foxmonkey: Robot Snowman with Flowers (Default)
[personal profile] foxmonkey
Posted in my personal DW back in January; tweaking that entry for this community...

I bought Robota back in January, thinking, correctly as it turns out, that it would be my first read of 2010. When I bought it I thought it was a book of very cool robot illustrations, not realizing that it was indeed an illustrated science fiction story. Doug Chiang, the illustrator, is the Academy-Award-winning design director for the Star Wars prequels. The pictures are just what you want from sci fi artwork. They're gorgeous and sweeping and larger-than-life.

The book started out promisingly enough. There were just enough touches of humor to make me laugh out loud in spots, and at least one or two very interestingly written passages that made me stop and think about my own love affair with words. Here's my favorite bit:

Then the hunters emerged into sunlight. They were not men at all. They were robots, carrying long thin rifles in their equally thin arms, moving on slender legs with the grace and precision of spiders.

...moving on slender legs with the grace and precision of spiders. I. Love. That. It's such a wonderful description, equally beautiful and creepy. It's perfection.

If this were a paperback with no illustrations, its words would fill the slimmest volume; I'm a fast reader, and from cover to cover, began and finished the book in a couple of hours. It was an interesting story, but ultimately it was unsatisfying. I thought about it off and on, and finally realized that the book had no warmth, almost as if the author let the illustrations carry the story instead of the illustrations enhancing the story.

And then the end. ::sigh:: I'll put the rest behind a cut in case someone out there wants to remain unspoiled.

Are you kidding me? )
gehayi: (joanneannoyed (silver_sunn101))
[personal profile] gehayi


Title: Alex Cross's Trial by James Patterson
Pages: 380 pages
Rating: Whatever the lowest rating that this group gives is. I'm not sure if it's 0 or 1.
Genre: Courtroom drama/historical novel

This book fails at life.

First of all, the title? False advertising. Alex Cross, Patterson's favorite lead character, is NOT on trial, which was the notion that got me to pick it up in the first place. No, this is allegedly an trial that Cross is writing about, and which supposedly took place during the lives of two of Cross's ancestors.

Cut for a synopsis full of MAJOR spoilers and discussion of triggery things like lynching and the Klan )

I hate books like this. I hate them because they behave as if the past were just like the present, but with funny clothes, and that everything that was wrong could have been fixed by a good inoculation of 21st century values. And in doing so, they devalue the pain and suffering of the people who actually lived through those times for whom the issues were not quite so simple or clear-cut.

I especially hate such books because they claim to be historically accurate...and people will believe them.


***

P.S. Mods? Could I please have a "James Patterson" tag and a "historical inaccuracy" tag?
susanreads: my avatar, a white woman with brown hair and glasses (Default)
[personal profile] susanreads
I read this years ago but I still remember it, unfortunately. I'd already read the Hyperion Cantos, which I mostly enjoyed iirc. The nasty parts have a reason, not necessarily a human reason; there's a story, and embedded stories, some of which are fun. There might be problematic aspects that I didn't notice; I was mostly clueless back then. Then I read Song of Kali and it put me off reading any more of his work. I don't usually read horror; this must have been recommended somewhere. Problematic isn't a strong enough word; racist? I think that's the one I'm looking for.

It's not only that it's full of violence and fear and icky stuff, a hard slog without relief except for the occasional fake-out when it looks as if someone's going to escape. It's not only that our white hero expects his credentials as an American and an academic to protect him; I'm sure people do do that. It reads as though the author did just enough research on the Hindu pantheon to pick one to portray the worshippers of as an evil cult.

Slums should have people in them, helping one another or fighting to get to the top of the heap; being ground down or resisting; being humane or committing the sorts of brutality that people commit everywhere; getting on with life. Everyone here seems to be either part of the conspiracy or a mere victim. The final shock is effectively shocking, but horror fans, you can find better.

Dammit, I want things I read ages ago and remember vividly to be good, so I can rec them on [community profile] littleknownbooks.
bliumchik: (Default)
[personal profile] bliumchik
A few months ago, some of my friends conspired to lend me Anne Bishop's Blood Jewels trilogy.

Because they had genuinely enjoyed the books as teenagers (and I suspect, not reread them since) and thought it would be my sort of thing. Which I suppose, if it wasn't for all the... everything, it totally would be.

Cut for spoilers and capslock. Oh, and also rape; torture; abuse of children, animals and adjectives; not to mention extremely unsafe BDSM practices. AND RIDICULOUSNESS. )

Paradox

Dec. 27th, 2009 01:12 pm
susanreads: my avatar, a white woman with brown hair and glasses (Default)
[personal profile] susanreads
This is the BBC's 5-part drama serial Paradox, not anything else of the same name. It's not all bad by any means, but there are definitely things that people should be warned about.

There's an intellectual mystery at the core, and a lot of police action, but it's predominantly a thriller, so there's deadly peril in every episode, which isn't always averted. If there's a particular peril you can't tolerate, it's probably in there somewhere.

They return frequently to the "images from the future", including dead people. This gives me the impression that they don't expect the audience to pay attention, so we need to be nudged in the ribs whenever a piece of the puzzle falls into place. This is OK in the first episode when nobody knows what's happening, but it gets old fast.

Trigger warning for sexual assault: (skip details) a lot of dialogue about rape (some of which debunks rape myths, but), extensive scenes of stalking, an attack on a woman on-screen and the start of another. This is mostly all over episode 3, but missing that one wouldn't make the rest of the show safe.

I want to call out something I'm not sure of the name for: psychophobia? The tabloid-friendly implication that anyone with a mental health diagnosis is a danger to the general public. There's a character, described as "a fantasist" (I think he's supposed to believe his own lies), who the law can't do anything about because he hasn't been caught sufficiently red-handed. If this case was real, the tabloids would be all over it. spoilers for episode 3 )

I really don't like what they did with Callum, the only black guy in the main cast. He's a Christian, a conscientious copper, and has a home life which isn't the soap-operatic mess his team-mates are involved in, which is all fine and dandy. Then the writers start playing up how being a believer means interpreting the mystery entirely in those terms, which could work, but in the last episode, OMG I can't even. vague spoiler for episode 5 )
jesse_the_k: Slings & Arrows' Anna says: "I'll smack you so hard your cousin will fall down!" (Anna smacks hard)
[personal profile] jesse_the_k
Resist the temptation to add these to your Netflix queue. I didn't, and I'm here to prevent you from making the same mistake. My new rule: if a movie has more than 3 actors you really admire, and yet you've never heard of it, there's a really good reason. No gems stay hidden long in the Internet age.

Take (to the next planet, please) the 1999 William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream. It features Kevin Kline, David Straitharn, Dominic West (yes, Jimmy from The Wire), Stanley Tucci, Rupert Everett, Christian Bale—and all of them are at least competent Shakespearean actors. (Kline, Everett, West & Tucci are positively inspired.) Sadly, the female leads are Calista Flockhart and Michelle Pfeiffer. Pfeiffer's Titania principally channels Catwoman, and Flockhart's Helena seems to be scanning the horizon for a cue-card. They bring psuedo-British accents and all the theatrical grace of an over-enthusiastic 7th grader to their roles. Had to pop it out at 30 minutes because it was so painful.

Ghost Town: The Movie (2008) features Ricky Gervais being dull, Téa Leoni being dull, and Greg Kinnear being dull. The plot is dull. Ejected at 30 minutes.

The Madness of King George's pedigree is carefully illuminated parchment: story by Alan Bennet, leads by Helen Mirren, Ian Holm, Rupert Everett, based on true and horrifying events fundamental to U.S. history. And yet, dull dull dull dull.

The Red Violin was scripted by 6CD love-baby Don McKellar, and its international cast features D.M., Samuel L Jackson, Sandra Oh, Colm Feore, as well as location shots from around the planet! And yet dull, dull, dull. Ejected at 35 minutes.
sasha_feather: Retro-style poster of skier on pluto.   (Default)
[personal profile] sasha_feather
Who doesn't like National Geographic? I've read this magazine on and off for years, enjoying the spectacular photos, the wide scientific coverage, and the consistent education about global warming. This article caused me to throw the December issue across the room:

December 2009
National Geographic, page 120, article: "Love is in the Air": Birds do it, bees do it, even pollinating plants do it.
Link to article (The photos are good)

By Rob Dunn
Photograph by Martin Oeggerli

As humans we take many things for granted. One is surely the ability to walk, crawl, or even, after a little too much to drink, drag ourselves over to a lovely member of the opposite sex.

Oh really, Rob Dunn?

He apparently takes it for granted that humans are heterosexual, able-bodied enough to move independently, and all choose to imbibe in alcohol to further these goals. Also, I'm not even sure what this sentence has to do with pollen. I didn't read the article.
susanreads: my avatar, a white woman with brown hair and glasses (Default)
[personal profile] susanreads
SCOPE OF THE COMMUNITY

Reviews of works (TV shows, books, etc.) that you want to warn people against - published works only, not derivative works. I'm looking for critiques of the work, not the creators, especially warnings about problems that aren't featured on the packaging. Could be a deep analysis, or just a paragraph:
"This is supposed to be light entertainment, but the racism is neither light nor entertaining"
"Another 'hero' who's a stalker, and we're supposed to find that romantic. He's not even an interesting stalker"
"There's two hours of my life I won't get back. Who told (name) he could direct?"


Reposting of old reviews is welcome (books hang around in libraries, TV shows come out on DVD), and you can also link to a public post elsewhere.

MEMBERSHIP AND POSTING

Membership is open: anyone with a Dreamwidth account may join the community. Any member can post; posting will be moderated to start with. These policies are subject to review.

Please avoid racist, transphobic, ableist and other hate-based language in this community, outside of quotations from the work being criticised; pay attention if people say your language is hurtful, and call me on it if I get it wrong.

COMMENTS

The community default is to have open commenting, with the usual security settings for anonymous comments. You can disable anonymous comments on your own posts, or restrict commenting to members.

No personal attacks: people can disagree without fighting, I've seen it done! Feel free to screen any abusive comments on your own posts (anonymous comments are screened by default) if I don't get to them first.

CUTS, SPOILERS AND WARNINGS

You might want to say "This series started out as a fun faux-feminist urban fantasy, but after (spoiler) in (book), it's all vampire porn all the way". Some people like vampire porn. Please put spoilers under a cut, or use a spoiler stripe. (How to make screenreader-accessible spoiler stripes.)

If you want to quote the source to show how heinous it is, please do so briefly and under a cut, and avoid anything likely to be triggering.

Readers might have their co-workers or their kids looking over their shoulder. Age restrictions (View With Discretion/NSFW and Explicit Content/18+) will warn people following a link from somewhere else, who won't see your cut text.

TAGS

Please tag your post with media, genre if applicable, and what you want to warn people about. Currently posters are allowed to create tags, but please check what's already there first.

Profile

anti_recs: road-sign: non-specific hazard warning (Default)
anti-recs community: reviews of things to avoid

January 2021

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
1011 1213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags