H_B Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'm reading the Song of Ice and Fire series. I've found it strangely enjoyable, though it wouldn't normally be my cup of tea. There are some bizarre aspects of it. There's just too many characters to remember who all the knights are and previous kings etc. And there are huge gaps in the story, from one chapter to the next, because each chapter is from a person's perspective. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Whilst this is true, you'd have to wouldn't you? I'm midway through my debut novel... "The Girl(s) who Couldn't Resist the IT Office Worker". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Freud Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I'm midway through my debut novel... "The Girl(s) who Couldn't Resist the IT Office Worker". Otherwise known as "fumbling through the bits of my coworkers". Ah ha. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I do agree the Salander character is fairly ridiculous - but then it's a pulp(ish) crime novel and I personally don't think every aspect needs to be entirely believable. I enjoyed the two books for what they are. The other thing that annoyed me about the first one was the lack of any real link between the opening court scandal and the Vanger investigation (despite a link being implied, ie its the reason why Blomqvist takes on the assignment on the first place), and the final section of the book which is all just tied up too nicely. It was that part that I saw far more as being the author's fantasy (other than the sexual stuff) - the noble journalist who all too easily brings down the multi-national corrupt corporation with the all too convenient hacker assistant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I do agree the Salander character is fairly ridiculous - but then it's a pulp(ish) crime novel and I personally don't think every aspect needs to be entirely believable. I enjoyed the two books for what they are. The other thing that annoyed me about the first one was the lack of any real link between the opening court scandal and the Vanger investigation (despite a link being implied, ie its the reason why Blomqvist takes on the assignment on the first place), and the final section of the book which is all just tied up too nicely. It was that part that I saw far more as being the author's fantasy (other than the sexual stuff) - the noble journalist who all too easily brings down the multi-national corrupt corporation with the all too convenient hacker assistant. Yes, I would agree with that. I kind of felt, as StewartyMac said earlier, if they had just cut the whole final episode out of the book, it would have ended at a better point. As it was, it felt like the ending was tacked on for the sake of "closure", and as you say, the redemption and justification of the crime-fighting journo. Again, something that should have been spotted by the editor, who I suspect was acting out of a sense of honour to the author - kind of like Kafka. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 Yes, I would agree with that. I kind of felt, as StewartyMac said earlier, if they had just cut the whole final episode out of the book, it would have ended at a better point. As it was, it felt like the ending was tacked on for the sake of "closure", and as you say, the redemption and justification of the crime-fighting journo. Again, something that should have been spotted by the editor, who I suspect was acting out of a sense of honour to the author - kind of like Kafka. Wasn't the first one published before he died? They could have taken note of what Robert Ludlum's publishers did. On his death he left a half written book, so they hired another writer to finish it off, leading to a book with a completely different style and quality of writing, with an ending the original author (I'm sure) hadn't planned. An abortion of a novel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Wasn't the first one published before he died? They could have taken note of what Robert Ludlum's publishers did. On his death he left a half written book, so they hired another writer to finish it off, leading to a book with a completely different style and quality of writing, with an ending the original author (I'm sure) hadn't planned. An abortion of a novel. You might well be right there. I was just assuming, as an excuse for the litany of errors in the book. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Yes, I would agree with that. I kind of felt, as StewartyMac said earlier, if they had just cut the whole final episode out of the book, it would have ended at a better point. As it was, it felt like the ending was tacked on for the sake of "closure", and as you say, the redemption and justification of the crime-fighting journo. Again, something that should have been spotted by the editor, who I suspect was acting out of a sense of honour to the author - kind of like Kafka. I felt at the time that the last section was largely to demonstrate Salander's skills of deception etc as she would become a more central character in the following books. The second book certainly revolves more around her (with some even more ridiculous back story) and it perhaps serves as an intro to the opening part of that book. But yeah, it's all just tied up a little too nicely without any real further twist. It even seems a missed opportunity - there may well have been a good book in there specifically about the journalist fighting business corruption and crime. I expected some overlap with the "murder" investigation and was disappointed how easily the implied link was just dropped. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I felt at the time that the last section was largely to demonstrate Salander's skills of deception etc as she would become a more central character in the following books. The second book certainly revolves more around her (with some even more ridiculous back story) and it perhaps serves as an intro to the opening part of that book. But yeah, it's all just tied up a little too nicely without any real further twist. It even seems a missed opportunity - there may well have been a good book in there specifically about the journalist fighting business corruption and crime. I expected some overlap with the "murder" investigation and was disappointed how easily the implied link was just dropped. Fair points. I have to say, I have no intention of reading the second or third books, so I'm taking book one as an end in itself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 Fair points. I have to say, I have no intention of reading the second or third books, so I'm taking book one as an end in itself. Again, to give him a bit of a get out clause, there were never intended to be only 3 books. I think it was supposed to be a 10 book series or something, so it's possible some of the initial glaring holes were down to this. The later books might have had the same problems of course, but as I understand it the whole series when complete would have been self contained. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam2304 Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 The Honest Assassain by CJ Carver 6/10 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundermonkey Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I've just finished the 3 part Batman: Knightfall. I picked them up in preparation for the movie next year. If Nolan pulls it off Bane will be elevated in status as he's a tremendous character. The first book is spectacular, the second book rounds off the first half of the story fairly well and creates the need for the third. It's here I lost a bit of interest as it assumes the reader is well versed in the Batman universe with many references to previous storylines and characters Overall it's worth a read - 7/10 stuff but as a stand alone book the first one is a classic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 You insulted me directly, never offered an apology and I asked the posters if they wanted me to open a new thread and that Hearts supporter wanted a new thread opened. I'm going to decline joining your thread because you didn't apologise and you appear uninformed. I'd say by your insults and patter that you wouldn't say boo to a goose. Rawk on and read up attempting to see beyond narrow mindedness. The church rightfully applied is a good place to be friend 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 I've just finished the 3 part Batman: Knightfall. I picked them up in preparation for the movie next year. If Nolan pulls it off Bane will be elevated in status as he's a tremendous character. The first book is spectacular, the second book rounds off the first half of the story fairly well and creates the need for the third. It's here I lost a bit of interest as it assumes the reader is well versed in the Batman universe with many references to previous storylines and characters Overall it's worth a read - 7/10 stuff but as a stand alone book the first one is a classic. Who is lined up to play Batman in the film out of interest? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundermonkey Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Who is lined up to play Batman in the film out of interest? Christian Bale. It's a deal breaker apparently, no Bale = No Nolan. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 Christian Bale. It's a deal breaker apparently, no Bale = No Nolan. Good stuff... I quite like Bale. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mak Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 You insulted me directly, never offered an apology and I asked the posters if they wanted me to open a new thread and that Hearts supporter wanted a new thread opened. I'm going to decline joining your thread because you didn't apologise and you appear uninformed. I'd say by your insults and patter that you wouldn't say boo to a goose. Rawk on and read up attempting to see beyond narrow mindedness. The church rightfully applied is a good place to be friend Hi mate, I have a name btw. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I've just finished the 3 part Batman: Knightfall. I picked them up in preparation for the movie next year. If Nolan pulls it off Bane will be elevated in status as he's a tremendous character. The first book is spectacular, the second book rounds off the first half of the story fairly well and creates the need for the third. It's here I lost a bit of interest as it assumes the reader is well versed in the Batman universe with many references to previous storylines and characters Overall it's worth a read - 7/10 stuff but as a stand alone book the first one is a classic. A lot of these big graphic nove;s have a lot of implied knowledge about the universe which is quite frustrating, the Death and rebirth of Superman was ridulous in that respect. But I remember Knightfall, and the Bane character from my childhood, it was awesome stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundermonkey Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 A lot of these big graphic nove;s have a lot of implied knowledge about the universe which is quite frustrating, the Death and rebirth of Superman was ridulous in that respect. But I remember Knightfall, and the Bane character from my childhood, it was awesome stuff. I generally find the Batman ones are self contained and relatively free from multiple cross-references to other storylines or characters. The 2nd but even more so the 3rd books relied heavily on your prior knowledge of the backstories of many characters I didn't care for. Bane however is a complete badass and the 1st book is brilliant. I'm picking up The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night again. I only managed 2/3 of the way through last time before I was distracted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I generally find the Batman ones are self contained and relatively free from multiple cross-references to other storylines or characters. The 2nd but even more so the 3rd books relied heavily on your prior knowledge of the backstories of many characters I didn't care for. Bane however is a complete badass and the 1st book is brilliant. If I ever have that particulalr itch I seek out standalone stuff rather than collected stuff rom the comics. For something left field I'd recommend "Red Son" by Scotland's own Mark Millar. I'm picking up The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night again. I only managed 2/3 of the way through last time before I was distracted. I remember being blown away by that when I first read it at 18. I reread it on a flight last year and I was a little deflated by it. i think it may be becasue I had built it up quite a lot in my head but also because it's great gimmick has arguably been superceded by The Incredible Adam Spark. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.