Ed Kay
Love JJ, though after a few episodes you realise the cases are either drunken fighting, property damage or people refusing to pay for the house/car/holiday they agreed to. Likewise this book: lots of repetition, except it's less entertaining without seeing the defendants wilting under the lashes of JJ's tongue.
Also, while I tend to agree with her common sense approach, this book was pretty hardcore conservative in parts, which made me uncomfortable.
Interesting concept. Particularly liked the conceit that the lie becomes the truth - because isn't society just a set of constructed truths we choose to live by? But this intriguing kernel gets pushed aside by a, well, far more technological Colonel, which derails all the subtlety and killed off my interest. Thought the writing was pretty bland too, and repetitive. Makes me want to watch the Costner movie, which is unforgivable.
Pretty torn over how to rate this book. I found myself really enjoying it, despite the nagging feeling that it wasn't all that good. One other reviewer expressed the same feeling as having been ‘enchanted', which is about right. Suffice it to say, I agree wholeheartedly with most of the criticisms levelled at this book in the many one star reviews, however, somehow, I found it compelling and enjoyable nonetheless. Averaging this out to 3 stars.
Figured I should read an Agatha Christie and found this in a second hand bookstore so took my chance. The writing is very good, I can't argue with that. It's a great skill to sketch out about 15 unique characters in such short time, and balance the unveiling of the mystery without giving too much away. The evidence is laid out neatly and well summarised at various points using devices such as maps, reproductins of Poirot's own notes and helpful conversations amongst the investigators.
Unfortunately, though, it seemed to be totally pointless even trying to play along, let alone work out ‘whodunnit', since the ending is such a ludicrous cheat: everyone's the murderer! I mean, sure, it makes sense, but the fact that this guy was the driver and that woman was the cook is something we can never have known. All the ‘evidence', therefore, is pure lies. Everything is a red herring.
Just seemed like a massive cheat to me.
I might like to try another Christie at some point, but I'd prefer it if it was just a straightforward murder mystery with one assailant!
Meh. Incoherent, rambling and without any meaningful narrative drive. The short unconnected stories in Them are at least internally logical. Ronson is always witty and his prose easy to read, but just couldn't get into this.
As one of the generation which fell between the stools of antiquated communication and modern technology, I was always a fan of the handwritten letter and miss that personal touch lost in email and social media. This is certainly a grand reminder of the beauty and elegance that handwritten notes can bring to our lives, and it has inspired me to endeavour to awaken this old habit in the new year.
Shepherd offers some useful tips on phraseology for more difficult letters - condolences in particular. However her tone is often trite, bordering on patronising, and there's really only so many times you can talk about fine paper and quality ink.
But on the whole a good little meditation on real communication in a digital age. Thanks Katie!
I find it difficult to say exactly what the problem is with this book. The writing is fine; nothing extraordinary, but I've read worse (Dan Brown, Crichton, Grisham, even Lee Child has his moments). There was a plot: art mystery, Nazis, mysterious messages from a sinister stranger.
But the characters... I just didn't care. I was so bored... FOR 700 PAGES. A page turner this wasn't - and even if it was I would still have been at it a week, just developing RSI.
On and on they wittered and waffled and nothing happened. At least when nothing happens in Dickens the writing is worth wasting time over.
When things happened, they seemed to... do so... without... any URGENCY. Even the EXCITING bits were dull.
There just wasn't enough here to support such a tome. Wittled down a good 70% it might have been OK, we could have done without the weird unnecessary backstory that hinted at character without actually developing any...
I was hoping for more. I read ‘The Dark Knight' series 15 years ago at Uni and LOVED them. Great stories and a real insight into the character of Bruce Wayne. Perhaps I need to have read a bit more background stuff to cope with this, as it seems to be a revisiting of all the enemies and friends Batman has had over his career. To be honest, the storyline was a bit too episodic - “...and here's the next one...” - and I was left totally confused by the ending. I'm still not entirely sure who the bad guy turned out to be.
Beautiful artwork, though, and Catwoman was good to look at while I was losing the plot...
I only gave this three stars because it wasn't as bad as the last one, and I gave the last one three stars. It deserved only two, TBH. Andrew Child is a competent writer - he can do the style - but unfortunately he seems to be writing thrillers with Reacher as a character, rather than REACHER NOVELS. I don't want Reacher to be in only a third of the book, relegated to a bit part in his own story. He needs to be front and centre, cracking skulls and taking people down. Every year I get a little bit more disheartened by the decline of this franchise, and every year I excitedly buy the new one and think “maybe this will be a return to form”. Nope. Not this time. Not sure I'll be rushing out to get the new one next year.
Randomly picked up after seeing glowing reviews on Twitter. Can't say I really understand why. The main character is annoying, and there are a lot of inconsistencies in the narrative. I also don't really understand how a spaceship that's been shot through with multiple bullet holes can be ‘patched up' in a day or two enough to survive 6 months of space travel from Mars to Earth. I'm assuming that this is what ‘steampunk' means: science fiction with rivets. Regardless, it rattles along at a fairly brisk pace to its less than satisfactory conclusion.
The thing that saves this from 2* review is that the ‘strange' of the title is an incredible conceit, a really fascinating idea. Mars is alive, and it's suffusing the humans and their technology with its own consciousness. This idea appears about two-thirds of the way through, at which point it's a bit too late to do anything interesting with the idea. Shame this wasn't made more of.
I have read other books by this author and found them serviceable thrillers, but this one is just absolute tripe. The writing is worse than anything by Dan Brown, repetitive and moronic. The plotting is thin. The ‘hero', presumably due to be a recurring character in a new series, is totally bland: uncharismatic and with no special skills. And Turner seems to think that by making him shout out “Fuck!” every once in a while it will truly convey the depth of feeling that he's experiencing.
I hated it, and by the end was just reading to see how awful it would get. I highlighted a number of passages that had me laughing and/or angry at just how bad they were.
At the shrink's, McNeal is talking about his murdered son, and has this incredible insight into his own psyche:
“There's an anger I can't explain”
“Son, listen to me. I'm proud of you. Easiest thing in the world to succumb to something like that. But that's not what we are. The McNeals are loyal. And true. Your mother, God rest her soul, would have turned in her grave if you had fallen for that woman's charms... But she raised you good.”
“One final thing: remember, take the battery out of your cell phone.”
“Why do you want me to do that?”
“So, we know you're alone and not being followed. Do you copy?”
“I'm sorry this happened, Peter. Truly sorry.”
“Who kills a fucking dog?”
“The same people who killed Caroline.”
“But why? It's a dog.”
McNeal nodded.
“I've been renovating our house, remember. I've got stuff in the trunk. DIY stuff. Builders' equipment. Tools. It's all in the trunk of my car.” Peter reached inside the trunk and hauled out polyethylene waterproof sheeting, rolls of duct tape, a five-gallon bucket, two large bottles of water, and a large bag of quick-drying cement.
Hilarious northern wit and a vividly drawn world that effectively skewers the hypocrisy of the religious. Contains the best description of a problem I have ever read:
“What constitutes a problem is not the thing, or the environment where we find the thing, but the conjunction of the two; something unexpected in a usual place (our favourite aunt in our favourite poker parlour) or something usual in an unexpected place (our favourite poker in our favourite aunt).”
Well written, lots of 60s/70s Cold War intrigue and space race science, but just not that thrilling for a thriller. There was no clear hero, no one to root for, at times I wasn't even sure whether I was supposed to be on the side of the Russians or not. There was no detective work, no revelations by any of the characters really had any bearing on any other part of the plot, since one set of protagonists were on Earth and the others on the Moon. Meh
Really enjoyed the Netflix series so bought this on a whim, and very much enjoyed the story all over again. There are only a few changes to the plot that I could tell, but the main thrust of Elizabeth Harmon's rise through the patriarchal world of chess is still a very thrilling journey to witness.
I was mainly surprised after I finished the book to realise that Walter Tevis also wrote The Hustler and Color of Money - as well as sci-fi classics such as The Man Who Fell To Earth. Will definitely be reading more of his stuff this year.
Couldn't get on with this at all. Writing style was clumsy so often got to the end of a paragraph or even a sentence with no real idea of what was going on. Became unbearable during the first ‘action' passage of the book where Taryn is attacked outside the library. Couldn't really picture the layout of the library, the location of the 4 characters or how the fight unfolded. Then the characters find themselves in another world without much surprise, Taryn learns she's been possessed by a demon without any sense of horror (oh, it must be because I sinned!) and the author is clearly setting up the possibility of her affair with the copper, even though there is absolutely no sexual or emotional tension between them at all. Figure if it's just getting worse after 120 pages I should just cut my losses. DNF.
I really enjoyed the first half of this book. The creeping dread was palpable: an isolated town populated by misfits and weirdos, where you can fell the mulch underfoot, smell the rot in Lauren's ramshackle house, shiver at the dreich Scottish weather and sympathised with this poor bullied child with the disinterested father. When a mysterious lady in white keeps appearing but no one can remember seeing her it just adds to the tension and the atmosphere.
As things start to escalate in the second half of the book, things take a turn. Mysteries are just easily discarded, which is unsatisfying (the constantly locked front room contains nothing of interest, and is just unlocked one day, meh; the mother's ghost is just hard for people to contemplate, so they forget, according to the mad old lady down the street who also sees her) and the denoument seems rushed. It all feels like a bit of a let down after the incredible, subtle effects created in the first half.
I'd probably give it 3.5* but rounded it up because I have so much good will from the incredible set up. I just wish it had just maintained that level to the end.
OK, but disappointing. Felt like a dumbed-down, thriller style sequel, with none of the incredible writing and allegory and allusion that characterised the Handmaid's Tale. Sure, it tied up some loose ends and added depth to the original story, but I don't feel like it added all that much. Not sure how it was deemed worthy of the Booker!
Almost put this down after 50 pages but there was something hypnotic about living so completely in this delusional man's head. The main adjective Bascombe uses to describe himself is “dreamy” and the whole novel - almost 400 pages to describe a weekend - is very fantastical, if not nightmarish. Frank is so self-assured it takes a while to realise how weak and pathetic he actually is. Everything he says out loud he assures us isn't how he really feels, or what he really thinks. I was surprised when Vicki punched him in the mouth but by the end the surprise is why more people in his life haven't done the same thing.
This book showed so much promise but seemed to constantly drop the ball. Tension would be built effectively but all the payoffs were terrible. The writing of battles and fights was almost incomprehensible, so you had no clue who was where or doing what, and then suddenly things would be over. We seemed also to miss out on critical information eg. why did Roos suddenly turn from potential assassin out on the seas, to giving them the knife and information on how to kill the Nameless One? In one paragraph he was seeting at Ead, eager to kill her, and then... he was on her side? It didn't make sense. So much promise and an incredibly built world, fantastic characters, but it consistently fluffed its lines.
Got this mainly for the boxing story “Fifty Grand”, which was excellent. Unfortunately I'm not a fan of the ‘nothing happens' variety of short story that make up 90% of this book. Sure, Hemingway's spare prose might be good, but when it services inconsequential tales filled with faint characters, there's just not much to enjoy.
Really wanted to like this as bizarre short stories are my kind of thing. Started excellently with the Summer People - subtle, mysterious and a touch sinister. But after that i don't really know what happened. The tales got a bit more convoluted, unnecessary. I found I was wrong footed with lots of similar sounding names, or complex and confusing sentences. This is a terrible review because I can't articulate what it was that I didn't like, but basically I found it hard work when I had hoped it would be deliciously light. Not so put out I wouldn't consider reading another of her collections, but it would be last chance saloon!
I loved Pride and Prejudice which was witty, characterful and dramatic. This is like a draft version of that book: the protagonists are almost identical, the plot points are similar, but unfortunately it's shorn of all of the humour and lightness of P&P. As an unexpected Austen fan, this has been a disappointment.
