Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2007 2:15:48 GMT -5
I admit, I haven't read this one, but it actually sounds interesting for a FF novel.
From what people are saying though and the description I read it seems to me like Patrick was only interested in his kids because of the fiancee. Wanting to look good in front of her.
I can't believe though this woman wants to marry a man who willingly walked out on his family and barely had contact for years. But then again she was probably given a version of the story that cast Patrick as the kicked down dad and Elizabeth as the b*tchy ex-wife. And I don't buy that Kristy's mom had been the one because if a person wants to see their kids and doesn't have the law physically barring him from doing so he could. Um, he could COME IN PERSON and see them if he wanted ANYTIME.
I have to ask though, how was Patrick's personality displayed in this book? Because I would understand Elizabeth and this new woman marrying this man if he was portrayed as being charismatic or charming. But in all the reg BSC books he was never portrayed that way. In my head I wrote him better and that way though. Because that at least makes sense to me. A lot of cad-ish fathers and husbands are charming and funny and whatnot and tend to get away with doing the cad-ish things because of that.
Darn, I really want to read this book now! Kristy and her father always fascinated me in the reg books and this book seems like a mildly more realistic version of that situation. I'm also a big Charlie and Sam fan so it might be neat to see those characters expanded upon.
|
|
|
Post by Karen Brewer on Dec 19, 2007 19:53:18 GMT -5
In this book Patrick was portrayed as a man who had "changed his ways" and expected his kids to forgive and forget everything that happened in the past. Charlie wouldn't. Sam seemed willing to forgive him. Kristy was torn.
|
|
|
Post by greer on Dec 19, 2007 21:17:43 GMT -5
it seemed as if patrick was trying to seem as if he had changed, but underneath he was the same old Patrick.
|
|
janey83
Sitter-In-Training
Posts: 374
|
Post by janey83 on Jan 2, 2008 23:00:37 GMT -5
Does anyone remember how at the beginning, Karen asks to go because she loves weddings, and claims that she doesn't have to be in it, but wants to attend. Classic self absorbed Karen.
I felt so bad for David Michael. Patrick didn't even ask Kristy, Sam or Charlie how he was doing. That was beyond cold.
I also think that Zoey probably had something to do with the kids being asked to visit for the wedding. I can just imagine Zoey bringing it up and telling Patrick that he would regret it, and yadda yadda yadda.
|
|
lyricalangel
Sitting For The Newtons

Logan's love-bunny
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by lyricalangel on Jan 3, 2008 0:52:47 GMT -5
^I agree. I also felt really bad for poor David Michael. Even though he didn't really know his father,he must have felt so left out. Thank goodness he had Watson.
|
|
starrynight
Sitting For The Kuhns
 
The Royal Diner of Pizza Express
Posts: 4,004
|
Post by starrynight on Jan 17, 2008 18:53:43 GMT -5
^I STILL wish they had explained in more detail why David Michael was left out.
|
|
|
Post by Karen Brewer on Feb 4, 2008 15:46:02 GMT -5
^ Me too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2008 11:43:01 GMT -5
I haven't read this one. But maybe the reason Patrick was indifferent to David Michael was because he was a suprise pg. He is a little bit younger than the others. He may have felt tricked etc.
Either way he is an a##hat.
|
|
|
Post by Kylie90210 on Jul 7, 2009 18:15:32 GMT -5
I actually really liked this one... It's hard to seperate this Patrick from movie Patrick though! I was kinda angry that no one made him address the David Michael issue, and also that Zoey kinda brushed it off. That said, I did like Zoey.
|
|
|
Post by rainbowgirl28 on Oct 23, 2009 21:08:08 GMT -5
I liked that they didn't wrap up every single issue/question in the book. Real life is messy, and it's nice to see one of the books being a little more realistic.
I LOL'd at Kristy imagining herself in a tux when Zoey was trying on her dress, and something about her thinking about wearing a tux (or preferring a tux over a dress) is hinted at later in the book. I bet that feeds the people who think Kristy turned into a lesbian later in life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2009 16:47:56 GMT -5
I really liked this one (it was such a surprise!). I loved seeing Charlie, Sam and Kristy interacting. I can't help thinking that DM being left out was perhaps a way to de-complicate the plot... it's a lot easier with three teens and no children to deal with. I liked the the way Kristy jumped in to defend Charlie, and Sam staying behind after it, something like, 'You're my family. He's not. Not like that.' I really liked that; underneath the trying-to-please, Sam still has his priorities right...
|
|
|
Post by zoar3 on Nov 12, 2009 21:44:44 GMT -5
I also loved seeing Charlie, Sam, and Kristy interact. I HATED that they ended up going to the wedding, at least without David Michael or finding out why Patrick had not invited him. I also think this would have been the perfect book for a discussion on the Thomas kids changing their surname to Brewer. I always wished that had happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2009 21:59:28 GMT -5
^ I still don't understand why they kept the name Thomas... Charlie, in particular. I always imagined (especially after this book) that David Michael would change his name at least to Thomas-Brewer when he was older.
I guess they went because of Zoey ... although I can see how it would be hard not to. Not that anything like this has ever happened in my life, but I guess cutting ties is hard - you can kind of see that when Charlie says that he doesn't hate his father. I thought they wouldn't go until they did - I really thought they would stay. It was heartbreaking either way though. I kind of feel like the whole issue went unresolved for the rest of the series... Kristy never really dealt with this again.
|
|
|
Post by Kylie90210 on Nov 12, 2009 22:23:17 GMT -5
^ That's true. Maybe they planned on the series being longer?
David Michael Thomas Brewer is a little too confusing. I think DM should ditch Thomas altogether, but I guess the kids would want to do whatever their siblings were doing, and the older ones might not like to ditch Thomas. Was Emily Michelle a Brewer or Thomas Brewer?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2009 23:56:46 GMT -5
^ Maybe they did - I always thought it was way too short.
David Michael is confusing period, IMO. I don't mind double names like "Mary Anne" etc. but David Michael and Emily Michelle annoyed me so much - why? Why not just pick one. Kristy doesn't walk around calling herself "Kristy Amanda"... I don't know what EM was, but she can't have taken Thomas, right? It's not even Elizabeth's maiden name, is it? But then she would go undifferentiated from Karen and Andrew, unless they eventually took Brewer-Engle... What a headache!
|
|