I have listened to 3 hours and 29 minutes of this book and if i wanted to read a psychology book I know many others that would hold my interest more than this- It was touted as a psychological thriller but if it takes mores than 3 hours to get to the "thriller" part- I give up. I want my credit back.
Good original story, but the unabridged version has periods of slow pontification that just drag. Narration is more of a read than a performance. Still, the story makes it a worthwhile listen, but you might want the abridged version if available.
The story and great narration.
Dave Gurney, he was very interesting.
A more than one, hard to say without giving away points of the story.
Not a writer, a writer wannabe, editor, lit maj, or pretend literary critic. Just an avid reader/listener. My ratings are opinion only.
The protagonist was actually well written and I did enjoy some aspects of the writing. However, the ludicrous story line required suspension of all reality and common sense.
These things don't necessarily preclude me from enjoying a well written story, but this went too far. I could not get involved in the story and had to keep rewinding just to find my place.
An audiobook can only be successful if the listener gets wrapped up in that narrators rendition. For me, this was not the case. Shut Your Eyes Tight was narrated by Scott Brick and I would say that book was better than this one for the sole purpose of the narration. It was hard to tell when one voice or conversation ended and another began so I did get thrown off at probably some key points. There are times where he tries to shake it up a little bit and add a different voice or tone here and there, but he doesn't keep it consistant so I found myself saying..Who is this now? I was getting aggitated by his voice and had to shut it off and take some deep breaths. It's bad when the review isnt about a book at all, but about narration. I don't need a Hollywood production, but I do have to find the reading pleasant and at least interesting. He is boring. Thru and thru. Be careful with this one. You might be better buying the paper novel and listen to the audio with the other 2 in this series.
No, I love mysteries!
I guess I don't know if the performance was the problem, I just got tired of it.
I stopped after listening to a little more than 2 hours of this book. It did not hold my interest as the reader did not put inflection in his voice or feeling in his characters. I listen to the samples each time I buy a book but it seems that whoever selects the samples finds a good part and uses that. I would like a sample that starts with the first page of the book. If the reader and/or book does not grab me after a few pages I will continue to look. If you buy something at a store and it isn't what you think it is, you can return it. This book isn't what I thought it was. How do you get your credit back? And does anyone from customer service actually read the comments?
I enjoyed the story and the written book actually deserves more than the 2 stars I gave the Audible book. The story was a little slow in places, but kept my interest. I kept trying to figure out the puzzle all the way to the end. I really enjoyed the main character's attempt to figure out his life and relationship after retirement. I can see other novels in this series, since the renowned detective can't let go of what he enjoys and does best; so many killers, so few experts. The one plot element I didn't like was the death of a loved one as the reason for all the angst. This theme is really overworked (think of how many main characters are tormented by his loss of a loved one) and not needed to develop the character or his relationship with his wife. Ok, enough about the story. What I didn't like was the reader, George Newbern. Why he was picked as the reader, I'll never know. His voice and inflections are monochromatic and dull. The pitch of his voice is a little too mid-range which adds to the dullness of his reading; however, it would work if he read with a little more excitement, like he really wanted to do this. The first part of the reading is clipped and spoken like he's reading a dull textbook instead of a thrilling novel. He does get better about a third of the way into the book, like he's getting used to reading, but it's not enough to save the performance. He ruined the book for me. My wife, listened to part of the book with me on a road trip and said the same thing about the reader. I would buy the next story in the series, if the author wrote it, but not if George Newbern was the reader! This is one of my pet peeves with Audible books. Who makes the decision on readers? Do people compete for the opportunity to read an Audible book? Why not use a panel of listeners to decide the reader? Oh well, I'll start listening to the sample audio before I spend my credit.
The narrator was performing this story and not telling a story; his voice always had this slightly hightened quality; all he needed to do was relax. His performace was remarkably uneasily dull. It didn't help that the writing was pretty amaturish -- the author was trying to create a rhythm in a by-the-numbers, I-learned-how-to-write-from-a-how-to-book way which was painfully obvious by the many torchured metaphors. The premise was not as interesting as other reviewers indicate; all you have to do is think about it and the explaination (which completely escapes this apparently smart retired detective) becomes clear. Solving the "mystery" early made the rest of it unbearable.
I really wanted to like this book. But there were way too many times when various characters would ask "What do you mean by that?" of "That can't possibly be" when presented with a perfectly valid explanation. Perhaps Verdon was trying to make sure the audience understood the story so far, but the characters seemed far too stupid to be believable.
And then there's the plot holes. When the bad guy is finally knocked unconscious the two protagonist start to argue about how they subdued the bad guy. But meanwhile, the bad guy is still laying there with a gun in his hand and a house about to explode. There's no sense of urgency to reduce the danger of the situation. "Oh, he's knocked out, we'll be fine." And when they start asking important questions like "why did he escalate so quickly" they just shrug it off with no real answer.
Let's add in the character stereotypes. The brash, foul mouthed detective; the angry lead Sargent who's so abusive that I can't believe he would ever be promoted to that position with that attitude; the gay bed and breakfast owner who has a Wizard of Oz fascination and is more angry about the robbery of his replica ruby slippers than the fact that a murderer may have stayed at his place.
I know this was Verdon's first book and I hope they get better. But there were far too many places where I found myself saying "Really!? That's how you're going to write this?"
When you find the answer to the first "I'm thinking of a number" puzzle you'll think "Really?" And that scam never got anyone's attention? Unbelievable.
It's a great idea and I really wanted it to work. But I don't think I'll spend another of my valuable credits on another Verdon book.