Easy-to-read, somewhere between fantasy and SF; somewhere between space opera and world design. It’s sort of a juvenile—its heroine is a juvenile anywEasy-to-read, somewhere between fantasy and SF; somewhere between space opera and world design. It’s sort of a juvenile—its heroine is a juvenile anyway and the language is simple, outside the fantasy’s floral imagery.
The story is fine. I fault the character development a bit, and the world building to some extent, because it’s a bit like a mirror image of Dune (I am not saying it apes Dune at all). In truth, I never particularly cared for the lead character, a diminutive young teenager. Like Dune, there is a underlying religion afoot here, and it also has a tie to energy, but a bit strained. I did like the twins (pilot and engineer), but apart from their roles in their jobs, they faded away. The other characters were interchangeable.
I wanted to like this more. I didn’t look at other reviews here before writing this—I never do—so perhaps I’m swimming against the current. If not, I need more recommendations! ...more
Not exactly sure why it took 50 years to read this book. I did because I saw the movie again for the first time since1968, and—in discussing my unchanNot exactly sure why it took 50 years to read this book. I did because I saw the movie again for the first time since1968, and—in discussing my unchanged dislike of the movie with another on the Intertubes—said that no one who saw Kubrick without reading the novel first would have a clue what was happening. My correspondent claimed this sequel also helped, though obviously it didn’t help those of us who saw the movie in its first theatrical release (I might have seen it on Kwajalein).
Perhaps. But I still hate Kubrick for ruining a wonderful idea (from a distasteful man). The first “Dawn of Man” actually works in the movie. It starts going sideways from there, with Kubrick’s devotion to Johann Strauss (not, mind you, Richard) eradicating any plot. At the end of segment two, you don’t actually know what happened (and aren’t told until the end of segment 3, the longest of the 4). And Kubrick never explains why HAL goes nuts—perhaps the most interesting plot point.
Because this is supposed to be a review of the book 2010, I offer that it adds nothing you didn’t learn from the distasteful man’s first book in this series, that the author has no idea how to draw women characters, except (seemingly) with the personality of young boys (distasteful again), and that in many ways this sequel subtracts from the story, which ended with (without looking it up) “For he was master of the world and he did not know what next to do.
But he would think of something.”
If this crappy sequel is all he could think of, avoid it....more
SF, military, quasi-post-apocalyptic. And i might be the only one who doesn’t like post-apocalyptic stories. Especially mixed with military or SF.
ThisSF, military, quasi-post-apocalyptic. And i might be the only one who doesn’t like post-apocalyptic stories. Especially mixed with military or SF.
This is too much like a Forever War (also a book I disliked), save Joe Halderman excels in hard science. Kameron Hurley is too busy making corporations the villains, without the humor that Scalzi brings in his military SF, plus a “Rebecca-esque” hidden name that becomes an excuse for occasional gay sex. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
The writing would be ok, were the author plausibly knowledgeable about the military. Or didn’t decide, seemingly without reason, to end the book in outline, rather than story, form—she seems to have hit a walk. The book’s a bore....more
This is book three in the series—the fourth to be published in late 2024. Like the second book, but unlike the first in the first, this has the arc ofThis is book three in the series—the fourth to be published in late 2024. Like the second book, but unlike the first in the first, this has the arc of a story. It also has actual sex (with the most idiotic character) and broad hints of a romance to come. Still, it’s nowhere near as funny as Book one....more
This is book two in the series—the fourth to be published in late 2024. Unlike the first in the first book, this has the arc of a story, and a some niThis is book two in the series—the fourth to be published in late 2024. Unlike the first in the first book, this has the arc of a story, and a some nibble of romance. But it’s nowhere near as funny as Book one....more
This feels like an Iowa Writer’s Conference book: every chapter is funny. But the whole is less than the sum of its parts. There’s no arc of story herThis feels like an Iowa Writer’s Conference book: every chapter is funny. But the whole is less than the sum of its parts. There’s no arc of story here; just events that are settled in the next chapter. Oh sure, there is a denouement, and an afterword (the latter is where a few “Arnold-esque” phrases get dropped). But, its less a book and more a comedy show. ...more
Not quite as good as the best in this wonderful series. But it would have to be awful—which it wasn’t—not to recommend.
My main difficulty was not remeNot quite as good as the best in this wonderful series. But it would have to be awful—which it wasn’t—not to recommend.
My main difficulty was not remembering what plot elements had been covered in books 1-6. I suppose I could have revisited them before cracking this open. But, I’m still a working stiff; I never would have been able to read it in just a day. ...more
Eh. “Copenhagen” it ain’t, though it clearly aimed that direction.
I get the impression the author knows more about physics than Frayn, the latter beinEh. “Copenhagen” it ain’t, though it clearly aimed that direction.
I get the impression the author knows more about physics than Frayn, the latter being only an educated layman. Yet Nick Payne’s characters elucidate no profound moral dilemmas; rather only illustrate the “alternative universe” theory of time travel There is a plot, of sorts, but Payne wants you to love not his dialogue, nor his characters, but rather the clever way he moves back-and-forth between alternate realities. I’m not sure why....more
With a John Scalzi novel, prepare to laugh. Many of his works have deeper meanings—indeed, I unfairly criticized “Red Shirts” on first read. I’m not sWith a John Scalzi novel, prepare to laugh. Many of his works have deeper meanings—indeed, I unfairly criticized “Red Shirts” on first read. I’m not sure this one has any meaning. But so what?
The book reads as if someone challenged Scalzi to write about Phillip Dick’s “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” in a way that would not, in any respect, resemble “Blade Runner,” the movie made from that work. It passes that test. It’s also reasonably internally consistent. And completely absurd.
Scalzi has made a career out of making fun of aliens. This book is no exception. In any script, they’d write some additional action scenes in (there only are two). But sufficient unto the day: Good writing and laughs are all that’s necessary. ....more
John Scalzi always has been a funny writer. But he lets it rip here, in a riotous smash up of urban-fantasy and James Bond. Anything I say would reveaJohn Scalzi always has been a funny writer. But he lets it rip here, in a riotous smash up of urban-fantasy and James Bond. Anything I say would reveal too much, because this at base is a mystery. But it’s been years since I’ve chuckled so much.
It’s also been years since I started reading at 3pm and didn’t put the book down until I finished at 8pm....more
There are two common falsehoods about Joe Haldeman. First, that his brother Jack was the better SF writer. Second, that “The Forever War” was his bestThere are two common falsehoods about Joe Haldeman. First, that his brother Jack was the better SF writer. Second, that “The Forever War” was his best novel. I don’t care for Forever War at all—it’s too much of a post-Vietnam period piece. I hated it when published, and it didn’t improve with age. The author’s “Mindbridge” is vastly superior—indeed, it’s one of my all time favorite SF, despite being an obvious Iowa Writer’s Conference experiment—that one never should trust those rating it lower than Forever War.
“Camouflage” makes a strong case as Joe Haldeman’s second best novel. The novel’s plot is nearly as novel as Mindbridge. And, like Mindbridge, it’s told via short chapters from different perspectives. Unlike Mindbridge, it’s not epistolary—but the resolution of Camouflage is less obviously foreseen (ignoring the fantastic last chapter of Mindbridge). Put differently, i did not guess the “secret” in Camouflage.
Joe Haldeman is a joy to read, at least when off his anti-Vietnam (really, anti all military) soapbox. There’s a hint of that in Camouflage; the book’s sole flaw. But not only is it a page-turner, it reads like Heinlein or Asimov. It’s wonderful to trod the Golden Age road again. ...more
Depressing. Not a character whose motives I could understand, much less like. Dystopia swallowed it whole. And the last 30 pages tied the tubes to ensDepressing. Not a character whose motives I could understand, much less like. Dystopia swallowed it whole. And the last 30 pages tied the tubes to ensure no further sequels were possible—but is an absolutely boring fashion. ...more
This book merely is ok. Virtually the entire book uses new and different characters from the prior version. That’s good and bad. You have to learn to This book merely is ok. Virtually the entire book uses new and different characters from the prior version. That’s good and bad. You have to learn to like (or not) these people (most of whom were “off stage” in book one), and that’s not easy. Worse, “the dystopia is strong in this one.” It’s anything but “Ad Astra.”...more
No. Just no. Flat characters. Sort of interesting plot (kind of reverse-Childhood’s End). But unconvincing and uninteresting dialogue and throw-away sNo. Just no. Flat characters. Sort of interesting plot (kind of reverse-Childhood’s End). But unconvincing and uninteresting dialogue and throw-away science-y terms. Finally, even though it’s YA, way to much Father-daughter huggy-bear. Heinlein wrote a double handful of juveniles, and none of the parents didn’t love their children. Yet, none of Heinlein’s families smothered their children....more
Nooilforpacifists
>
Books:
science-fiction
(393)
Loading...
