Yes, because it is interesting and humorous,
Just the many humorous stories. How videos were made was interesting.
No. He did very well.
The facts and supporting details of how the DNC have taken advantage of minorities for years.
Good job, Ann. Good emotion.
It made me angry at the DNC's exploitation of minorities.
Read this book!
No. I don't listen to books again. Too many other good books are waiting to be read.
The historical ways others treated rabies,
Nothing. He did well.
The stories were all consistently good.
No. They both did well.
Arlette, because she is a humorous drunk.
No. I don't usually listen to books multiple times -- too many other good books are out there!
The high concept being pulled off well, and the codas complemented the story very well.
Obvious. Energetic. Adequate.
Neither laughter or tears, although others may do both.
Star Trek fans will enjoy it, of course,
The book was painfully unabridged! Every number, letter, acronym, and phone number were included. It got pretty tedious!
I would. It was still interesting to learn about social engineering.
Yes, but the way the narrator drew out the profanity was tiresome and off putting.
Possibly. Someone narcissistic should play Kevin. Narcissistic and fat, anyway.
I might try another book from David R. Stokes, but not by R. C. Bray. Too many ridiculous voices.
I would have selected a different narrator, or told this narrator to turn it down a notch with his caricatures...oops, I mean characterizations of the people in the story.
I don't know, but l not R. C. Bray.
It is a factual story, so none of them.
The audio quality could have been better. The volume level would go up and down, especially when the narrator switched to one of his ridiculous and unnecessary voices. Also, the book seemed biased against Norris, and seemed surprised that the defense legal counsel would have the gall to actually defend their client. So strange.
It was just out of date. Science has changed so much since this book was released. It is now irrelevant. Plus, it has some strong attacks against religion that I personally found insulting.
It felt like a book that anybody could have written with a little help from Wikipedia. No new ideas were presented, and far too often the authors went off on irrelevant tangents.
Yes. He did a passable job. Maybe a little too much emphasis and enunciation.
It had a great deal of potential. Maybe uber-fans or scientists would find it enjoyable.
Authors: leave politics and personal beliefs out of your books, and you will be better off in the long run. Alienating your fan base is not a recipe for success.
Report Inappropriate Content