A year had passed since little Danny's death - A year since his mother began the painful process of acceptance. But Tina Evans could have sworn she just saw her Danny in a stranger's car...Then she dreamed that Danny was alive. And when she awoke, she found a message waiting for her in Danny's bedroom - Two disturbing words scrawled on his chalkboard: NOT DEAD.
Was this someone's grim joke? Her mind playing tricks on her? Or something ...more? For Tina Evans, it was a mystery she couldn't escape. An obsession that would lead her from the bright lights of Las Vegas to the cold shadows of the High Sierras. A terrible secret seen only by...The Eyes of Darkness
©2008 Dean Koontz; (P)2010 Brilliance Audio, Inc.
Good plot. Bad dialogue. Weak narrator.
Tina’s son Danny was on a field trip. The bus was in an accident and he died. The cops recommended she not view the body because it was mangled. She complied. The story begins a year later. A ghost or something paranormal is sending messages to Tina. The messages say “not dead.” She is also having dreams saying her son is not dead. She believes someone is playing pranks.
Tina meets Elliot an attorney. They are attracted to each other and quickly become intimate. He suggests they exhume the body so she can say goodbye to her son which might stop the troubling dreams.
It was pretty good, but I did not like the dialogue. It seemed that most of the conversations were one person saying or suggesting something and the other dismissing it as “not possible.” In the beginning Tina was the doubtful one. For far too long, she kept saying my son is dead, these messages are wrong. I kept thinking she never saw the body. Why does she keep insisting he is dead? Finally she believes the messages are coming from her son. Then Elliot becomes the naysayer. And the conversations are him saying that’s not possible. Even after Elliot is convinced, when Tina suggests something, Elliot says “how can he do that?” I’m thinking because you saw him do those other things you idiot. I was impatient with the lack of logic. Sure this is paranormal fiction. But if these things were happening to me in real life, I’d be a believer sooner they were. And I wouldn’t keep saying the things they said. So I was annoyed.
Another piece of dialogue didn’t fit. Tina meets with her ex-husband Michael to discuss the pranks. He spends a few minutes telling her what his job is like and some of the interesting things he’s seen. It sounded like what he would tell someone on a first date. They were married for many years and divorced. She would have heard all that before. I think the author wanted to include those interesting tidbits in the book, but he picked the wrong characters to do it. He should have had Michael tell somebody else, not his ex-wife.
The narrator Tanya Eby bothered me. When a situation is stressful or tense, she narrates as if she’s having a good time talking to her girlfriends. She’s too pleasant sounding when a situation is unpleasant. It doesn’t feel like mystery or suspense. For example, Tina is wondering if her ex husband “had slipped into the house like a little boy playing a cruel prank, if he had written that message on the chalk board, then his hatred of her was far greater than she thought.” The narrator read this as if she were smiling and amused about a little boy doing something cute. I thought the narrator should have conveyed suspicion and anger, not amusement.
Genre: action suspense paranormal with a little romance.
Ending: good for the good guys.
as with all D.K books its either his or miss unfortuatley this was a near hit but not quite. On the other hand he gives an acount of the delopment of the book and a related TV series that never was and that is worth the credit to listen to, very entertaining, thats why I gave it the thrid star.
Well written but you need to like Science Fiction to truly enjoy this book. I enjoyed it and would say ---read it- it ends where you think-this needs a follow up. What is next?
I focus on fiction, sci-fi, fantasy, science, history, politics and read a lot. I try to review everything I read.
The characters are significantly weaker than Koontz at his best. Koontz redid this kind of story better in another novel - with more characterization of the kid. I still liked this version but it is not the best of Koontz.
I found this book to be all consuming. It had those little twists that keep you wanting more. Not to many books have happy endings these days and that was great. Enjoy!
and Dean Koontz delivered wonderfully on this book. I was scared, tense, and look forward to getting in the car to hear this book. Excellent!
I agree with some other reviews I've read. This is not one of Koontz's best. You can tell it's an early work. Still, a good listen.
I like this character development. I drew me in and made me want to finish the book. It ended way to soon, but is still a worthwhile listen or read. I like our heroin a tough Vegas showgirl. Nuff said.
You generally know what to expect with Dean Koontz and the popular culture horror genre. He's no John Steinbeck. I think we all know that, but he does do some really fun and fantastical stories. I especially like the buildup and suspense in "Intensity". I think that is one of his better novels. However, "The Eyes of Darkness" is so bad. It seems like he wrote it right out of college. The things the characters say are so cliche' and predictible that it's embarrassing. It's like he was writing the novel as a screenplay...a bad screenplay. He explains what the characters are thinking and doing as if he was giving stage direction to the actors. It's awkward and just very poor writing. Sorry Dean, but I know you can do much better than this.
"One of my favourites"
This is one of my favourite books to read and I enjoy the audiobook just as much.
Report Inappropriate Content