Kailua Kona, HI, United States | Member Since 2009
If you have not read, or listened, to this wonderful book yet, do it now. A beautiful story of memories lost and found, of young love and a life lived well, of courage and its consequences, and of elephants! (well, at least one).
This is one of those novels you will listen to more than once.
Mildly interesting plot, unconvincing characters, overwrought language. Extravagantly positive reviews here are misleading. Full review in progress.
Read my reviews, I like horror stories. I am a great fan of both Steven King and his son Joe Hill. They are amazingly creative and, at their best, they build our terror as they build their tales.
At their best. This is not their best. This is not in the same zip code as their best. This is a cheap, ugly story with none of the nuance or suspense we can usually expect from both King and Hill.
I will admit that the first half of the book builds interest. Knowing these great writers, we are certain that they will redeem this introduction masterfully. And we are wrong. At some point, after wading through the grotesque muck of the last several chapters, we find ourselves asking "Is this it? Is this all they've got?" And then we take a shower.
This is the work of juvenile hacks. There is nothing here other than an apparent quest to find the most vile imagery. The plot lines are broadly derivative of other works (Children of the Corn, Blair Witch Project). The thrills do not build to a climax but are one-offs, relying for their power on the gross.
Don't waste your credit. Don't waste your cash. Don't waste your time. This is trash.
Still tempted? Well (Spoiler Alert) ... how anxious are you to spend a couple hours following a pregnant girl and her brother as they are lured into a Kansas field and become lost; as she confronts a supernaturally tainted madman who beats her into miscarriage; as her brother is similarly turned mad and feeds her the fresh corpse of her baby; and as she too is lost to madness and joins in luring others into the field? If this appeals, you deserve the experience.
Of course, this is a tale about a bookseller and his books. Read most any review and that will be its central focus.
We can view this book as a gauntlet thrown down in the battle between small book stores and the giant(s) of online bookselling. Perhaps that is not surprising in our age of disruptive transformation in the way we buy and sell books. Not all such change is for the good, reviewers seem to agree, and change risks great loss.
You can certainly read this wonderful story in that way with great pleasure. It is a beautiful story. But that story, and its lessons, are relevant far behind the musty shelves of an old neighbor book store. Superficially, this book is about a book seller. Really, though, it is about all of us.
This is a story of loves lost and found again, albeit in different forms.
It is a story of a man who is profoundly lost and then saved who then, in turn, saves others ... all without intending to do anything special.
It is a story of the effect each of us has on others and the reservoir of strength we have that enables us to rise to meet new challenges and remake our lives and our world.
It is a story of hope. And a beautiful one at that. Told with care by Scott Brick.
Whether you enjoy books and bookstores or not, read (or listen) to this book. It will touch you.
I am a great fan of the Matthew Shardlake series and approached this alternative history with the hope that it would rise to the same level of excellence. It did not.
The premise is relatively commonplace: how would history develop if Britain had not fought on against Nazi Germany following the twin debacles in Norway and at Dunkirk. We learn the answer as we follow an intrepid group of soon-to-be resistance figures who must strive to keep an important nuclear secret out of Nazi hands.
This is a very fragile plot line. For it to work, we must believe that a few sentences passed between brothers would have been sufficient to advance the Nazi search for atomic weaponry by years or decades. In itself, that is foolish to the point of absurdity.
What's more, these brothers, presumably capable scientists, seem unable to differentiate between atomic and nuclear weapons, using the terms almost interchangeably. (Atomic weapons are a subset of nuclear weapons, which also include hydrogen bombs. Yes, a pedantic point, but one a scientist would likely make.)
More distracting than any of this, though, is the rampant bias we find throughout the narrative. With a single exception, every reference to the Catholic Church is negative. Every reference to American Republicans paints them as isolationist Nazi collaborators (or useful idiots). Almost every reference to organized religion in general is disparaging or negative, most characters have fallen away from their faith and religious faith almost never (with a single Anglican exception) plays any role in the resistance (completely at odds with the actual history of WWII resistance).
It is a shame that Sansom, the careful historian, who painted such a convincing tale of Tudor England should offer Dominion to his fans. Better that we receive another installment of the Shardlake series than any more work of this disappointing quality.
No question, Jonathan Maberry has an engagingly creative mind and the plot of this Joe Ledger novel, just like its predecessors, won't disappoint. Neither will Ray Porter's narration. He has great range and nails Maberry's characters.
What IS disappointing is Maberry's development of the Joe Ledger character. Ledger, once a multi-faceted "action hero" with an in-your-face sense of humor has now become 90% juvenile smart-a** and 10% self-pitying narcissist. The snarkiness is MUCH more frequent and sometimes jarringly inappropriate. This is a shame because Ledger had real potential in earlier series entries.
Of course, Ledger was always a smart-a**. But what was once a character trait has, in this novel, become the entire character. And this has reduced enjoyable banter and humorous narrative to a contrived pursuit of Ledger's next witty comment. Add to this the occasional "poor me" self-pitying reflection, and the periodic politically-correct preaching, and the result is disappointing character development and, on balance, a disappointing novel.
Stumble upon a true 5-star novel and you are grateful for heft. Five hundred pages reading ... 15 hours listening ... GREAT! The more, the better. You just don't want the story to end. With A Case of Redemption, though, the 11-hour heft of the novel is a weakness, and redemption comes only in the last 100 minutes or so.
Admittedly, legal thrillers rarely deliver a solid 5-star experience. By their nature, they ARE formulaic (at least usually). The protagonists recognizably fall into one of a very few "types" ~ world weary veteran ... naive young go-getter ... fallen star wounded by life. And, of course, the plots usually follow the same investigation ~ discovery ~ revelation ~ trial ~ verdict pattern. Of course, there are exceptions (Turow, Connelly, early Grisham), and THEY redeem the genre.
A Case of Redemption is not one of those rare and welcome exceptions. But it is not entirely formulaic either. There are surprises here. There is a late plot twist (or two). And it is these surprises that ultimately earn A Case of Redemption a listen.
Otherwise, though, the tale is disappointing.
Character development, for example, is largely unconvincing. Do we really believe a year of binge drinking can just stop, in a few days, because a pretty girl asks you for a favor you aren't sure you should grant? Do we really believe a new job, reluctantly accepted, can instantly vanquish debilitating grief? Do we really believe that at the same time a lawyer is faced with a growing body of lies from his client, he will become increasingly convinced of that client's innocence?
The plot provides little relief. For much of the novel, the plot is entirely predictable. There is really little doubt of the identity of the villain. We can tell who it is before the characters seem to know, even though they have all the information we do (this is a first person narration, after all). And while we come to loath the villain, he is unidimensional; Mitzner never reveals more than a stereotype and only lightly explores motive.
Perhaps least forgivable are the errors of law and practice that litter Mitzner's courtroom scenes. Would it really have been that difficult to fact check this sort of thing?
All these weaknesses notwithstanding, you may well conclude that A Case of Redemption is itself redeemed by the surprising conclusion. For me, it was. The hour or two from the last of the courtroom action, through the end of the novel, made this listen, on balance, a worthwhile investment of time and credit.
IMPORTANT: Since the late plot twists are such "ah ha" moments, you will want to be especially careful of spoilers. Unfortunately, there are some in other reviews here. If you want to experience all the surprises as Mitzner intended (and not at the hands of an Audible reviewer) avoid the reviews entitled, "At Last ... A GOOOD Book" and "Suspenseful."
Finally, a few words about the narration. Collins is an able reader who maintained an appropriate pace throughout his narration. However, he has trouble with some pronunciations (why is this so prevalent among readers?). And, more important, he made a remarkably poor choice in the "voice" he selected for Dan, the main protagonist (and first person narrator). Dan is a 40-something man who has been beaten down by tragedy, which he faced by retreating from the world and into a bottle. Collins "voice" for him, on the other hand, is youthful and immature. The disconnect is especially jarring every time Dan mentions his age.
So, do you spend the credit, and more valuable, 11 hours of your time? If you have not yet experienced legal thrillers by the masters of the genre, go there first. Scott Turow, Michael Connelly or John Grisham can, and often do, deliver full 5-star listens. On the other hand, if you have plumbed those works, enjoy the genre, and relish late plot twists and surprising endings, then redeem your credit here.
Leningrad, in winter, is brutally cold. Real hunger is a gnawing beast. Relief from either, as welcome as it may be, merely releases the exhaustion that the pain of cold and the ache of hunger had kept at bay.
We know this, not because David Benioff told us, but because we experienced it through the remarkable characters of City of Thieves. Benioff crafts his characters so deftly, and with such originality and empathy, that we are drawn into his story completely. We don't read it; we live it.
City of Thieves is a character-driven tale set in Leningrad at war. We travel with Benioff's protagonists, Lev and Kolya, through this besieged city, on a quest that is both trivial and life-threatening, to find a dozen eggs. Their fear, their hunger, their rage, their hope, their grief ... these aren't emotions we read about. We feel them, and empathize because Benioff has drawn his characters so robustly.
Benioff has done this, in large part, through the little details he has sprinkled so generously throughout the narration. In many ways, the details carry us forward, through a very tight plot, that never really loses intensity. The details create the mental images that endure ... the *giant's" rooms, the city's defenses, the Colonel's petty corruption, the Nazi's instances of unimaginable cruelty, and much, much more.
What might otherwise be a soul-crushing story, is made bearable (and even somehow ennobling) by regular injections humor ~ often war-weary or cynical ~ but real enough and creative enough, that you will find yourself smiling and laughing much more often than you would expect. At least I did.
Even the profanity is wildly imaginative and, far from being gratuitous, is an important, and welcome, part of the story.
City of Thieves is narrated wonderfully by Ron Perlman. Here, the narration really does add to the story. Characters are presented faithfully; their voices ring true and are just what you would expect for them. Pace is flawless; pronunciation equally so (something that is increasingly rare in audiobooks these days)
City of Thieves is more than worth the time and the credit. This one is a keeper. Do yourself a favor.
Any time Lincoln Rhyme is called into action, I can count on Jeffrey Deaver to deliver hours of enjoyable diversion, either in print or on audio. Any time, that is, until now.
In print, The Kill Room might equal Deaver's earlier works. I wouldn't know. I made the mistake of listening to the tale. And the new, multi-voiced narration of this work harms the story-telling so greatly, it surprises me that any audio producer would sacrifice his reputation by allowing it to reach listeners.
Audio casting is remarkably bad. Rhyme is presented in a weak, petulant voice, undermining the gravitas that our disabled forensic investigator presented in early audiobooks (and films). Sachs is even worse, portrayed with a voice that is not serious and is almost flitty. All this is even more disappointing since previous narrators, including the great George Guidall and Dennis Boutsikaris, performed so outstandingly that they enhanced Deaver's work.
Worse, something went wrong technically with the merging of these voices. You can hear that these two voices were not actually recorded at the same time and that Sachs was spliced into the overall audio. This is so jarring and so noticeable, it is unforgivable that professionals would not have corrected it before releasing the "finished" product.
There are worse narrations in the Audible catalog, but none for such a high-profile, popular novelist. How did this happen?
Narration aside, the plot is interesting and offers a few surprises. Rhyme continues to be developed nicely as a character, as does Sachs. This may not be Deaver's "A" game, but it isn't too far off the mark.
In short, The Kill Room is worth a READ, but not a listen. This time, buy the BOOK.
The Ironman Triathlon comes to our little Island this week which seemed a good enough reason to dust off Richard Bachman/Stephen King's The Long Walk. I've read the book but had not listened to the audio before.
First observation ~ in this case, the audio is better than the book. Kirby Heyborne is first rate; his characterizations are distinct and consistent. As the characters move from fatigue to exhaustion to agony and beyond, you can hear the transformations in his voice. The guy is very good.
So, of course, is the book. If you are new to Stephen King's Richard Bachman period, you should know that the Bachman books are fairly described as King's darker ones. Yes, it is hard to accept that Pet Cemetery, Carrie, The Shining and the rest of King's oeuvre don't represent the limit of King's horror. They don't. Listen to The Long Walk and you will understand why.
The difference between King writing as King and King writing as Bachman ~ especially here in The Long Walk ~ is the presence or absence of hope. Even in the darkest of the King novels (perhaps, Pet Cemetery), the characters never abandon hope, even when that hope is ultimately self-destructive.
The Bachman books are different. Hope ~ for success, redemption, love, almost anything ~ is stripped away from the characters, sometimes dramatically all-at-once, sometimes incrementally. We, the readers, are then faced with what is left. Often, that is a new and profound terror.
The Long Walk is the archetype for such a plot. It is an amazingly compelling, step-by-step telling of the defining contest in an America that is recognizable to us, but has somehow strayed far off course. We are given just a few hints of how this happened and they are offered in passing, not as central plot elements. What the plot focuses on is the defining manifestation of this redrawn America ~ The Long Walk. Through it, we can see the contours of this new America.
And all that is just background. The story you will remember, the story King tells, is of the boys on this long walk. Avoiding spoilers, we watch them begin their competition as any boys would ~ with bluster and bravado, good humor and mischief. We watch as they test themselves, over a very long walk (recounted in a long 10+ hour tale). We watch them slowly stripped of, well, everything. And, in the end, we find ourselves, too, stripped of hope.
This is not horror in the sense of monsters and dungeons. There are no "gotcha" moments, no cheap thrills. This is a higher grade, more insidious terror. And, that makes it all the more compelling.
Spend the credit. Listen to the novel. Don't worry, you'll still be able to fall asleep afterwards. You just might not like your dreams.
John Sandford is a terrific writer and the creator of both the Lucas Davenport and Virgil Flowers mystery series. Both series have given fans some great reads (or listens) and Sandford has certainly earned his place among the very best crime/mystery writers. I'm a fan and I've read (or listened to) everyone one of his books, many more than once.
I'm glad I read this latest Virgil Flowers mystery and, as a fan, will be unlikely to miss the next one. Mad River is an enjoyable, sometimes suspenseful listen. If you are a fan, its worth the credit.
That said, this is not the right book to introduce you to Virgil Flowers or to hook you on the series. Something is going on with John Sandford and it is not leading to great books. It seems Sandford is losing steam with both his series. Plots, character development, local color are all a bit less compelling than they once were.
Perhaps this is understandable with the long-running (22-book) Davenport series. But Sandford's Virgil Flowers offerings (of which this is the 6th) have seemed a fresh and exciting new start. That may yet prove out, but this latest novel is merely a good tale from an author we know can produce great ones.
Listening to Mad River was more like listening to a straight chronology of events than to a novel. The events were well-related and the new characters were engaging enough (although by no means compelling). But it seemed like this story was something Sandford just had to get off his chest, so he told it too straight. As a result, much of the spark Sandford brings to his tales (GREAT local color, plot twists, solid character development) are missing.
I don't want to be too harsh here. If we weren't talking about John Sandford here, the story would probably rate a 4 instead of a 3. I'm not sorry I spent time with this audio, and the plot was sufficiently interesting to be remembered. But if this type of story-telling is the new normal for John Sandford, I'm not sure how long I will be anxiously anticipating his next work.
The best advice I can offer (as others have) is that this is certainly a creditworthy mystery for the Virgil Flowers/John Sandford/Lucas Davenport fan. For everyone else, start with the earlier works and become a fan, first.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.