OMG The Terror... I CANNOT PUT IT DOWN. I came in late an hour to work because of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What an awesome book. I actually get cold reading it! lol
Stop making me add more books to my To Read list! I already have an insane back log as it is! lol
Yeah me too... and I spend my weekend ATV'ing, parties, boating in the summer AND shows/movies and work all week. MAN I have no time.. and no kids. lol I read just before bed... but YOU HAVE TO read this book. What a F)&(^&*%'IN page turner!
There is quite a bit in the news this past year regarding this expedition. I would have never found it interesting prior to reading this book.
My good buddy has been up to the Arctic numerous times. He has stood and gotten a pic with the monument to this expedition. VERY cool to read about it for sure. I am in Nova Scotia and we get cold and snow... but man oh man nothing like that. I actually live at the half way point from the North Pole to the Equator. Pretty cool. It is a town next to me and that is what they are known for.
OMG The Terror... I CANNOT PUT IT DOWN. I came in late an hour to work because of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What an awesome book. I actually get cold reading it! lol
That's one of my favorite reads--in the summer. I wouldn't read it in the winter for anything.
OMG The Terror... I CANNOT PUT IT DOWN. I came in late an hour to work because of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What an awesome book. I actually get cold reading it! lol
That's one of my favorite reads--in the summer. I wouldn't read it in the winter for anything.
John
LOL... late again for work. haha Gotta finish it before the snow comes. hahhahahahaha
I am hoping the second half of Cujo is better. Been fairly bored during most of the character build up. The Camber family is far more interesting than The Trentons. It feels lIke a novella he stretched into a novel. At least Cujo is killing people now.
OMG The Terror... I CANNOT PUT IT DOWN. I came in late an hour to work because of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What an awesome book. I actually get cold reading it! lol
That's one of my favorite reads--in the summer. I wouldn't read it in the winter for anything.
John
LOL... late again for work. haha Gotta finish it before the snow comes. hahhahahahaha
The best time to read it is a cold snowy winter night
I am hoping the second half of Cujo is better. Been fairly bored during most of the character build up. The Camber family is far more interesting than The Trentons. It feels lIke a novella he stretched into a novel. At least Cujo is killing people now.
You're all heart buddy. I remember there was one part where it got a little slow, but overall I really liked that book. Mostly for some of the themes that he explored through the characters.
I remember thinking Cujo was a little slow too. And it irritated me so much that there were no chapters, just page breaks.
I prefer books to be written this way. It's the fashion I'm writing my second novel. It can't be used with all stories but it provides the writer greater flexibility and the reader can read in wbatever sized intervals they choose. At the end of a chapter it can be easy to put the book down whereas with this format I always push myself to keep going.
Cujo wasn't great, but it wasn't bad. I thought the characters were kind of weak for King's standards. I had a hard time feeling for the Trenton's, whereas the Cambers made the story for me. I found most of the stuff outside of Cujo was uninteresting, which again I find to be a rarity for King. Even a book like Desperation which I didn't end up looking by the end had me mesmerized with the characters. I think what really killed me from really enjoying Cujo was
Spoiler:
The dreams and the visions and the monster in the closet just didn't work for me. It's a story about a rabid dog and these supernatural elements really took me away from the reality of the story...they almost felt obligatory
i think in a lot of ways I'm just not a fan of King's older stuff. There is some good stuff but I love one book for every book I didn't love. In comparison with how I feel about his works from about 1990 until 2010, his older stuff just doesn't speak to me the same way. The newest book I read from him was Under The Dome, though I have Dark Tower: WTTK, I'm going to slide it between books four and five when I re-read the series, and I just picked up Doctor Sleep cheap. I'm quite behind on his new books as I have to rely on used books.
I'm finally polishing off books I started, some years ago, to get them off my conscience. Almost done Blindness, which is an awesome, awesome book.
I liked the book although I do agree that the 'supernatural' element was slightly distracting, but there was so little of it to make it not matter for me. A book that comes to mind where the supernatural did, to some degree spoil it for me was Rose Madder. BoB also comes to mind. I guess we just have to accept the fact that the supernatural plays a part in many of the novels and roll with it. I have a different opinion about his older books. There are many that I feel are amongst the best. I can't seem to group the ones I didn't like into a certain timeframe. They're scattered all over.
I liked the book although I do agree that the 'supernatural' element was slightly distracting, but there was so little of it to make it not matter for me. A book that comes to mind where the supernatural did, to some degree spoil it for me was Rose Madder. BoB also comes to mind. I guess we just have to accept the fact that the supernatural plays a part in many of the novels and roll with it. I have a different opinion about his older books. There are many that I feel are amongst the best. I can't seem to group the ones I didn't like into a certain timeframe. They're scattered all over.
Bag of Bones is probably my favourite stand-alone novel from King. That story could have been told without it but he wrote it so good and it played such a key part in the story. Such great writing in it. I think the only thing he wrote (that I've read) pre-1990 that I can say was great were The Stand and Pet Semetary...probably Carrie too. Christine and The Dead Zone are two I still have to read but I've never owned them. I need to re-read Rose Madder since I read that back in grade 8 to see if the supernatural stuff is distracting, I just remember the imagery being so top notch. I still cringe when I think of some the images in that book...haunting stuff.
I just think these days he's a better writer than he was back then, and the styles are so disparate in very small ways that I can't even really pinpoint them, I just pick up on them. When I think of the run he went on with Insomnia and Wizard and Glass/rest of the DT series, Dreamcatcher, Bag of Bones, Duma Key, Lisey's Story, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, Gerald's Game...that's where all my favourites are.
I liked the book although I do agree that the 'supernatural' element was slightly distracting, but there was so little of it to make it not matter for me. A book that comes to mind where the supernatural did, to some degree spoil it for me was Rose Madder. BoB also comes to mind. I guess we just have to accept the fact that the supernatural plays a part in many of the novels and roll with it. I have a different opinion about his older books. There are many that I feel are amongst the best. I can't seem to group the ones I didn't like into a certain timeframe. They're scattered all over.
Bag of Bones is probably my favourite stand-alone novel from King. That story could have been told without it but he wrote it so good and it played such a key part in the story. Such great writing in it. I think the only thing he wrote (that I've read) pre-1990 that I can say was great were The Stand and Pet Semetary...probably Carrie too. Christine and The Dead Zone are two I still have to read but I've never owned them.
I liked the book although I do agree that the 'supernatural' element was slightly distracting, but there was so little of it to make it not matter for me. A book that comes to mind where the supernatural did, to some degree spoil it for me was Rose Madder. BoB also comes to mind. I guess we just have to accept the fact that the supernatural plays a part in many of the novels and roll with it. I have a different opinion about his older books. There are many that I feel are amongst the best. I can't seem to group the ones I didn't like into a certain timeframe. They're scattered all over.
Bag of Bones is probably my favourite stand-alone novel from King. That story could have been told without it but he wrote it so good and it played such a key part in the story. Such great writing in it. I think the only thing he wrote (that I've read) pre-1990 that I can say was great were The Stand and Pet Semetary...probably Carrie too. Christine and The Dead Zone are two I still have to read but I've never owned them. I need to re-read Rose Madder since I read that back in grade 8 to see if the supernatural stuff is distracting, I just remember the imagery being so top notch. I still cringe when I think of some the images in that book...haunting stuff.
I just think these days he's a better writer than he was back then, and the styles are so disparate in very small ways that I can't even really pinpoint them, I just pick up on them. When I think of the run he went on with Insomnia and Wizard and Glass/rest of the DT series, Dreamcatcher, Bag of Bones, Duma Key, Lisey's Story, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, Gerald's Game...that's where all my favourites are.
I think a lot depends upon when one began reading SK. I've been on board since 'Salem's Lot in 1976 and, except for Carrie and The Dark Tower series), have read every book in the order of publication so I probably have the opposite opinion as yours. Overall I much prefer his earlier works. They have a vibrancy and exuberance of a truly gifted writer discovering and harnessing his talent. His later works may feature better writing but not necessarily better stories. From a reading perspective SK's stories take precedence over the intricacies of his writing style. That said I include 11/22/63 in my SK top 5 so I'm not completely stuck in the past!
I liked the book although I do agree that the 'supernatural' element was slightly distracting, but there was so little of it to make it not matter for me. A book that comes to mind where the supernatural did, to some degree spoil it for me was Rose Madder. BoB also comes to mind. I guess we just have to accept the fact that the supernatural plays a part in many of the novels and roll with it. I have a different opinion about his older books. There are many that I feel are amongst the best. I can't seem to group the ones I didn't like into a certain timeframe. They're scattered all over.
Bag of Bones is probably my favourite stand-alone novel from King. That story could have been told without it but he wrote it so good and it played such a key part in the story. Such great writing in it. I think the only thing he wrote (that I've read) pre-1990 that I can say was great were The Stand and Pet Semetary...probably Carrie too. Christine and The Dead Zone are two I still have to read but I've never owned them. I need to re-read Rose Madder since I read that back in grade 8 to see if the supernatural stuff is distracting, I just remember the imagery being so top notch. I still cringe when I think of some the images in that book...haunting stuff.
I just think these days he's a better writer than he was back then, and the styles are so disparate in very small ways that I can't even really pinpoint them, I just pick up on them. When I think of the run he went on with Insomnia and Wizard and Glass/rest of the DT series, Dreamcatcher, Bag of Bones, Duma Key, Lisey's Story, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, Gerald's Game...that's where all my favourites are.
I think a lot depends upon when one began reading SK. I've been on board since 'Salem's Lot in 1976 and, except for Carrie and The Dark Tower series), have read every book in the order of publication so I probably have the opposite opinion as yours. Overall I much prefer his earlier works. They have a vibrancy and exuberance of a truly gifted writer discovering and harnessing his talent. His later works may feature better writing but not necessarily better stories. From a reading perspective SK's stories take precedence over the intricacies of his writing style. That said I include 11/22/63 in my SK top 5 so I'm not completely stuck in the past!
Don't think that applies much to me. I wasn't born until 86 but the first books by him I read were all older stuff like The Stand, Firestarter, and The Gunslinger. My mom managed a book store for years so I had tons of his stuff around. I'm not when the shift is, probably when he wrote his 'female trilogy', but.It's like at some point he stopped writing horror novels and started writing novels with horror in them, if that makes any sense. That was my problem with Cujo, it both tried to be a drama about marriage and a horror novel and he hadn't quite perfected how to blend them seamlessly, which isn't a knock against King....it's not an easy thing to do. He got very good at it not long after.
Think the next King book I'll be reading is either The Regulators or Blaze. Hope I like The Regulators more than Desperation.
They have a vibrancy and exuberance of a truly gifted writer discovering and harnessing his talent. His later works may feature better writing but not necessarily better stories.
Agreed. I enjoy most of his later books, but up to and including Misery he was untouchable. After that the quality seems to waver a bit and his writing starts lacking urgency and hunger. This is true for many actors, writers, bands etc.
I think when artists start lacking urgency and hunger they often wander outside their comfort zones and start to explore never-before-seen roads and, to me, that is where the real magic begins. But some people do not like their artists to stray into new territory because they liked the old territory, which is why people still listen to AC/DC who have been playing the same song for forty years. I say if an artist cannot grow they are barely an artist at all.
I hate to admit it, but I'm having kind of a hard time really getting into The Martian.
Me too. I finished it, but did not like it. I think I'm in the minority on this as so many people enjoyed it. I still need to see the movie.
Yeah, I guess I expected something different. I'm getting bored with the journal entries. Maybe it's because I really don't enjoy it when stories are written in first-person.
Originally Posted by frik
Originally Posted by Girlystevedave
I hate to admit it, but I'm having kind of a hard time really getting into The Martian.
Saw the movie, liked it (but no more than that) and am glad I didn't buy the book.
sk
I think this may be one of the rare cases when I'm thinking I'd rather see the movie.
Originally Posted by Dan
There is quite a bit in the news this past year regarding this expedition. I would have never found it interesting prior to reading this book.
Reply With Quote
I remember there was one part where it got a little slow, but overall I really liked that book. Mostly for some of the themes that he explored through the characters.
