This is sad. I really didn't want to DNF this book as I have been an avid fan of the System Divine trilogy ever since the release of the very first book. I followed the releases faithfully, and preordered the 2nd and 3rd books. I have been a diehard fan of Les Misérables since high school and so I was very captivated by this sci fi retelling. 
However, the third book disappointed me. I wasn't expecting to be disappointed - I went into Suns Will Rise fully prepared not only to love it, but even to overlook any details I might dislike. That's how eager I was to appreciate this book. However, the two authors took the retelling in a direction that I strongly dislike. I feel like it disregards and disrespects the spirit of the original source material in a way I just can't reconcile myself with. Spoilers below, I'm going to tell you what narrative choices Brody and Rendelle made that convinced me to drop this series 2 books and 240 pages in. 
<Spoiler> 
1. They turned the Friends of the ABC into a terrorist group. Their main crime? Wanting to use violence in an uprising. The protagonists of Suns Will Rise strongly believe that the only way to overturn an abusive status quo is peaceful protest and heart to hearts with the enemy. I just...no. it's giving Hayes Code Les Mis to me. It felt like the authors, although well intentioned, confused the June Rebellion described in Les Misérables with the actual French Revolution. They even replace Enjolras with an invented character, "Maximilienne", as the leader of this group which - guess what they named it instead of Les Amis de l'ABC? Wait for it... tHe ReD sCaR. 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️ And if you were hoping to see your favorite barricade boys transposed into a sci fi setting? Tough luck. Combeferre? I don't know her. Jehan Prouvaire? He's a random old fisherman with no connections to the Amis. I'm in pain. 
2. They turned Alouette/Marcellus/Chatine (space!Cosette, Marius and Éponine) into a basic YA love triangle. I just... I can't. I can't anymore. Terrorist!Amis made me groan but Marcellus kissing Chatine was my last straw. That's when I looked at this book and decided to stop lying to myself that I liked it. I kept reading after the terrorist!Amis because I hoped that the situation would get turned around, it would come out that they weren't actually in the wrong, it was propaganda by General Bonnefaçon (space!Marius' space!grandpa) to keep the two rebel groups apart from each other...but no. Brody and Rendelle really did decide to get rid of any nuance in their retelling. I'm so sad typing this. Major disappointment.
 Also, idk if it's just me, but the writing quality seems to have gone down too. The characters aren't as interesting anymore and none of the jokes HIT. 

I enjoyed reading Pachinko because it taught me about a group I didn't know much about, and its history about which I knew even less. The only thing I'd ever read before about Koreans in Japan was a short story by a Japanese author, so it was interesting to read a whole book focusing on these people and their struggles. Said book was also highly readable - I blew through all 530 pages in 2 days. 
However, stylistically I found it lacking. It's written so simply, and not in a good way, I'd say. It didn't seem to have anything very insightful or interesting to say. The messages, like the style, are far too simplistic to be satisfying on a literary level. I can't think of any memorable passages - and I was really looking hard for at least one. I was determined to admire this book. I wanted to be impressed.
Another major issue I have with Pachinko - reviews have praised it for its vividness, but the descriptions, I found, fell short of this glowing praise. I very rarely could actually picture the settings. I didn't feel transported while reading because i didn't feel like the author had actually seen or experienced very many of the events or places described in the book. For anyone looking to write historical fiction, creating a convincing setting and atmosphere is tantamount to success. And in Pachinko... well. Suffice it to say that the word "okay" is used in a chapter where the action takes place in 1940s Japan. (The focalization is on Sunja, an uneducated woman who does not speak English. I don't think I need to tell you how out of place that is.)
Which brings me to another complaint of mine. Sadly, I could very much tell that Pachinko was not only not written by a historian; it was also not written by a Korean Korean, or a Japanese Korean, but an American Korean. It was painfully obvious. Americans writing about other countries have such a jarring, obnoxious way of injecting American characters, values and mindsets where they shouldn't be. Whenever I read historical fiction I try to avoid American authors for this exact reason, but when I fail to do so - usually because the author belongs to an ethnic minority and has a name that reflects their background - I always notice this trend.
Basically, Pachinko wasn't a bad book, but it didn't meet the high expectations I had for it. It wasn't clever enough or artistic enough or moving enough. It was kind of just... a story. It's the kind of book that is admired by people who don't read a lot of books.

Don't waste your time on this. The characters are poorly constructed, their actions inconsistent - and sensitive topics are handled pretty ham-handedly. There are some very cringe worthy passages and many of the "strong female characters" are just variations of the same paper thin girlboss trope. I saw the plot twists coming a mile away, and as for the dialogue... there were several times when I just had to sigh and say to myself "nobody fucking talks like that".

Entertaining enough, and I imagine it's even more so for its target audience of kids younger than fourteen - but it's not quite as unputdownable as the reviews say, and the ending is really, really sappy. And I mean I wouldn't have liked it even when I was a kid. It's just... you know when you say a word so many times it loses its meaning? That's what happens in this ending with the word "love". Also, the ending feels rushed, but at the same time takes too many pages. Overall it feels not detailed and snarky enough to be one of those homey, cozy middle grade fantasy novels like Howl's Moving Castle, and not fast-paced or inventive enough to be one of the Adventurous middle grades. It tries to be a bit of both, and it just doesn't do it for me. 
Then again, the writing style is nice enough, with some really pretty quotes at times and some really interesting crumbs of worldbuilding. It's not a bad books by any means, it just could have been better.
Also, take me with a grain of salt. I'm an overly critical literature student reviewing a children's book, for heaven's sake. Your twelve year old will love it, don't worry. 

I feel a bit bad for DNF-ing this one, because I actually quite liked the style and the concept. There's the sense that it could have been a quality read, except the book seems SO. MUCH. LONGER than it needs to be.
I'm usually very good with long and slow-paced books. It's just that, in the case of Life after life, there is practically no plot, just a concept, and characters that aren't fascinating enough to make up for it. The descriptions aren't bad by any means, but they just don't have that magically immersive quality that impressed me in The Goldfinch, for example (another long and slow-paced book that I absolutely adored). And yeah, as I was saying, Life after life DRAGS. My mind keeps wandering while reading this thing... It feels like one interminable introduction, I keep waiting for the plot to actually happen, except I'm 198 pages in and it STILL feels like the beginning of the book, with the stage being set. 
One more thing that annoyed me about the book: the author has this annoying habit of starting off almost every new chapter right in the middle of the action, with new characters and events she doesn't bother to actually introduce or, respectively, explain until like 10 pages later. I'm sure Atkinson thinks it's very modern and candid and surprising, but really it is just confusing.

As glittery, ragtag and shocking a novel as the profession that is its subject: that of the theatre.