Question: What is your premise of the movie?

I am a huge fan of Stephanie's and LOVE the twilight books. I am however in my 30's so when I saw this book and the caption "adult novel" I thought great! Something with her style written for a more adult audience.The premise was interesting and there were allot of places it could go. (alien being in a human body, planet taken over etc.) I think my biggest criticism is that the main character seems like a revisit of her main character from Twilight- Bella. The caring, martyr that puts everyone above herself. The love story that develops takes a interesting turn, but makes itself a lot less complicated than the direction it seemed to be going. All in all it was enjoyable, just not as good as her other series. If you haven't read the Twilight series I recommend that more. Also I would not characterize this book as "Adult" there aren't any steamy love scenes or bouts of swearing like a sailor.Steph- if you happen to read this: I hope what I had to say (and others) doesn't discourage you. I really enjoy your books and hope that you write more. :)

Answer: like a revisit of her main character from Twilight- Bella

I am a huge fan of Stephanie's and LOVE the twilight books. I am however in my 30's so when I saw this book and the caption "adult novel" I thought great! Something with her style written for a more adult audience. The premise was interesting and there were allot of places it could go. (alien being in a human body, planet taken over etc.) <hl> I think my biggest criticism is that the main character seems like a revisit of her main character from Twilight- Bella . <hl> The caring, martyr that puts everyone above herself. The love story that develops takes a interesting turn, but makes itself a lot less complicated than the direction it seemed to be going. All in all it was enjoyable, just not as good as her other series. If you haven't read the Twilight series I recommend that more. Also I would not characterize this book as "Adult" there aren't any steamy love scenes or bouts of swearing like a sailor. Steph- if you happen to read this: I hope what I had to say (and others) doesn't discourage you. I really enjoy your books and hope that you write more. :)

I am a huge fan of Stephanie's and LOVE the twilight books. I am however in my 30's so when I saw this book and the caption "adult novel" I thought great! Something with her style written for a more adult audience.The premise was interesting and there were allot of places it could go. (alien being in a human body, planet taken over etc.) I think my biggest criticism is that the main character seems <hl> like a revisit of her main character from Twilight- Bella <hl>. The caring, martyr that puts everyone above herself. The love story that develops takes a interesting turn, but makes itself a lot less complicated than the direction it seemed to be going. All in all it was enjoyable, just not as good as her other series. If you haven't read the Twilight series I recommend that more. Also I would not characterize this book as "Adult" there aren't any steamy love scenes or bouts of swearing like a sailor.Steph- if you happen to read this: I hope what I had to say (and others) doesn't discourage you. I really enjoy your books and hope that you write more. :)

I think my biggest criticism is that the main character seems <hl> like a revisit of her main character from Twilight- Bella <hl> .


Question: How good is the story?

I came across Atlas Shrugged here on Amazon while looking for something else entirely. I read some of the reviews. Many people loved this book, and some people absolutely hated it. There was a real conflict going on. The one star reviews sighted an overly lengthy tomb that was preachy and highly opinionated with poorly drawn and poorly developed characters, unrealistic dialogue and confusing descriptions. The 5 star reviews touted amazing characters, poetic descriptions and ground breaking philosophy. But, it was the comments to the 5 star and 1 star reviews that got me interested. I read a comment on a one star review that the commenter thought the one star review was unwarranted and the reviewer needed to read some in-depth analytical books addressing this book and its author's philosophies - then re-read and try the review again (and that the second time around couldn't possibly be a low rating). Well, any book that needs other books to explain it and make it understandable and worthwhile does not sound like a good book at all in my opinion. Other commenter on the 1 star reviews basically said that the reviewers (and anyone who would rate this book low) were a bunch of closed minded sheep that COULD not or WOULD not understand the monumental, brand new philosophy in this book. Well, when anyone says that the reason a book is not liked is because of stupidity, ignorance or willful disregard, it makes me wonder - about both the book and the commenter. On the other side, the comments on some of the 5 star reviews accused those reviewers of being brainwashed cult followers. Overall, I was interested enough to read the sample on my Kindle. I wanted to know what all the controversy was about. I was pretty underwhelmed, and I have to say, I agree more with the 1 star reviewers than the 5 star. It was not well written, it was unrealistic in many ways, not believable at all, and was way too long. I was not fired up in either way. I do not vehemently hate it, nor did I absolutely despise it. I was pretty unimpressed, both with the writing itself and the concepts therein.As I said, the book is not well written. Many of the reviewers did comment on this, and the response from those who loved the book were often that English was author's second language so cut her some slack. I do not agree that that is an acceptable reason nor is it even a good excuse. A good editor or even a proof reader, even a few willing friends, could have cleaned it up. There is no reason why a book should be published like this. A few examples follow. Verb tense. Often the verb tense was inappropriate, especially when switching between past memory to current time. At one point, a character was thinking about an oak tree from his child hood (in past tense) and then this sentence "He stood there for a while, making no sound, then he walked back to the house." Now, of course, after a moment of thought and a quick re-read, I figured out that he was still remembering a memory and not actually looking for a moment and walking back to the house NOW, but when there are multiple instances of verb tense mix ups throughout, it makes for a very confusing, jarring read. There are also many places were the wrong form of a verb or adjective is used, such as singular versus plural. An example: "It was as if normal existence were (should be was rather than were) a photograph." And "-not more than every fourth one of the stores was (should be were) out of business; its (should be their) windows dark." A proof reader or editor would have easily corrected this. Also, there were sudden point of view changes without indication or warning, one moment we are in one character's head, with their thoughts and feelings, and then we are suddenly in the head of another, then back again. Then, there is Rearden's name. He's referred to both as Hank and as Henry. Again, I figured it out, but there were a few pages where people were talking to "Henry" and I was thinking, did someone else walk in? I read back and forth, trying to find where it was explained that Hank was Henry, and couldn't find it. Earlier in the book, people would suddenly speak up that hadn't been initially described as being in the scene, so it wasn't unprecedented to have new characters show up without introduction.In addition, the sentence structure was rather cumbersome and confusing at times. Sentences are very long, repetitive and strung together with commas and semicolons.  Example: "The notes flowed up, they spoke of rising and they were rising itself, they were the essence and form of upward motion, they seemed to embody every human act and thought that had ascent as its motive." Or "But from the sunset far at the end of the street, yellow glints caught his eyes, and the eyes looked straight at Eddie . . ." So, were the yellow glints at the end of the street and did the glints catch his attention? Because, if they did, how can he look at Eddie at the same time he's looking at the glints? Were they supposed to be caught IN his eyes? I think so. Or ". . . not an active fire, but a dying one which it is too late to stop." This sentence indicates that it's too late to stop the fire, which doesn't make sense because the fire is dying. But I think what it is actually trying to say is that it is the dying of the fire that is too late to stop. There were instances of this thoughout the book, and it made reading it difficult because I found myself re-reading and re-reading, before I got it. You can't just read through this book non-stop with images and experiences running through your head, because the words keep getting in the way.I don't know about all readers, but I would guess many of them would be thrown off balance and just plain confused by the writing of this book. I was. I had a writing teacher once who gave some of the best advice I've ever gotten, "You want readers to read your story not the words of your story. You want them to read without seeing the words. If they are seeing the words or worse, being confused and tripped up by them, then you have failed." That was certainly true for me reading this book. It was only a string of words without imagery that envoked no feeling.Onto the characters. I too found them to be unrealistic, contradictory, and poorly drawn. There were only a few types of people in this book, those portrayed as stupid, selfish (wanting things only for their own gratification) and charitable beyond any rational reason and those portrayed as cold, emotionless and selfish (wanting things only to feed their vision). I would agree with the other reviewers who said the dialogue was preachy, contrived and unrealistic. Example: "Of what importance is an individual in the titanic collective achievement of our industrial age?" or "little slum children", "it's purely non-commercial", and "selfish greed for profit is a thing of the past.", or this great big long, incongruous statement, "I'm not going to requisition a new typewriter. The new ones are made of tin. When the old ones go, that will be the end of typewriting. There was an accident in the subway this morning, their brakes wouldn't work. You ought to go home, Eddie, turn on the radio and listen to a good dance band. Forget it, boy. Trouble with you is you never had a hobby. Somebody stole the electric light bulbs from off the staircase, down where I live. I've got a pain in my chest. Couldn't get any cough drops this morning, the drugstore on our corner went bankrupt last week. The Texas-Western Railroad went bankrupt last month. They closed the Queensborough Bridge yesterday for temporary repairs. Oh well, what's the use? Who is John Galt?" Who says things like this? Nobody! People don't talk like that. They give speeches with that kind of language, maybe, but not talk to each other like that in everyday conversations.I found no new concepts in this book. The individual versus the whole, society versus industry, ect . . . Rand did not discover something new and reveal it in this book. Nor was her restated concepts portrayed in any realistic setting. The man who runs the train company is whining in response to urging to use a big, established, good quality supplier because the small company (low quality and long lead times that cost them months of time and money) should be given a chance. Or defending a failing venture in an undeveloped country because - shouldn't those countries have help and have modern facilities too? And he's telling his more efficient, hardworking and profit minded hardnosed co-owner sister that she doesn't understand or care about the human element . . . well, as far as business is concerned, of course she doesn't! And to portray any leader of a business as this man is silly. I work in a manufacturing field, and I can tell you, a vendor that provides high cost, low quality parts and is constantly blowing delivery dates is dropped. Same with business ventures, if something isn't making a profit, it goes. And what's this whole resistance to using the new type of metal? "but - but no ones used this new type of metal before . . ." Once again, businesses are always looking for the newest tech, the newest discoveries and inventions to make themselves bigger and better and give them an edge and make them money. This whole business set up in this book just seriously annoyed me. No business runs like that, it couldn't, and rendering one as such, even to make a point, just rang false for me. In the book, sentiment, affection, charity were portrayed as weak, negative emotions that none of the obviously strong, truly successful, hero characters had, even towards their families. The strong heros were condescending, arrogant and bitter.I did read the forward, which had some comments on Rand, as well as some explanations of her characters and the parts they played. Again, if I have to have things spelled out before hand and be TOLD (because it's apparently not clear enough in the book itself) what something ACTUALLY means (because my own ability to drawn my own conclusions must be faulty or my willful ignorance might make me ignore logic and reason) then I suspect there is something lacking in the book itself, either in the nuts and bolts of the writing or in the characters or plot. I found all that to be true in this instance. The actual structure of the writing was confusing and repetitive as well as contradictory, and both the characters and the plot were unrealistic, unrelatable, inhuman and also contradictory. Clarity, concise and realistic dialogue, sympathetic characters, believable plot/people/motivations/actions were all lacking. As a story, it is not something I want to read. As a philosophy, it was nothing new or groundbreaking, that I need to read, and certainly don't want to if its not well written.Quote from Rand: "I seem to be both a theoretical philosopher and a fiction writer. But it is the last that interests me most; the first is only a means to the last . . ." Well, this book is not evidence that supports this statement. It is the exact opposite, in my opinion. This fiction book was not a vehicle for her philosophy. Her philosophy was a vehicle for this book. That was evident to me in the preachy speeches of the characters and the unrealistic mold every scene was shoved into. She did not use her fiction to tell about a philosophy but rather used her philosophy to tell a story. Everything was drawn and built to fit that philosophy.Quote from Rand: ". . . creating a new, original abstraction and translating it through new, original means. This, as far as I know, is only ME - my kind of fiction writing . . . May God forgive me if this is mistaken as conceit. As near as I can now see it, it isn't . . ." Well, I saw nothing new or original in the philosophy and certainly nothing new in this book, and to think it is, to judge one's own work as such, sounds conceited to me. And, in reading Rand's other statements in the forward, she certainly left me with an impression she is an elitist, arrogant, condescending and bitter woman, just like the heroes she created. I will definitely not be paying the high Kindle price to read the rest of this book.This all makes me sad, in a way. There were moments and certain descriptions that were like breathtaking snatches of sunlight and left me thinking - wow, this woman could have been a great novelist. With a little editing, a little less soap box preaching, a grounding in realistic, believable settings and characters, she could have written a tremendous book. There is talent here, but its warped and lost in the extrusion through her narrow and bent mold.

Answer: Many people loved this

I came across Atlas Shrugged here on Amazon while looking for something else entirely. I read some of the reviews. <hl> Many people loved this book, and some people absolutely hated it. <hl> There was a real conflict going on. The one star reviews sighted an overly lengthy tomb that was preachy and highly opinionated with poorly drawn and poorly developed characters, unrealistic dialogue and confusing descriptions. The 5 star reviews touted amazing characters, poetic descriptions and ground breaking philosophy. But, it was the comments to the 5 star and 1 star reviews that got me interested. I read a comment on a one star review that the commenter thought the one star review was unwarranted and the reviewer needed to read some in-depth analytical books addressing this book and its author's philosophies - then re-read and try the review again (and that the second time around couldn't possibly be a low rating). Well, any book that needs other books to explain it and make it understandable and worthwhile does not sound like a good book at all in my opinion. Other commenter on the 1 star reviews basically said that the reviewers (and anyone who would rate this book low) were a bunch of closed minded sheep that COULD not or WOULD not understand the monumental, brand new philosophy in this book. Well, when anyone says that the reason a book is not liked is because of stupidity, ignorance or willful disregard, it makes me wonder - about both the book and the commenter. On the other side, the comments on some of the 5 star reviews accused those reviewers of being brainwashed cult followers. Overall, I was interested enough to read the sample on my Kindle. I wanted to know what all the controversy was about. I was pretty underwhelmed, and I have to say, I agree more with the 1 star reviewers than the 5 star. It was not well written, it was unrealistic in many ways, not believable at all, and was way too long. I was not fired up in either way. I do not vehemently hate it, nor did I absolutely despise it. I was pretty unimpressed, both with the writing itself and the concepts therein. As I said, the book is not well written. Many of the reviewers did comment on this, and the response from those who loved the book were often that English was author's second language so cut her some slack. I do not agree that that is an acceptable reason nor is it even a good excuse. A good editor or even a proof reader, even a few willing friends, could have cleaned it up. There is no reason why a book should be published like this. A few examples follow. Verb tense. Often the verb tense was inappropriate, especially when switching between past memory to current time. At one point, a character was thinking about an oak tree from his child hood (in past tense) and then this sentence "He stood there for a while, making no sound, then he walked back to the house." Now, of course, after a moment of thought and a quick re-read, I figured out that he was still remembering a memory and not actually looking for a moment and walking back to the house NOW, but when there are multiple instances of verb tense mix ups throughout, it makes for a very confusing, jarring read. There are also many places were the wrong form of a verb or adjective is used, such as singular versus plural. An example: "It was as if normal existence were (should be was rather than were) a photograph." And "-not more than every fourth one of the stores was (should be were) out of business; its (should be their) windows dark." A proof reader or editor would have easily corrected this. Also, there were sudden point of view changes without indication or warning, one moment we are in one character's head, with their thoughts and feelings, and then we are suddenly in the head of another, then back again. Then, there is Rearden's name. He's referred to both as Hank and as Henry. Again, I figured it out, but there were a few pages where people were talking to "Henry" and I was thinking, did someone else walk in? I read back and forth, trying to find where it was explained that Hank was Henry, and couldn't find it. Earlier in the book, people would suddenly speak up that hadn't been initially described as being in the scene, so it wasn't unprecedented to have new characters show up without introduction. In addition, the sentence structure was rather cumbersome and confusing at times. Sentences are very long, repetitive and strung together with commas and semicolons. Example: "The notes flowed up, they spoke of rising and they were rising itself, they were the essence and form of upward motion, they seemed to embody every human act and thought that had ascent as its motive." Or "But from the sunset far at the end of the street, yellow glints caught his eyes, and the eyes looked straight at Eddie . . ." So, were the yellow glints at the end of the street and did the glints catch his attention? Because, if they did, how can he look at Eddie at the same time he's looking at the glints? Were they supposed to be caught IN his eyes? I think so. Or ". . . not an active fire, but a dying one which it is too late to stop." This sentence indicates that it's too late to stop the fire, which doesn't make sense because the fire is dying. But I think what it is actually trying to say is that it is the dying of the fire that is too late to stop. There were instances of this thoughout the book, and it made reading it difficult because I found myself re-reading and re-reading, before I got it. You can't just read through this book non-stop with images and experiences running through your head, because the words keep getting in the way. I don't know about all readers, but I would guess many of them would be thrown off balance and just plain confused by the writing of this book. I was. I had a writing teacher once who gave some of the best advice I've ever gotten, "You want readers to read your story not the words of your story. You want them to read without seeing the words. If they are seeing the words or worse, being confused and tripped up by them, then you have failed." That was certainly true for me reading this book. It was only a string of words without imagery that envoked no feeling. Onto the characters. I too found them to be unrealistic, contradictory, and poorly drawn. There were only a few types of people in this book, those portrayed as stupid, selfish (wanting things only for their own gratification) and charitable beyond any rational reason and those portrayed as cold, emotionless and selfish (wanting things only to feed their vision). I would agree with the other reviewers who said the dialogue was preachy, contrived and unrealistic. Example: "Of what importance is an individual in the titanic collective achievement of our industrial age?" or "little slum children", "it's purely non-commercial", and "selfish greed for profit is a thing of the past. ", or this great big long, incongruous statement, "I'm not going to requisition a new typewriter. The new ones are made of tin. When the old ones go, that will be the end of typewriting. There was an accident in the subway this morning, their brakes wouldn't work. You ought to go home, Eddie, turn on the radio and listen to a good dance band. Forget it, boy. Trouble with you is you never had a hobby. Somebody stole the electric light bulbs from off the staircase, down where I live. I've got a pain in my chest. Couldn't get any cough drops this morning, the drugstore on our corner went bankrupt last week. The Texas-Western Railroad went bankrupt last month. They closed the Queensborough Bridge yesterday for temporary repairs. Oh well, what's the use? Who is John Galt?" Who says things like this? Nobody! People don't talk like that. They give speeches with that kind of language, maybe, but not talk to each other like that in everyday conversations. I found no new concepts in this book. The individual versus the whole, society versus industry, ect . . . Rand did not discover something new and reveal it in this book. Nor was her restated concepts portrayed in any realistic setting. The man who runs the train company is whining in response to urging to use a big, established, good quality supplier because the small company (low quality and long lead times that cost them months of time and money) should be given a chance. Or defending a failing venture in an undeveloped country because - shouldn't those countries have help and have modern facilities too? And he's telling his more efficient, hardworking and profit minded hardnosed co-owner sister that she doesn't understand or care about the human element . . . well, as far as business is concerned, of course she doesn't! And to portray any leader of a business as this man is silly. I work in a manufacturing field, and I can tell you, a vendor that provides high cost, low quality parts and is constantly blowing delivery dates is dropped. Same with business ventures, if something isn't making a profit, it goes. And what's this whole resistance to using the new type of metal? "but - but no ones used this new type of metal before . . ." Once again, businesses are always looking for the newest tech, the newest discoveries and inventions to make themselves bigger and better and give them an edge and make them money. This whole business set up in this book just seriously annoyed me. No business runs like that, it couldn't, and rendering one as such, even to make a point, just rang false for me. In the book, sentiment, affection, charity were portrayed as weak, negative emotions that none of the obviously strong, truly successful, hero characters had, even towards their families. The strong heros were condescending, arrogant and bitter. I did read the forward, which had some comments on Rand, as well as some explanations of her characters and the parts they played. Again, if I have to have things spelled out before hand and be TOLD (because it's apparently not clear enough in the book itself) what something ACTUALLY means (because my own ability to drawn my own conclusions must be faulty or my willful ignorance might make me ignore logic and reason) then I suspect there is something lacking in the book itself, either in the nuts and bolts of the writing or in the characters or plot. I found all that to be true in this instance. The actual structure of the writing was confusing and repetitive as well as contradictory, and both the characters and the plot were unrealistic, unrelatable, inhuman and also contradictory. Clarity, concise and realistic dialogue, sympathetic characters, believable plot/people/motivations/actions were all lacking. As a story, it is not something I want to read. As a philosophy, it was nothing new or groundbreaking, that I need to read, and certainly don't want to if its not well written. Quote from Rand: "I seem to be both a theoretical philosopher and a fiction writer. But it is the last that interests me most; the first is only a means to the last . . ." Well, this book is not evidence that supports this statement. It is the exact opposite, in my opinion. This fiction book was not a vehicle for her philosophy. Her philosophy was a vehicle for this book. That was evident to me in the preachy speeches of the characters and the unrealistic mold every scene was shoved into. She did not use her fiction to tell about a philosophy but rather used her philosophy to tell a story. Everything was drawn and built to fit that philosophy. Quote from Rand: ". . . creating a new, original abstraction and translating it through new, original means. This, as far as I know, is only ME - my kind of fiction writing . . . May God forgive me if this is mistaken as conceit. As near as I can now see it, it isn't . . ." Well, I saw nothing new or original in the philosophy and certainly nothing new in this book, and to think it is, to judge one's own work as such, sounds conceited to me. And, in reading Rand's other statements in the forward, she certainly left me with an impression she is an elitist, arrogant, condescending and bitter woman, just like the heroes she created. I will definitely not be paying the high Kindle price to read the rest of this book. This all makes me sad, in a way. There were moments and certain descriptions that were like breathtaking snatches of sunlight and left me thinking - wow, this woman could have been a great novelist. With a little editing, a little less soap box preaching, a grounding in realistic, believable settings and characters, she could have written a tremendous book. There is talent here, but its warped and lost in the extrusion through her narrow and bent mold.

I came across Atlas Shrugged here on Amazon while looking for something else entirely. I read some of the reviews. <hl> Many people loved this <hl> book, and some people absolutely hated it. There was a real conflict going on. The one star reviews sighted an overly lengthy tomb that was preachy and highly opinionated with poorly drawn and poorly developed characters, unrealistic dialogue and confusing descriptions. The 5 star reviews touted amazing characters, poetic descriptions and ground breaking philosophy. But, it was the comments to the 5 star and 1 star reviews that got me interested. I read a comment on a one star review that the commenter thought the one star review was unwarranted and the reviewer needed to read some in-depth analytical books addressing this book and its author's philosophies - then re-read and try the review again (and that the second time around couldn't possibly be a low rating). Well, any book that needs other books to explain it and make it understandable and worthwhile does not sound like a good book at all in my opinion. Other commenter on the 1 star reviews basically said that the reviewers (and anyone who would rate this book low) were a bunch of closed minded sheep that COULD not or WOULD not understand the monumental, brand new philosophy in this book. Well, when anyone says that the reason a book is not liked is because of stupidity, ignorance or willful disregard, it makes me wonder - about both the book and the commenter. On the other side, the comments on some of the 5 star reviews accused those reviewers of being brainwashed cult followers. Overall, I was interested enough to read the sample on my Kindle. I wanted to know what all the controversy was about. I was pretty underwhelmed, and I have to say, I agree more with the 1 star reviewers than the 5 star. It was not well written, it was unrealistic in many ways, not believable at all, and was way too long. I was not fired up in either way. I do not vehemently hate it, nor did I absolutely despise it. I was pretty unimpressed, both with the writing itself and the concepts therein.As I said, the book is not well written. Many of the reviewers did comment on this, and the response from those who loved the book were often that English was author's second language so cut her some slack. I do not agree that that is an acceptable reason nor is it even a good excuse. A good editor or even a proof reader, even a few willing friends, could have cleaned it up. There is no reason why a book should be published like this. A few examples follow. Verb tense. Often the verb tense was inappropriate, especially when switching between past memory to current time. At one point, a character was thinking about an oak tree from his child hood (in past tense) and then this sentence "He stood there for a while, making no sound, then he walked back to the house." Now, of course, after a moment of thought and a quick re-read, I figured out that he was still remembering a memory and not actually looking for a moment and walking back to the house NOW, but when there are multiple instances of verb tense mix ups throughout, it makes for a very confusing, jarring read. There are also many places were the wrong form of a verb or adjective is used, such as singular versus plural. An example: "It was as if normal existence were (should be was rather than were) a photograph." And "-not more than every fourth one of the stores was (should be were) out of business; its (should be their) windows dark." A proof reader or editor would have easily corrected this. Also, there were sudden point of view changes without indication or warning, one moment we are in one character's head, with their thoughts and feelings, and then we are suddenly in the head of another, then back again. Then, there is Rearden's name. He's referred to both as Hank and as Henry. Again, I figured it out, but there were a few pages where people were talking to "Henry" and I was thinking, did someone else walk in? I read back and forth, trying to find where it was explained that Hank was Henry, and couldn't find it. Earlier in the book, people would suddenly speak up that hadn't been initially described as being in the scene, so it wasn't unprecedented to have new characters show up without introduction.In addition, the sentence structure was rather cumbersome and confusing at times. Sentences are very long, repetitive and strung together with commas and semicolons. Example: "The notes flowed up, they spoke of rising and they were rising itself, they were the essence and form of upward motion, they seemed to embody every human act and thought that had ascent as its motive." Or "But from the sunset far at the end of the street, yellow glints caught his eyes, and the eyes looked straight at Eddie . . ." So, were the yellow glints at the end of the street and did the glints catch his attention? Because, if they did, how can he look at Eddie at the same time he's looking at the glints? Were they supposed to be caught IN his eyes? I think so. Or ". . . not an active fire, but a dying one which it is too late to stop." This sentence indicates that it's too late to stop the fire, which doesn't make sense because the fire is dying. But I think what it is actually trying to say is that it is the dying of the fire that is too late to stop. There were instances of this thoughout the book, and it made reading it difficult because I found myself re-reading and re-reading, before I got it. You can't just read through this book non-stop with images and experiences running through your head, because the words keep getting in the way.I don't know about all readers, but I would guess many of them would be thrown off balance and just plain confused by the writing of this book. I was. I had a writing teacher once who gave some of the best advice I've ever gotten, "You want readers to read your story not the words of your story. You want them to read without seeing the words. If they are seeing the words or worse, being confused and tripped up by them, then you have failed." That was certainly true for me reading this book. It was only a string of words without imagery that envoked no feeling.Onto the characters. I too found them to be unrealistic, contradictory, and poorly drawn. There were only a few types of people in this book, those portrayed as stupid, selfish (wanting things only for their own gratification) and charitable beyond any rational reason and those portrayed as cold, emotionless and selfish (wanting things only to feed their vision). I would agree with the other reviewers who said the dialogue was preachy, contrived and unrealistic. Example: "Of what importance is an individual in the titanic collective achievement of our industrial age?" or "little slum children", "it's purely non-commercial", and "selfish greed for profit is a thing of the past.", or this great big long, incongruous statement, "I'm not going to requisition a new typewriter. The new ones are made of tin. When the old ones go, that will be the end of typewriting. There was an accident in the subway this morning, their brakes wouldn't work. You ought to go home, Eddie, turn on the radio and listen to a good dance band. Forget it, boy. Trouble with you is you never had a hobby. Somebody stole the electric light bulbs from off the staircase, down where I live. I've got a pain in my chest. Couldn't get any cough drops this morning, the drugstore on our corner went bankrupt last week. The Texas-Western Railroad went bankrupt last month. They closed the Queensborough Bridge yesterday for temporary repairs. Oh well, what's the use? Who is John Galt?" Who says things like this? Nobody! People don't talk like that. They give speeches with that kind of language, maybe, but not talk to each other like that in everyday conversations.I found no new concepts in this book. The individual versus the whole, society versus industry, ect . . . Rand did not discover something new and reveal it in this book. Nor was her restated concepts portrayed in any realistic setting. The man who runs the train company is whining in response to urging to use a big, established, good quality supplier because the small company (low quality and long lead times that cost them months of time and money) should be given a chance. Or defending a failing venture in an undeveloped country because - shouldn't those countries have help and have modern facilities too? And he's telling his more efficient, hardworking and profit minded hardnosed co-owner sister that she doesn't understand or care about the human element . . . well, as far as business is concerned, of course she doesn't! And to portray any leader of a business as this man is silly. I work in a manufacturing field, and I can tell you, a vendor that provides high cost, low quality parts and is constantly blowing delivery dates is dropped. Same with business ventures, if something isn't making a profit, it goes. And what's this whole resistance to using the new type of metal? "but - but no ones used this new type of metal before . . ." Once again, businesses are always looking for the newest tech, the newest discoveries and inventions to make themselves bigger and better and give them an edge and make them money. This whole business set up in this book just seriously annoyed me. No business runs like that, it couldn't, and rendering one as such, even to make a point, just rang false for me. In the book, sentiment, affection, charity were portrayed as weak, negative emotions that none of the obviously strong, truly successful, hero characters had, even towards their families. The strong heros were condescending, arrogant and bitter.I did read the forward, which had some comments on Rand, as well as some explanations of her characters and the parts they played. Again, if I have to have things spelled out before hand and be TOLD (because it's apparently not clear enough in the book itself) what something ACTUALLY means (because my own ability to drawn my own conclusions must be faulty or my willful ignorance might make me ignore logic and reason) then I suspect there is something lacking in the book itself, either in the nuts and bolts of the writing or in the characters or plot. I found all that to be true in this instance. The actual structure of the writing was confusing and repetitive as well as contradictory, and both the characters and the plot were unrealistic, unrelatable, inhuman and also contradictory. Clarity, concise and realistic dialogue, sympathetic characters, believable plot/people/motivations/actions were all lacking. As a story, it is not something I want to read. As a philosophy, it was nothing new or groundbreaking, that I need to read, and certainly don't want to if its not well written.Quote from Rand: "I seem to be both a theoretical philosopher and a fiction writer. But it is the last that interests me most; the first is only a means to the last . . ." Well, this book is not evidence that supports this statement. It is the exact opposite, in my opinion. This fiction book was not a vehicle for her philosophy. Her philosophy was a vehicle for this book. That was evident to me in the preachy speeches of the characters and the unrealistic mold every scene was shoved into. She did not use her fiction to tell about a philosophy but rather used her philosophy to tell a story. Everything was drawn and built to fit that philosophy.Quote from Rand: ". . . creating a new, original abstraction and translating it through new, original means. This, as far as I know, is only ME - my kind of fiction writing . . . May God forgive me if this is mistaken as conceit. As near as I can now see it, it isn't . . ." Well, I saw nothing new or original in the philosophy and certainly nothing new in this book, and to think it is, to judge one's own work as such, sounds conceited to me. And, in reading Rand's other statements in the forward, she certainly left me with an impression she is an elitist, arrogant, condescending and bitter woman, just like the heroes she created. I will definitely not be paying the high Kindle price to read the rest of this book.This all makes me sad, in a way. There were moments and certain descriptions that were like breathtaking snatches of sunlight and left me thinking - wow, this woman could have been a great novelist. With a little editing, a little less soap box preaching, a grounding in realistic, believable settings and characters, she could have written a tremendous book. There is talent here, but its warped and lost in the extrusion through her narrow and bent mold.


Question: Why do I have a positive review?

I was worried that I would constantly be missing all the beloved characters that Rowling has created, but I couldn't be more wrong.  The writing is excellent, the mystery compelling and the characters complex.  I was almost sad to finish and wishing it was the first in a series.  How delighted I was to find that another Cormoran Strike  novel is on the way.

Answer: The writing is excellent

I was worried that I would constantly be missing all the beloved characters that Rowling has created, but I couldn't be more wrong. <hl> The writing is excellent , the mystery compelling and the characters complex. <hl> I was almost sad to finish and wishing it was the first in a series. How delighted I was to find that another Cormoran Strike novel is on the way.

I was worried that I would constantly be missing all the beloved characters that Rowling has created, but I couldn't be more wrong. <hl> The writing is excellent <hl>, the mystery compelling and the characters complex. I was almost sad to finish and wishing it was the first in a series. How delighted I was to find that another Cormoran Strike novel is on the way.

<hl> The writing is excellent <hl> , the mystery compelling and the characters complex.


Question: How is the write?

OK I LOVE ALL THINGS SOOKIE!!!!!!!!! Yes I know that some people were not happy about the ending of this epic series but I did. I love Charlaine Harris's writing. Her stories are witty, charming, and full of suspense and I love every minute of it.Sookie is one of my all time favorite characters. I love the fact that she expresses everything she feels and holds NOTHING back!! She is always into something and there is always someone after her.....You never know what you are going to get when you begin a Sookie Stackhouse novel but you know this....IT WILL BE GOOD!!! Every new character that pops out is just as fascinating as the one before.Sookie is my favorite character but there is a close running for second between her best friend/boss Sam and her ex-vampire boyfriend Bill. There is just something about Bill that I have always loved. He always fights for Sookie no matter what. Even after their relationship ended he always swore he would watch out for her and he does...Another character that I enjoy immensly is the bitch of all bitches, Pam. Pam is Eric's (Sookie's "current vampire love") child. Pam is just fascinating. She is mean and vindictive but yet you know she will always have your back.When thinking of how I would write my review I ended up with the decision to not give away any spoilers. The shocks and secrets are what make this book good. I will say that yes the ending is not what alot will expect especially with how this series has been going and being shown on tv (True Blood.) But die-hard Sookie fans (such as myself) will love the book no matter what. I am truly sad that this is the last book in the series. I will miss Charlaine's writing and her story-telling....

Answer: love Charlaine Harris's writing

I love Charlaine Harris's writing .

OK I LOVE ALL THINGS SOOKIE!!!!!!!!! Yes I know that some people were not happy about the ending of this epic series but I did. <hl> I love Charlaine Harris's writing . <hl> Her stories are witty, charming, and full of suspense and I love every minute of it. Sookie is one of my all time favorite characters. I love the fact that she expresses everything she feels and holds NOTHING back!! She is always into something and there is always someone after her..... You never know what you are going to get when you begin a Sookie Stackhouse novel but you know this....IT WILL BE GOOD!!! Every new character that pops out is just as fascinating as the one before. Sookie is my favorite character but there is a close running for second between her best friend/boss Sam and her ex-vampire boyfriend Bill. There is just something about Bill that I have always loved. He always fights for Sookie no matter what. Even after their relationship ended he always swore he would watch out for her and he does...Another character that I enjoy immensly is the bitch of all bitches, Pam. Pam is Eric's (Sookie's "current vampire love") child. Pam is just fascinating. She is mean and vindictive but yet you know she will always have your back. When thinking of how I would write my review I ended up with the decision to not give away any spoilers. The shocks and secrets are what make this book good. I will say that yes the ending is not what alot will expect especially with how this series has been going and being shown on tv (True Blood.) But die-hard Sookie fans (such as myself) will love the book no matter what. I am truly sad that this is the last book in the series. I will miss Charlaine's writing and her story-telling....

OK I LOVE ALL THINGS SOOKIE!!!!!!!!! Yes I know that some people were not happy about the ending of this epic series but I did. I <hl> love Charlaine Harris's writing <hl>. Her stories are witty, charming, and full of suspense and I love every minute of it.Sookie is one of my all time favorite characters. I love the fact that she expresses everything she feels and holds NOTHING back!! She is always into something and there is always someone after her.....You never know what you are going to get when you begin a Sookie Stackhouse novel but you know this....IT WILL BE GOOD!!! Every new character that pops out is just as fascinating as the one before.Sookie is my favorite character but there is a close running for second between her best friend/boss Sam and her ex-vampire boyfriend Bill. There is just something about Bill that I have always loved. He always fights for Sookie no matter what. Even after their relationship ended he always swore he would watch out for her and he does...Another character that I enjoy immensly is the bitch of all bitches, Pam. Pam is Eric's (Sookie's "current vampire love") child. Pam is just fascinating. She is mean and vindictive but yet you know she will always have your back.When thinking of how I would write my review I ended up with the decision to not give away any spoilers. The shocks and secrets are what make this book good. I will say that yes the ending is not what alot will expect especially with how this series has been going and being shown on tv (True Blood.) But die-hard Sookie fans (such as myself) will love the book no matter what. I am truly sad that this is the last book in the series. I will miss Charlaine's writing and her story-telling....

I <hl> love Charlaine Harris's writing <hl> .


Question: Does the story get better as the book progresses?

Wow what a book. This is one I could not put down no matter how tired I was.The dynamic of the main characters and their relationship is very interesting.

Answer: The dynamic of the main characters and their relationship is very interesting

Wow what a book. This is one I could not put down no matter how tired I was. <hl> The dynamic of the main characters and their relationship is very interesting . <hl>

Wow what a book. This is one I could not put down no matter how tired I was.<hl> The dynamic of the main characters and their relationship is very interesting <hl>.

<hl> The dynamic of the main characters and their relationship is very interesting <hl> .


Question: How is the quality of the book?

Article first published as Book Review:The Help by Kathryn Stockett on Blogcritics.Life in the 60's, in Jackson, Mississippi was difficult for most people. Being a black maid, raising children not your own, was made even more difficult by the times.In The Help by Kathryn Stockett, we follow the coming of age of a young white woman, one raised and well loved by her own family's black maid, Constantine. When Miss Skeeter goes away to school to learn a trade in writing, she maintains a long distance relationship via letters. When the letters suddenly stop, she is hurt by the silence, but knows she will get an explanation from Constantine when she gets home. Little does she know at that time, she will never see her loving maid again.Elizabeth Leefolt and Hilly Holbrook are Skeeter's best friends. Having grown up together, they maintain that relationship. They belong to the same groups and attend the same parties. When Elizabeth has a daughter, her maid Aibileen takes on the task of caring for her. For Aibileen it is a labor of love, Mae Mobley is a sweet child, and Aibileen dotes on her. But Skeeter begins to see a different world than the one she remembers.Fresh out of school, Skeeter decides to apply for a job as editor, for the publishers Harper and Roe. When she receives a letter back from Elaine Stein, the senior editor, she is in heaven. However the letter is to inform her she is not being hired. Miss Stein is willing to look at her writing though, but informs her that is must be both interesting and dear to her heart. Skeeter offer up her thoughts but is turned down.When she continues to interact within her circle, she begins to pay attention to the interaction of the maids and the families they work for. Remembering her own upbringing, she decides to get the maids to tell their stories; this is what she will submit. Little does she know just how dangerous and difficult of a task this is. This is a turbulent time, a time of race riots, murders and hate. How will she move forward, and who will tell their story?As Skeeter works on her plan she finds a job with the Jackson Journal. She will write the Miss Myrna column, a column that supplies answers to domestic questions. She decides to get help with the answers from an expert. Her friend Elizabeth allows her to ask, Abilieen, her own maid for answers. This bond than forges a trust, and an uneasy alliance that will shake up the very foundations of the Jackson, Mississippi lives and interactions, giving a voice to a group of people long oppressed.Stockett has written a story set in the turbulent era heralding the death of a beloved president, John F Kennedy, the murder of Medgar Evers, and the teachings of Martin Luther King Jr. Hate and distrust were high, and life for many of these maids was unimaginable. Stocketts characters are strong, sometimes bold, yet sometimes silent. She ads humor and fun, as well as danger and intrigue into her dialogue. Writing from the point of view of numerous characters, she has done an amazing job of pulling together a story that gets to the heart of the times.Using fact and fiction she weaves a strong telling of how life was lived in these households. Using her own background, she uses her knowledge to get into the heart of what living during this time may have really looked like.I would recommend this book for a book club or reading group. The style is interesting and while a bit difficult to begin, once you understand the technique the story evolves and takes you to that time and place in history. As is often quoted, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times", and Miss Stockett puts you right in the middle, making you think. The humor is real, but the pain and angst also weave their way into the fray. The characters are gutsy and bold, pulling you in, and earning your respect. A great book for your library.

Answer: great book

A great book for your library.

Article first published as Book Review:The Help by Kathryn Stockett on Blogcritics. Life in the 60's, in Jackson, Mississippi was difficult for most people. Being a black maid, raising children not your own, was made even more difficult by the times. In The Help by Kathryn Stockett, we follow the coming of age of a young white woman, one raised and well loved by her own family's black maid, Constantine. When Miss Skeeter goes away to school to learn a trade in writing, she maintains a long distance relationship via letters. When the letters suddenly stop, she is hurt by the silence, but knows she will get an explanation from Constantine when she gets home. Little does she know at that time, she will never see her loving maid again. Elizabeth Leefolt and Hilly Holbrook are Skeeter's best friends. Having grown up together, they maintain that relationship. They belong to the same groups and attend the same parties. When Elizabeth has a daughter, her maid Aibileen takes on the task of caring for her. For Aibileen it is a labor of love, Mae Mobley is a sweet child, and Aibileen dotes on her. But Skeeter begins to see a different world than the one she remembers. Fresh out of school, Skeeter decides to apply for a job as editor, for the publishers Harper and Roe. When she receives a letter back from Elaine Stein, the senior editor, she is in heaven. However the letter is to inform her she is not being hired. Miss Stein is willing to look at her writing though, but informs her that is must be both interesting and dear to her heart. Skeeter offer up her thoughts but is turned down. When she continues to interact within her circle, she begins to pay attention to the interaction of the maids and the families they work for. Remembering her own upbringing, she decides to get the maids to tell their stories; this is what she will submit. Little does she know just how dangerous and difficult of a task this is. This is a turbulent time, a time of race riots, murders and hate. How will she move forward, and who will tell their story?As Skeeter works on her plan she finds a job with the Jackson Journal. She will write the Miss Myrna column, a column that supplies answers to domestic questions. She decides to get help with the answers from an expert. Her friend Elizabeth allows her to ask, Abilieen, her own maid for answers. This bond than forges a trust, and an uneasy alliance that will shake up the very foundations of the Jackson, Mississippi lives and interactions, giving a voice to a group of people long oppressed. Stockett has written a story set in the turbulent era heralding the death of a beloved president, John F Kennedy, the murder of Medgar Evers, and the teachings of Martin Luther King Jr. Hate and distrust were high, and life for many of these maids was unimaginable. Stocketts characters are strong, sometimes bold, yet sometimes silent. She ads humor and fun, as well as danger and intrigue into her dialogue. Writing from the point of view of numerous characters, she has done an amazing job of pulling together a story that gets to the heart of the times. Using fact and fiction she weaves a strong telling of how life was lived in these households. Using her own background, she uses her knowledge to get into the heart of what living during this time may have really looked like. I would recommend this book for a book club or reading group. The style is interesting and while a bit difficult to begin, once you understand the technique the story evolves and takes you to that time and place in history. As is often quoted, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times", and Miss Stockett puts you right in the middle, making you think. The humor is real, but the pain and angst also weave their way into the fray. The characters are gutsy and bold, pulling you in, and earning your respect. <hl> A great book for your library. <hl>

Article first published as Book Review:The Help by Kathryn Stockett on Blogcritics.Life in the 60's, in Jackson, Mississippi was difficult for most people. Being a black maid, raising children not your own, was made even more difficult by the times.In The Help by Kathryn Stockett, we follow the coming of age of a young white woman, one raised and well loved by her own family's black maid, Constantine. When Miss Skeeter goes away to school to learn a trade in writing, she maintains a long distance relationship via letters. When the letters suddenly stop, she is hurt by the silence, but knows she will get an explanation from Constantine when she gets home. Little does she know at that time, she will never see her loving maid again.Elizabeth Leefolt and Hilly Holbrook are Skeeter's best friends. Having grown up together, they maintain that relationship. They belong to the same groups and attend the same parties. When Elizabeth has a daughter, her maid Aibileen takes on the task of caring for her. For Aibileen it is a labor of love, Mae Mobley is a sweet child, and Aibileen dotes on her. But Skeeter begins to see a different world than the one she remembers.Fresh out of school, Skeeter decides to apply for a job as editor, for the publishers Harper and Roe. When she receives a letter back from Elaine Stein, the senior editor, she is in heaven. However the letter is to inform her she is not being hired. Miss Stein is willing to look at her writing though, but informs her that is must be both interesting and dear to her heart. Skeeter offer up her thoughts but is turned down.When she continues to interact within her circle, she begins to pay attention to the interaction of the maids and the families they work for. Remembering her own upbringing, she decides to get the maids to tell their stories; this is what she will submit. Little does she know just how dangerous and difficult of a task this is. This is a turbulent time, a time of race riots, murders and hate. How will she move forward, and who will tell their story?As Skeeter works on her plan she finds a job with the Jackson Journal. She will write the Miss Myrna column, a column that supplies answers to domestic questions. She decides to get help with the answers from an expert. Her friend Elizabeth allows her to ask, Abilieen, her own maid for answers. This bond than forges a trust, and an uneasy alliance that will shake up the very foundations of the Jackson, Mississippi lives and interactions, giving a voice to a group of people long oppressed.Stockett has written a story set in the turbulent era heralding the death of a beloved president, John F Kennedy, the murder of Medgar Evers, and the teachings of Martin Luther King Jr. Hate and distrust were high, and life for many of these maids was unimaginable. Stocketts characters are strong, sometimes bold, yet sometimes silent. She ads humor and fun, as well as danger and intrigue into her dialogue. Writing from the point of view of numerous characters, she has done an amazing job of pulling together a story that gets to the heart of the times.Using fact and fiction she weaves a strong telling of how life was lived in these households. Using her own background, she uses her knowledge to get into the heart of what living during this time may have really looked like.I would recommend this book for a book club or reading group. The style is interesting and while a bit difficult to begin, once you understand the technique the story evolves and takes you to that time and place in history. As is often quoted, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times", and Miss Stockett puts you right in the middle, making you think. The humor is real, but the pain and angst also weave their way into the fray. The characters are gutsy and bold, pulling you in, and earning your respect. A <hl> great book <hl> for your library.


Question: How strength was it?

After just one book, I'm already a fan of Amy Tintera and her writing! I found her debut, Reboot, to be an absolutely stunning dystopian offering with a strong romantic plot line and well-placed humor to balance the novel's darkness and violence.The main character, Wren, is known the most deadly and dangerous of the Reboots by her peers and the HARC, the corporation which effectively rules the Republic of Texas. Reboots, which at first might sound suspiciously like zombies, are actually quite different. In the novel, it's briefly theorized that Reboots may be more advanced humans whose bodies had the capabilities to manipulate the virus that swept through the population. Their deaths were actually more akin to a resting period - or incubation period, perhaps - for the virus and that, instead of killing them, it made them stronger, both physically and mentally (if you count less emotion as a strength). Reboots, however, are no longer considered humans but Other (by both the HARC and the remaining human population) and have become slaves tasked with hunting down and capturing or killing human criminals.Perhaps because they are labelled Other, the Reboots themselves, especially those labelled with higher numbers indicating that they were "dead" longer than lower numbered Reboots, no longer consider themselves human. They consider themselves a race unto themselves. For me, this stood out as an important detail: I knew Reboot featured a romance, but I couldn't imagine how the inhuman Wren would suddenly be able to fall in love, especially a love that was strong enough to change how she interacted with the world.Wren and Callum's romance was believable for me because Callum, a 22 (and, therefore, a Reboot who is, except for a few physical changes, still pretty much human) sees Wren as more than Other - allowing her to see herself as more than the narrow label of Reboot as determined by the HARC. Some may have found the romance odd in a world filled with so much violence and so little emotion, but, for me, the love between Callum and Wren, the understanding and connection between them, is the only force that could effectively combat the kind of brainwashing the Reboots endured at the hands of HRAC. It reminded me strongly of the aftereffects of colonization, where, after time, the colonized may view themselves negatively when the viewpoint of the conquerors is repeatedly forced upon them.The relationship between Callum and Wren was one of my favorite aspects of the novel. I loved Callum, he was a typical human guy, which I think was necessary distinction. I could see how some might think the relationship (and the laughter between the characters) a bit odd in the midst of such darkness, but I think Wren and Callum acting less serious and enjoying life was a sign of hope... that there was still something left to fight for when everything else had become so unrecognizable. Others might wonder how Wren could be both a killing machine for the HRAC and, simultaneously a giggling teenager, but I think it just shows how desensitized Wren had become at the hands of the HRAC and her parents, before she became a Reboot, and that how she lives her life & values are a direct result of those influences, not who she truly is. Plus, in a world where you really can't be sure you'll live to see the next day, making out with the person you're head over heels for, potentially for the first and last time, seems like a fantastic idea.I felt the pacing of this novel was absolutely perfect. I never once felt bored or rushed while reading. The novel ends on a cliffhanger, but not before wrapping up the bulk of the action in book one. Instead of leaving tons of unanswered questions throughout the entire book and into the next installment, Tintera presents new questions and a new setting for book two as well as leaving some of the overarching, deeper questions. I cannot wait for book two, where I hope we'll find out more about what exactly Reboots are and how things will change after the game-changing events in Reboot.Don't waste any time, grab a copy of Tintera's debut as soon as possible!

Answer: was strong enough to change how she interacted with the world

After just one book, I'm already a fan of Amy Tintera and her writing! I found her debut, Reboot, to be an absolutely stunning dystopian offering with a strong romantic plot line and well-placed humor to balance the novel's darkness and violence. The main character, Wren, is known the most deadly and dangerous of the Reboots by her peers and the HARC, the corporation which effectively rules the Republic of Texas. Reboots, which at first might sound suspiciously like zombies, are actually quite different. In the novel, it's briefly theorized that Reboots may be more advanced humans whose bodies had the capabilities to manipulate the virus that swept through the population. Their deaths were actually more akin to a resting period - or incubation period, perhaps - for the virus and that, instead of killing them, it made them stronger, both physically and mentally (if you count less emotion as a strength). Reboots, however, are no longer considered humans but Other (by both the HARC and the remaining human population) and have become slaves tasked with hunting down and capturing or killing human criminals. Perhaps because they are labelled Other, the Reboots themselves, especially those labelled with higher numbers indicating that they were "dead" longer than lower numbered Reboots, no longer consider themselves human. They consider themselves a race unto themselves. <hl> For me, this stood out as an important detail: I knew Reboot featured a romance, but I couldn't imagine how the inhuman Wren would suddenly be able to fall in love, especially a love that was strong enough to change how she interacted with the world .Wren <hl> and Callum's romance was believable for me because Callum, a 22 (and, therefore, a Reboot who is, except for a few physical changes, still pretty much human) sees Wren as more than Other - allowing her to see herself as more than the narrow label of Reboot as determined by the HARC. Some may have found the romance odd in a world filled with so much violence and so little emotion, but, for me, the love between Callum and Wren, the understanding and connection between them, is the only force that could effectively combat the kind of brainwashing the Reboots endured at the hands of HRAC. It reminded me strongly of the aftereffects of colonization, where, after time, the colonized may view themselves negatively when the viewpoint of the conquerors is repeatedly forced upon them. The relationship between Callum and Wren was one of my favorite aspects of the novel. I loved Callum, he was a typical human guy, which I think was necessary distinction. I could see how some might think the relationship (and the laughter between the characters) a bit odd in the midst of such darkness, but I think Wren and Callum acting less serious and enjoying life was a sign of hope... that there was still something left to fight for when everything else had become so unrecognizable. Others might wonder how Wren could be both a killing machine for the HRAC and, simultaneously a giggling teenager, but I think it just shows how desensitized Wren had become at the hands of the HRAC and her parents, before she became a Reboot, and that how she lives her life & values are a direct result of those influences, not who she truly is. Plus, in a world where you really can't be sure you'll live to see the next day, making out with the person you're head over heels for, potentially for the first and last time, seems like a fantastic idea. I felt the pacing of this novel was absolutely perfect. I never once felt bored or rushed while reading. The novel ends on a cliffhanger, but not before wrapping up the bulk of the action in book one. Instead of leaving tons of unanswered questions throughout the entire book and into the next installment, Tintera presents new questions and a new setting for book two as well as leaving some of the overarching, deeper questions. I cannot wait for book two, where I hope we'll find out more about what exactly Reboots are and how things will change after the game-changing events in Reboot. Don't waste any time, grab a copy of Tintera's debut as soon as possible!

After just one book, I'm already a fan of Amy Tintera and her writing! I found her debut, Reboot, to be an absolutely stunning dystopian offering with a strong romantic plot line and well-placed humor to balance the novel's darkness and violence.The main character, Wren, is known the most deadly and dangerous of the Reboots by her peers and the HARC, the corporation which effectively rules the Republic of Texas. Reboots, which at first might sound suspiciously like zombies, are actually quite different. In the novel, it's briefly theorized that Reboots may be more advanced humans whose bodies had the capabilities to manipulate the virus that swept through the population. Their deaths were actually more akin to a resting period - or incubation period, perhaps - for the virus and that, instead of killing them, it made them stronger, both physically and mentally (if you count less emotion as a strength). Reboots, however, are no longer considered humans but Other (by both the HARC and the remaining human population) and have become slaves tasked with hunting down and capturing or killing human criminals.Perhaps because they are labelled Other, the Reboots themselves, especially those labelled with higher numbers indicating that they were "dead" longer than lower numbered Reboots, no longer consider themselves human. They consider themselves a race unto themselves. For me, this stood out as an important detail: I knew Reboot featured a romance, but I couldn't imagine how the inhuman Wren would suddenly be able to fall in love, especially a love that <hl> was strong enough to change how she interacted with the world <hl>.Wren and Callum's romance was believable for me because Callum, a 22 (and, therefore, a Reboot who is, except for a few physical changes, still pretty much human) sees Wren as more than Other - allowing her to see herself as more than the narrow label of Reboot as determined by the HARC. Some may have found the romance odd in a world filled with so much violence and so little emotion, but, for me, the love between Callum and Wren, the understanding and connection between them, is the only force that could effectively combat the kind of brainwashing the Reboots endured at the hands of HRAC. It reminded me strongly of the aftereffects of colonization, where, after time, the colonized may view themselves negatively when the viewpoint of the conquerors is repeatedly forced upon them.The relationship between Callum and Wren was one of my favorite aspects of the novel. I loved Callum, he was a typical human guy, which I think was necessary distinction. I could see how some might think the relationship (and the laughter between the characters) a bit odd in the midst of such darkness, but I think Wren and Callum acting less serious and enjoying life was a sign of hope... that there was still something left to fight for when everything else had become so unrecognizable. Others might wonder how Wren could be both a killing machine for the HRAC and, simultaneously a giggling teenager, but I think it just shows how desensitized Wren had become at the hands of the HRAC and her parents, before she became a Reboot, and that how she lives her life & values are a direct result of those influences, not who she truly is. Plus, in a world where you really can't be sure you'll live to see the next day, making out with the person you're head over heels for, potentially for the first and last time, seems like a fantastic idea.I felt the pacing of this novel was absolutely perfect. I never once felt bored or rushed while reading. The novel ends on a cliffhanger, but not before wrapping up the bulk of the action in book one. Instead of leaving tons of unanswered questions throughout the entire book and into the next installment, Tintera presents new questions and a new setting for book two as well as leaving some of the overarching, deeper questions. I cannot wait for book two, where I hope we'll find out more about what exactly Reboots are and how things will change after the game-changing events in Reboot.Don't waste any time, grab a copy of Tintera's debut as soon as possible!

For me, this stood out as an important detail: I knew Reboot featured a romance, but I couldn't imagine how the inhuman Wren would suddenly be able to fall in love, especially a love that <hl> was strong enough to change how she interacted with the world <hl> .Wren


Question: Who do you love?

Let me start off by saying I don't normally write a lot of reviews, I just felt compelled to do so with this book. I mean, wow! One of the best books I've ever read. I went through so many emotions while reading this book. I laughed, smiled, gasped, got nervous, and was on the verge of tears, It was a roller coaster!I loved Camryn and Andrew. I loved how he brought out the best in her, made her feel alive, showed her what it was like to live to the fullest, no regrets, no worries, not to be scared to say what you want when you want to. He might have even taught me a few things ;) Andrew is pretty much perfect, sexy, sweet, caring, protective, funny...etc. I loved Cam too, I loved when she started opening up and growing into herself. She was relatable and I loved that.These two had some hard times and found each other at the perfect time, their friendship was amazing. I didn't really find the beginning slow, I felt like I was sucked in, living in the moment with them. We had to understand what it was that made Cam feel like getting away. I felt like I knew Andrew had a secret but wasn't sure what it was and when we'd find out. Then I was hoping I was wrong about the secret.This book teaches you to live, be you, don't worry about what people think, do what makes you happy, live your life the way you want to live it. Never have any regrets. Don't be afraid to love and to grow.This book also just stunned me speechless! But I also had my outbursts, gasps, my oh no's, my oh my gosh's, my aww's, you get the point. My poor heart was heavy and racing and it took me a while to calm it down. These characters and this story will definitely stay with you. I can't say how much I love it. Read the whole thing within a day.Just gotta say Bravo to you Ms Redmerski! What an amazing job on this book, the writing, the story, the characters, everything!

Answer: I loved that.These two had some hard times and found each other at the perfect time

Let me start off by saying I don't normally write a lot of reviews, I just felt compelled to do so with this book. I mean, wow! One of the best books I've ever read. I went through so many emotions while reading this book. I laughed, smiled, gasped, got nervous, and was on the verge of tears, It was a roller coaster!I loved Camryn and Andrew. I loved how he brought out the best in her, made her feel alive, showed her what it was like to live to the fullest, no regrets, no worries, not to be scared to say what you want when you want to. He might have even taught me a few things ;) Andrew is pretty much perfect, sexy, sweet, caring, protective, funny...etc. I loved Cam too, I loved when she started opening up and growing into herself. <hl> She was relatable and I loved that.These two had some hard times and found each other at the perfect time , their friendship was amazing. <hl> I didn't really find the beginning slow, I felt like I was sucked in, living in the moment with them. We had to understand what it was that made Cam feel like getting away. I felt like I knew Andrew had a secret but wasn't sure what it was and when we'd find out. Then I was hoping I was wrong about the secret. This book teaches you to live, be you, don't worry about what people think, do what makes you happy, live your life the way you want to live it. Never have any regrets. Don't be afraid to love and to grow. This book also just stunned me speechless! But I also had my outbursts, gasps, my oh no's, my oh my gosh's, my aww's, you get the point. My poor heart was heavy and racing and it took me a while to calm it down. These characters and this story will definitely stay with you. I can't say how much I love it. Read the whole thing within a day. Just gotta say Bravo to you Ms Redmerski! What an amazing job on this book, the writing, the story, the characters, everything!

Let me start off by saying I don't normally write a lot of reviews, I just felt compelled to do so with this book. I mean, wow! One of the best books I've ever read. I went through so many emotions while reading this book. I laughed, smiled, gasped, got nervous, and was on the verge of tears, It was a roller coaster!I loved Camryn and Andrew. I loved how he brought out the best in her, made her feel alive, showed her what it was like to live to the fullest, no regrets, no worries, not to be scared to say what you want when you want to. He might have even taught me a few things ;) Andrew is pretty much perfect, sexy, sweet, caring, protective, funny...etc. I loved Cam too, I loved when she started opening up and growing into herself. She was relatable and <hl> I loved that.These two had some hard times and found each other at the perfect time <hl>, their friendship was amazing. I didn't really find the beginning slow, I felt like I was sucked in, living in the moment with them. We had to understand what it was that made Cam feel like getting away. I felt like I knew Andrew had a secret but wasn't sure what it was and when we'd find out. Then I was hoping I was wrong about the secret.This book teaches you to live, be you, don't worry about what people think, do what makes you happy, live your life the way you want to live it. Never have any regrets. Don't be afraid to love and to grow.This book also just stunned me speechless! But I also had my outbursts, gasps, my oh no's, my oh my gosh's, my aww's, you get the point. My poor heart was heavy and racing and it took me a while to calm it down. These characters and this story will definitely stay with you. I can't say how much I love it. Read the whole thing within a day.Just gotta say Bravo to you Ms Redmerski! What an amazing job on this book, the writing, the story, the characters, everything!

She was relatable and <hl> I loved that.These two had some hard times and found each other at the perfect time <hl> , their friendship was amazing.


Question: What is your opinion of the book?

Answer: This fourth book in the Harry Potter series blows the first three books away!  Harry finally comes face to face with his enemy and is forced to use everything he has learned to survive.  This book is slightly "darker" and more frightening than the other three, but even more engaging.  Though this book is over 700 pages, I found myself wishing it were even longer.  Incredible!

<hl> This fourth book in the Harry Potter series blows the first three books away! Harry finally comes face to face with his enemy and is forced to use everything he has learned to survive. This book is slightly "darker" and more frightening than the other three, but even more engaging. Though this book is over 700 pages, I found myself wishing it were even longer. Incredible! <hl>


Question: Who is author?

I wanted to try this series out after hearing it and the author likened to J.K. Rowling-- in that with her 4 books, Stephenie Meyer had cultivated a media storm of sales very quickly, comparable (but not nearly on the same level) to the Harry Potter series.  That got my attention, so I went out and bought the first book in the series, Twilight.The book starts and already we know a few things:  The main character, Bella Swan, is seemingly apathetic about everything in her life. She is leaving Phoenix, where she was living with her mother, to go stay in rainy little Forks, Washington where her father Charlie works and resides.  Bella refers to her parents, Charlie and Renee, by their first names rather than Mom and Dad. This isn't particularly significant, but just annoys me for some reason.  It's also a glimpse into the family dynamics of the characters. You get the impression off the bat that they are this modern, laid back family...but it doesn't take long for the author to reverse that and put Bella back into her place as far as women's "roles" and "duties".  She is 16, 17, but doing the cooking and grocery shopping for her police chief father and herself. Ok, whatever.  She breezes indifferently through school, brushing off kids her own age because she has to "cook dinner for Charlie", making it sound like she's an old married maid rather than a highschool teenager.Fast forward- things start to change for Bella one day when she sees a pale and mysterious boy that she can only describe as "gorgeous and perfect." He is Edward, of the elusive Cullen clan of Forks.  Her first day seeing him, she thinks he hates and despises her because he clenches his fists and leans away at the sight of her. Later, accident prone Bella gets in a near death accident but Edward swiftly and mysteriously swoops in and saves her.  Turns out he doesn't hate her, its just that he's a vampire and no one has ever smelled that good to him before.  And then its all history from there. They know very little about eachother, just that *he* is 'gorgeous' and immaculately put together, and *she* has an irresistable scent and is clumsy so he's inclined to protect her.  The book is melodramatic in the way that only naive teenagers can be, as the two profess their undying and eternal love for eachother.Overall there is just little character development, a general lack of imagination, and it's just unrealistic.  Yes we are all well-aware its a fan-fic, but in terms of Bella and Edward's relationship-- they are two strangers who are madly (key word mad) in love with eachother. What kind of love is that?  She's the first human who's mind he can't read, and she smells "mouthwatering", so automatically she's the love of his immortal life?  And he is pale and marble-like and has icy skin and is gorgeous. Bella shuns all her friends and admiring boys from her school because she's so enamored with Icy Edward. Because he is 'gorgeous'. That's about all you get as far as the character depth goes.  I think it kind of speaks volumes when a book of this subject matter is actually boring.  Meyer's writing is flat and boring and has all the creativity of a fire ant.I can see how these books became popular- it kind of reminds me of how R.L. Stine's "Goosebumps" series was really popular when I was younger. These are similar in that they have an alluring and interesting subject matter, but ultimately (if you know better) you lose interest because Meyer's just kind of misses the mark.  It is unlike the Harry Potter series, in that J.K. Rowling does an amazing job at completely capturing your attention and taking you to this whole other imaginary realm of wizards and witchcraft, etc.  Her details are exquisite, very clever, and Harry Potter really can be enjoyed by adults as well as younger readers.  Whereas the twilight series really stands out as young-adult and not much else.  The premise of this whole series, while not original by any stretch of the imagination, wasn't a bad idea... it just would have been better by leaps and bounds had the author fleshed out the details a little better, and gave us more substance to work with. I also kept waiting for the "mystery and suspense" as described on the back cover, but that never came either.  This author's idea of suspense and intrigue really just made me yawn. I read the book as if someone had already told me everything that was going to happen- that's how predictable the plot turns were. I like a good love story as much as anybody else. And a love story mingled with the occult? I'm all for it. But this story is just full of so many holes and breadth in general that I found it hard to stay interested. Twilight is shallow and dull and for the life of me I can't comprehend why people are ranting and raving about it.  It just seems like one of those 'latest fads' type thing. Right now this is all the rage, but when the novelty wears off...Twilight is very forgettable.Christina McColl,  2008-29-09

Answer: Christina McColl

Christina McColl ,  2008-29-09

I wanted to try this series out after hearing it and the author likened to J.K. Rowling-- in that with her 4 books, Stephenie Meyer had cultivated a media storm of sales very quickly, comparable (but not nearly on the same level) to the Harry Potter series. That got my attention, so I went out and bought the first book in the series, Twilight. The book starts and already we know a few things: The main character, Bella Swan, is seemingly apathetic about everything in her life. She is leaving Phoenix, where she was living with her mother, to go stay in rainy little Forks, Washington where her father Charlie works and resides. Bella refers to her parents, Charlie and Renee, by their first names rather than Mom and Dad. This isn't particularly significant, but just annoys me for some reason. It's also a glimpse into the family dynamics of the characters. You get the impression off the bat that they are this modern, laid back family...but it doesn't take long for the author to reverse that and put Bella back into her place as far as women's "roles" and "duties". She is 16, 17, but doing the cooking and grocery shopping for her police chief father and herself. Ok, whatever. She breezes indifferently through school, brushing off kids her own age because she has to "cook dinner for Charlie", making it sound like she's an old married maid rather than a highschool teenager. Fast forward- things start to change for Bella one day when she sees a pale and mysterious boy that she can only describe as "gorgeous and perfect." He is Edward, of the elusive Cullen clan of Forks. Her first day seeing him, she thinks he hates and despises her because he clenches his fists and leans away at the sight of her. Later, accident prone Bella gets in a near death accident but Edward swiftly and mysteriously swoops in and saves her. Turns out he doesn't hate her, its just that he's a vampire and no one has ever smelled that good to him before. And then its all history from there. They know very little about eachother, just that *he* is 'gorgeous' and immaculately put together, and *she* has an irresistable scent and is clumsy so he's inclined to protect her. The book is melodramatic in the way that only naive teenagers can be, as the two profess their undying and eternal love for eachother. Overall there is just little character development, a general lack of imagination, and it's just unrealistic. Yes we are all well-aware its a fan-fic, but in terms of Bella and Edward's relationship-- they are two strangers who are madly (key word mad) in love with eachother. What kind of love is that? She's the first human who's mind he can't read, and she smells "mouthwatering", so automatically she's the love of his immortal life? And he is pale and marble-like and has icy skin and is gorgeous. Bella shuns all her friends and admiring boys from her school because she's so enamored with Icy Edward. Because he is 'gorgeous'. That's about all you get as far as the character depth goes. I think it kind of speaks volumes when a book of this subject matter is actually boring. Meyer's writing is flat and boring and has all the creativity of a fire ant. I can see how these books became popular- it kind of reminds me of how R.L. Stine's "Goosebumps" series was really popular when I was younger. These are similar in that they have an alluring and interesting subject matter, but ultimately (if you know better) you lose interest because Meyer's just kind of misses the mark. It is unlike the Harry Potter series, in that J.K. Rowling does an amazing job at completely capturing your attention and taking you to this whole other imaginary realm of wizards and witchcraft, etc. Her details are exquisite, very clever, and Harry Potter really can be enjoyed by adults as well as younger readers. Whereas the twilight series really stands out as young-adult and not much else. The premise of this whole series, while not original by any stretch of the imagination, wasn't a bad idea... it just would have been better by leaps and bounds had the author fleshed out the details a little better, and gave us more substance to work with. I also kept waiting for the "mystery and suspense" as described on the back cover, but that never came either. This author's idea of suspense and intrigue really just made me yawn. I read the book as if someone had already told me everything that was going to happen- that's how predictable the plot turns were. I like a good love story as much as anybody else. And a love story mingled with the occult? I'm all for it. But this story is just full of so many holes and breadth in general that I found it hard to stay interested. Twilight is shallow and dull and for the life of me I can't comprehend why people are ranting and raving about it. It just seems like one of those 'latest fads' type thing. Right now this is all the rage, but when the novelty wears off... Twilight is very forgettable. <hl> Christina McColl , 2008-29-09 <hl>

I wanted to try this series out after hearing it and the author likened to J.K. Rowling-- in that with her 4 books, Stephenie Meyer had cultivated a media storm of sales very quickly, comparable (but not nearly on the same level) to the Harry Potter series. That got my attention, so I went out and bought the first book in the series, Twilight.The book starts and already we know a few things: The main character, Bella Swan, is seemingly apathetic about everything in her life. She is leaving Phoenix, where she was living with her mother, to go stay in rainy little Forks, Washington where her father Charlie works and resides. Bella refers to her parents, Charlie and Renee, by their first names rather than Mom and Dad. This isn't particularly significant, but just annoys me for some reason. It's also a glimpse into the family dynamics of the characters. You get the impression off the bat that they are this modern, laid back family...but it doesn't take long for the author to reverse that and put Bella back into her place as far as women's "roles" and "duties". She is 16, 17, but doing the cooking and grocery shopping for her police chief father and herself. Ok, whatever. She breezes indifferently through school, brushing off kids her own age because she has to "cook dinner for Charlie", making it sound like she's an old married maid rather than a highschool teenager.Fast forward- things start to change for Bella one day when she sees a pale and mysterious boy that she can only describe as "gorgeous and perfect." He is Edward, of the elusive Cullen clan of Forks. Her first day seeing him, she thinks he hates and despises her because he clenches his fists and leans away at the sight of her. Later, accident prone Bella gets in a near death accident but Edward swiftly and mysteriously swoops in and saves her. Turns out he doesn't hate her, its just that he's a vampire and no one has ever smelled that good to him before. And then its all history from there. They know very little about eachother, just that *he* is 'gorgeous' and immaculately put together, and *she* has an irresistable scent and is clumsy so he's inclined to protect her. The book is melodramatic in the way that only naive teenagers can be, as the two profess their undying and eternal love for eachother.Overall there is just little character development, a general lack of imagination, and it's just unrealistic. Yes we are all well-aware its a fan-fic, but in terms of Bella and Edward's relationship-- they are two strangers who are madly (key word mad) in love with eachother. What kind of love is that? She's the first human who's mind he can't read, and she smells "mouthwatering", so automatically she's the love of his immortal life? And he is pale and marble-like and has icy skin and is gorgeous. Bella shuns all her friends and admiring boys from her school because she's so enamored with Icy Edward. Because he is 'gorgeous'. That's about all you get as far as the character depth goes. I think it kind of speaks volumes when a book of this subject matter is actually boring. Meyer's writing is flat and boring and has all the creativity of a fire ant.I can see how these books became popular- it kind of reminds me of how R.L. Stine's "Goosebumps" series was really popular when I was younger. These are similar in that they have an alluring and interesting subject matter, but ultimately (if you know better) you lose interest because Meyer's just kind of misses the mark. It is unlike the Harry Potter series, in that J.K. Rowling does an amazing job at completely capturing your attention and taking you to this whole other imaginary realm of wizards and witchcraft, etc. Her details are exquisite, very clever, and Harry Potter really can be enjoyed by adults as well as younger readers. Whereas the twilight series really stands out as young-adult and not much else. The premise of this whole series, while not original by any stretch of the imagination, wasn't a bad idea... it just would have been better by leaps and bounds had the author fleshed out the details a little better, and gave us more substance to work with. I also kept waiting for the "mystery and suspense" as described on the back cover, but that never came either. This author's idea of suspense and intrigue really just made me yawn. I read the book as if someone had already told me everything that was going to happen- that's how predictable the plot turns were. I like a good love story as much as anybody else. And a love story mingled with the occult? I'm all for it. But this story is just full of so many holes and breadth in general that I found it hard to stay interested. Twilight is shallow and dull and for the life of me I can't comprehend why people are ranting and raving about it. It just seems like one of those 'latest fads' type thing. Right now this is all the rage, but when the novelty wears off...Twilight is very forgettable.<hl> Christina McColl <hl>, 2008-29-09