Scan barcode
helgamharb's review against another edition
5.0
The sky is falling...
The first thing I thought as soon as I finished the book was: WOW! I want more!
The second thing I thought was: I should read Ragdoll again!
What a tense and satisfying read this was!
A deadly game of cat and mouse. A macabre tale of murder and mayhem; parallel killings in two cities. London and New York are on high alert as bodies are being hanged as puppets and baits. But who is the puppeteer? Who is pulling the strings? And who are his next victims?
The first thing I thought as soon as I finished the book was: WOW! I want more!
The second thing I thought was: I should read Ragdoll again!
What a tense and satisfying read this was!
A deadly game of cat and mouse. A macabre tale of murder and mayhem; parallel killings in two cities. London and New York are on high alert as bodies are being hanged as puppets and baits. But who is the puppeteer? Who is pulling the strings? And who are his next victims?
talesofaliteraryaddict's review against another edition
3.0
If you forget plots as easily as I do it’s imperative you read this series back to back. There’s too many references to Ragdoll to fully understand this as a stand-alone if there’s a delay in reading.
ritaralha's review against another edition
3.0
Em 2017, li e gostei do livro de estreia de Daniel Cole, intitulado [b:Boneca de Trapos|38719949|Boneca de Trapos (Fawkes and Baxter, #1)|Daniel Cole|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1519299683l/38719949._SY75_.jpg|50732235], o primeiro livro da série Fawkes and Baxter. No entanto, acabei por me esquecer do autor ao longo dos últimos seis anos. Foi apenas há alguns dias que me deparei com o segundo livro e senti vontade de dar continuidade à série.
Do livro 1, só tinha recordações vagas. O Wolf era uma personagem que ou se adora ou se odeia, e não tinha gostado particularmente da agente Baxter. A minha personagem favorita tinha sido o detective Edmunds, talvez por isso as primeiras páginas foram um pouco penosas para me recordar dos detalhes.
Há assassinatos para todos os gostos, desde homicídios aos pares até assassinatos em massa. Não me lembro de um livro com uma quantidade tão grande de mortes.
A leitura foi um pouco confusa, com demasiadas personagens e sempre algo a acontecer.
Achei completamente desnecessária a parte passada em Nova Iorque e pouco verosímeis as partes em que a Baxter e o Rouche, já completamente ensanguentados e feridos, conseguem levantar-se e continuar com as perseguições.
Quanto ao humor, ainda está presente, mas em doses mais reduzidas.
O Wolf e o Edmunds têm uma participação limitada neste livro e continuo sem gostar da Baxter, mas vou ler o último da série, só espero que não seja daqui a 6 anos.
Do livro 1, só tinha recordações vagas. O Wolf era uma personagem que ou se adora ou se odeia, e não tinha gostado particularmente da agente Baxter. A minha personagem favorita tinha sido o detective Edmunds, talvez por isso as primeiras páginas foram um pouco penosas para me recordar dos detalhes.
Há assassinatos para todos os gostos, desde homicídios aos pares até assassinatos em massa. Não me lembro de um livro com uma quantidade tão grande de mortes.
A leitura foi um pouco confusa, com demasiadas personagens e sempre algo a acontecer.
Achei completamente desnecessária a parte passada em Nova Iorque e pouco verosímeis as partes em que a Baxter e o Rouche, já completamente ensanguentados e feridos, conseguem levantar-se e continuar com as perseguições.
Quanto ao humor, ainda está presente, mas em doses mais reduzidas.
O Wolf e o Edmunds têm uma participação limitada neste livro e continuo sem gostar da Baxter, mas vou ler o último da série, só espero que não seja daqui a 6 anos.
exorcismemily's review against another edition
3.0
I adored Ragdoll, the first book in this series. I was so excited to get my hands on an early copy of Hangman, but I feel pretty let down.
Where Ragdoll was hard-hitting and fast-paced, Hangman is much more of a slow burn. Procedural novels are already not my favorite, but I've found some that I've really loved. I struggle with maintaining interest in procedural novel of it's slow.
My attention went in and out with this one, but the few scenes that interested me weren't enough to hold my focus. I am pretty sad since I had really been looking forward to Hangman.
Where Ragdoll was hard-hitting and fast-paced, Hangman is much more of a slow burn. Procedural novels are already not my favorite, but I've found some that I've really loved. I struggle with maintaining interest in procedural novel of it's slow.
My attention went in and out with this one, but the few scenes that interested me weren't enough to hold my focus. I am pretty sad since I had really been looking forward to Hangman.
thiscoconutreads's review against another edition
dark
emotional
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
4.0
litwithleigh's review against another edition
4.0
3.5 generously rounded up to a 4
Writing: bangerlicious | Plot: depends on your yeetage of disbelief abilities | Ending: gucci
SYNOPSIS
A series of murders in New York and London that are seemingly connected to the Ragdoll case have Baxter shooketh.
MY OPINION
Okay before we get into it you need to know two things:
1. You absolutely 100% need to read book #1 ([b:Ragdoll|30259893|Ragdoll (Fawkes and Baxter, #1)|Daniel Cole|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1473338167l/30259893._SY75_.jpg|50732235]) before this one. This is saying something since IYKYK, I'm an absolute vet when it comes to jumping into a series wherever I please and still enjoying myself. I read Ragdoll in November and I was still lost af in some area. I just finished #3 (read it right after this one) and you can't be reading that one as a standalone either. There's some 'clues' for #3 in this book.
2. EXTREME yeetage of disbelief required. There's a lil interview with the author in the back of the book and he says that he writes 'cinematically' and is not confined by the restrictions of reality. There's one scene in particular where you'd be luckier to pick the winning lotto numbers than try to logic out how it's possible. This scene in particular had me giving the book a HUGE side-eye, and I probably would've rounded down if it wasn't for the author saying straight up he wasn't tryna write anything remotely realistic. Mission accomplished, Cole.
Alright, now let's get to this book. Like #1, the humour is the saving grace and the reason why I rounded it up to a 4. Cole has a way of writing genuinely funny scenes that separate this book from the pack. Sometimes I share excerpts in my reviews of good and stanklicious writing, but nothing can top this literary masterpiece:
She shrugged: 'Freaks be freakin'' LMFAOOO SHAKESPEARE WHO??? I've never read anything funnier in my life.
The major buzzkill in this book is Baxter. Despite reading #1, I legitimately have no memory of her whatsoever. I know she was there, but I don't recall her being this RUDE. Good thing Cole made it clear he wasn't tryna be realistic, because her ass would've been canned in about 5 minutes given how she speaks to everyone. She's like my arch nemesis DD Warren, but if DD woke up on the wrong side of the bed covered in cow shit. And it's not even a case where she's like Spencer Reid from Criminal Minds with a big ole super brain. All her 'breakthroughs' are served up by Edmunds (looks like he was the hero of #1 as well, according to my review). Baxter just moves through life like a stereoided out Bull in a China shop. Absolutely brutal.
I found the case interesting (again, extreme yeetage of disbelief required), and I can definitely see it working well on-screen with Gerald Butler running this way and that. While Baxter was a sore spot, Rouche made up for it with his quirky antics. Idk why but Elliot Curtis reminded me of Chelsea Arrington from The Night Agent. Anyways, all in all a fun book to get lost in but I wish Baxter had been voted off the island.
PROS AND CONS
Pros: great wit and dark humor, interesting case when you yeet your disbelief, loved Rouche's character, fast paced
Cons: BAXTER.
____________________________
For some sick reason, do you want to hear more of my nonsense? Check out my podcast: Novels & Nonsense streaming everywhere.
Writing: bangerlicious | Plot: depends on your yeetage of disbelief abilities | Ending: gucci
SYNOPSIS
A series of murders in New York and London that are seemingly connected to the Ragdoll case have Baxter shooketh.
MY OPINION
Okay before we get into it you need to know two things:
1. You absolutely 100% need to read book #1 ([b:Ragdoll|30259893|Ragdoll (Fawkes and Baxter, #1)|Daniel Cole|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1473338167l/30259893._SY75_.jpg|50732235]) before this one. This is saying something since IYKYK, I'm an absolute vet when it comes to jumping into a series wherever I please and still enjoying myself. I read Ragdoll in November and I was still lost af in some area. I just finished #3 (read it right after this one) and you can't be reading that one as a standalone either. There's some 'clues' for #3 in this book.
2. EXTREME yeetage of disbelief required. There's a lil interview with the author in the back of the book and he says that he writes 'cinematically' and is not confined by the restrictions of reality. There's one scene in particular where you'd be luckier to pick the winning lotto numbers than try to logic out how it's possible. This scene in particular had me giving the book a HUGE side-eye, and I probably would've rounded down if it wasn't for the author saying straight up he wasn't tryna write anything remotely realistic. Mission accomplished, Cole.
Alright, now let's get to this book. Like #1, the humour is the saving grace and the reason why I rounded it up to a 4. Cole has a way of writing genuinely funny scenes that separate this book from the pack. Sometimes I share excerpts in my reviews of good and stanklicious writing, but nothing can top this literary masterpiece:
She shrugged: 'Freaks be freakin'' LMFAOOO SHAKESPEARE WHO??? I've never read anything funnier in my life.
The major buzzkill in this book is Baxter. Despite reading #1, I legitimately have no memory of her whatsoever. I know she was there, but I don't recall her being this RUDE. Good thing Cole made it clear he wasn't tryna be realistic, because her ass would've been canned in about 5 minutes given how she speaks to everyone. She's like my arch nemesis DD Warren, but if DD woke up on the wrong side of the bed covered in cow shit. And it's not even a case where she's like Spencer Reid from Criminal Minds with a big ole super brain. All her 'breakthroughs' are served up by Edmunds (looks like he was the hero of #1 as well, according to my review). Baxter just moves through life like a stereoided out Bull in a China shop. Absolutely brutal.
I found the case interesting (again, extreme yeetage of disbelief required), and I can definitely see it working well on-screen with Gerald Butler running this way and that. While Baxter was a sore spot, Rouche made up for it with his quirky antics. Idk why but Elliot Curtis reminded me of Chelsea Arrington from The Night Agent. Anyways, all in all a fun book to get lost in but I wish Baxter had been voted off the island.
PROS AND CONS
Pros: great wit and dark humor, interesting case when you yeet your disbelief, loved Rouche's character, fast paced
Cons: BAXTER.
____________________________
For some sick reason, do you want to hear more of my nonsense? Check out my podcast: Novels & Nonsense streaming everywhere.
bartps's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
staceyrenee10's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25