his identity: Martin Fulbridge, Earl of Dexter, who has been away from Society for ten years due to a scandal in which he might have seduced an innocent girl and murdered her father. Of course, he didn't do it, as we're assured as soon as we meet Dexter, and of course if he wants to aspire to Amanda's hand he needs to prove it - so thus we have Laurens' usual dramatic plot. And once again this plot feels as if it was buttoned onto the story as an afterthought because she ran out of things to write about - other than occasional references to 'the scandal' and Dexter's need to clear his name, there is no mention of it for a couple of hundred pages, and the resolution is all dealt with in a great hurry. Why only one star? Well, to begin with I find it impossible to believe that this book is set in Regency England. I could just about believe it of Georgian England, but not the 1820s. Where was Amanda's chaperon? Regardless of how long she'd been 'out', she couldn't get away with running around gambling dens, orgies, meeting men at five o'clock in the morning and even going to what appeared to be brothels unnoticed. And, by the way, if she had been 'out' for that long, I couldn't see her or her sister still being sought after other than for their dowries: they'd be considered on the shelf by their age, 23. Second, I had thought that this book might be somewhat different from others in the series, in that the Cynster character is female; perhaps a hero not of that family might be an interesting character, for a change. But no; Dexter is depressingly Cynsterish in his traits: uninterested in marrying until he meets Amanda, whereupon he immediately wants her; he pretends he's not pursuing her, but his manner is oppressively protective; he proposes marriage - which she refuses - and insists that she will be his wife, and then conspires to ensure that she has to accept him by enlisting the help of her family. Yes, I've been here before. Yawn. Annoying errors riddle the book. First, Dexter introduces himself to Amanda in the gambling den as 'Martin'. Of course he wouldn't; he'd have introduced himself as 'Dexter'. Second, at one stage he is introduced at a party as 'Lord Martin Fulbridge, the Earl of Dexter'. Incorrect; he is Lord (or the Earl of) Dexter. His first name is Martin and his family name Fulbridge, and so if he wanted to be relatively incognito he could introduce himself as Martin Fulbridge, but never 'Lord Martin'. And what's with all those irritating sentence fragments and verbless sentences? This is a habit of Laurens' in her [romantic] scenes (of which, again, there are too many to be convincing for the period, and they are too long to be interesting), but in this book they seemed even more noticeable than usual. I note that she's finally using 'disinterested' correctly, but she's now using 'evocative' incorrectly. Apparently, Dexter's kisses and caresses are 'evocative' - of what, Ms Laurens? The word isn't an adjective akin to 'sensual' or 'arousing'! I have Amelia's story already, though I don't expect much from it; I can't see me buying anything else by Laurens after that.
Rating: 
Summary: On a Wild Night
Review: This is the first book of hers I have read. I LOVED it. Her characters are strong and well developed. I was laughing one moment and breathless the next. I read this book in 8 hours and then went to the bookstore to buy all of the others in this series. I highly recommend it. Also check out the historical romances by Julie Garwood.
Rating:
Summary: One in a great series
Review: The twins raised in the shadow of uncles and cousins know as the Bar Cynster couldn't help but growing up to be independant, strong willed, and beautiful. From the first night they "came out" the "Bar" ran heard on everyone the girls came in contact with.making the young ladies feel helpless that they should never find a proper match. With nick-names like Demon, Gabrial, and Scandel that fit the former rakes to a tee, these young ladies learned from the best how to manipulate any situation to there own best end. My best recommendation is not to start the series with this book, but start from the beginning. Each book plays a little off the former, carring a subplot line all the way through, showing how this stong family from the Duke all the way though comes to the rescue of the others. A regal family that cares about all of it's members, even those born on the wrong side of th sheets. The woman are strong, they have to be to handle there men, but of the highest cut. They are resourceful, and brave. Not some ninny that hides in cornes. A great series to read from beginning to end. I've recommended these to many of my friends who have gotten hours of pleasure from them.
Rating: 
Summary: SHOULD HAVE WAITED
Review: I must say that I enjoyed all of the Bar Cynster
series, but this book could have used more depth
and have the heroine not so focus on getting your
man, after a while that seem to be the whole story.
I started reading the set of books about The Twins,
Amanda and Amelia and 3 weeks later I am still read-
ing these books. Should have waited until you could
have put more of a story line in it.
Rating:
Summary: This book was boring. Tedious. Dull.
Review: This was my first Stephanie Laurens book and it will probably be my last. I couldn't even finish it, I was so bored. I didn't connect with Martin and Amanda at all and I'm not quite sure how they connected with each other because it was never really dealt with by the time I got 2/3 of the way through the book. I quit reading when all they did was meet on terrace after terrace and steal a kiss and then he'd go off into the night, promising to meet her at the next ball. For another kiss? And I wasn't quite sure if she really liked the man or if it was all a big game for her. She was much too sure of herself. I also didn't care for the detail. There was too much of it and this wasn't a "light read". It drove me crazy the way the author would carry on a sentence, like, "She kissed him long, lingeringly." and "she laughed seductive, sultry." Aren't these the same things? Long, lingeringly? Seductive, sultry? And sentences like "He found her reticence disconcerting. Disorienting." I think they mean the same thing. Her sentences were much too choppy, didn't flow together at all. "He looked. Nodded." It's a pretty drastic change to go from "Romancing Mr. Bridgerton" to On A Wild Night. And what's with all the corny names? Vane, Demon, Patience? Sorry, but I couldn't give this one more than 2 stars and I'm not sure why I gave it that.
Rating:
Summary: On A Wild Night
Review: I read all of the male Cynster books and they were hot and so were the Cynsters. However, I read this one about the first twin and it was boring to me and not as sexy. I read the reviews on the next book on the second twin and it was so bad I didn't buy it. So if we could go back to some more sexy Cynster men I would read all of them.
Rating: 
Summary: Superb!
Review: I liked this book. This was my first novel I read by Stephanie Laurens, and it was a welcome change from my previous novels.
I liked her style of writing, literate and polished, not having a high school drop out kind of english!
It had the right mix of characterisation and sensuality,which made the love scenes sizzle.
A very good book indeed. I'll be reading 'A Secret Love' after this. Hope it turns out to be good too!
Rating:
Summary: so... monotonous...
Review: While this book had great character development, i was very disapointed with it. I stuggled to make it though the entire book. The first 300 pages of this novel (3/4 of it) was nothing but interaction between the main characters. There was literaly NO significant secondary characters. In my opinion, secondary characters and their friendship/interaction with the main characters is what really makes them real to the reader. I think the only thing that kept me reading was knowing that there was a plot, as explained early in the book, but actually getting to it took the reader almost to the end if the novel! While romance, love, and sex are vital things in a romance novel, in my opinion, ON A WILD NIGHT could have done with a many number less love scenes! It got sooooo boring not to mention looooong, I actually had to flip through the pages until it ended, they were pointless to the story line and almost exactly the same each time. This is the first Stephanie Laurens novel I've read, and I'm sad to say, it will also be the last. I was shocked when I read the notes about the auther to discover that she's published 21 such novels! Wow... I didn't know the talentless could do so well.
|
