CMfromCA

Felt like a different author and not in a good way

Revisado: 06-17-23

Really enjoyed the 1st one, it had a great balance of action and historical interest to keep it going.

This one was NOT that at all. This time the author seemed to be striving for some sort of soft porn novel, misogynistic and completely unnecessarily focusing on the women's bodies. The first time I heard "fat scientist chicks" was enough. the 50th was like...come on.

Then passing off years of sexual abuse of the female soldiers, one male soldier being a pedophile, and the complete lack of cohesive storyline was disappointing.

Where the 1st was a fun listen with interesting moral and ethical dilemmas, this was a hot mess of very poorly written narrative interwoven with the sex scenes stolen directly out of some 13 year old boys fantasy.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Maybe I should have spaced out the books

Revisado: 02-15-18

So this is the 3rd in a series by Jason Matthews. I came into the books after seeing a preview for Red Sparrow at the movie theater. I listened to the first book in mid Jan, the second book of the trilogy at the end of January and started on this book the day it was released.

I understand to some extent why the author feels the need to provide a 'back story' as an introduction, however by the 3rd book of the series I found it a bit much to have to listen to an abbreviated history lesson as to how/why Dominika Egorova is where she is at. Also, by now I have grown weary of the whole 'Sparrow School Sexspionage' angle. It worked for the 1st book, but by now I'd like to think Dominika is more than a 1 trick turning pony. At various points the book is less a spy novel and more a Harlequin Romance novel. As I stated, at least for Red Sparrow that was a major driver of the plot. By book 3 (and like 7 years of time give or take) it should have a much smaller role.

I'm also starting to notice a serious lack of imagination of characters and character development, especially with the black winged Russian types. It's like the author kills off one, only to bring out another carbon copy.

Anyway, it was a good listen. But of the 3, it is the least successful as it retreads major plots of the 1st two.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 9 personas

Martian is MUCH better

Revisado: 11-15-17

I had high hopes for the book. Granted, I'm not finished with it, but I'm in about 4 hours. More than enough to have come to some conclusions.

1. This is NOT the Martian. I didn't want the same book, but I sure did want some of the suspense and well written sections. This is not even close.
2. I can certainly suspend my disbelief enough to read science fiction. However, I can't suspend my disbelief of how some of the characters behave. She's supposed to be some sort of 'rough around the edges' down on her luck player. But the situations she's in just seem so implausible even in a fiction book.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 3 personas

Had such potential, but never gets there

Revisado: 10-21-16

What could have made this a 4 or 5-star listening experience for you?

I was expecting hilarity. What I got was snippets of stories that typically start with some random persons experience. "Sally was surprised when Bill Murray walked into her party, stayed and helped with the dishes afterward". It's like 500 of those little gems. No background from Bill, No underlying or follow up either. A 10 sec anecdote and bam, onto the next one. Once in a while you get a longer story, maybe 3-5 minutes of narration. Also, the first hour is an extremely dry and uneventful 'buildup' for very little if any payoff.

What do you think your next listen will be?

Nothing by this author.

How could the performance have been better?

More interesting stories. Not sure how one makes Bill Murray dull, but this author has perfected it.

What character would you cut from The Tao of Bill Murray?

The author?

Any additional comments?

Very disappointed in the format and reading of the story. I literally only laughed out loud 1 time in the ~6 hour reading. It's Bill freakin' Murray. Should be laughing almost the whole time.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 8 personas

What a dud. 1 hour in and I'd like a refund.

Revisado: 06-29-16

What could have made this a 4 or 5-star listening experience for you?

The story is less than engaging. For anyone over 75, it'll have plenty of names that you'd remember from Hollywood and the movies, actors and actress' of that time period. The story sounded engaging, particularly from the piece on NPR that drove me to buy the book. However, it takes FOREVER to get moving. The narration is somewhat shy of a carnival barker, but even less entertaining.

What do you think your next listen will be?

Nothing from this author, or the narrator. Ever.

How could the performance have been better?

A more engaging story, faster pace, and less 'name dropping' of people that anyone under 70 would most likely never get. It had such promise to, I mean really who wouldn't enjoy hearing a story about swindling Hilter.

You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

No.

Any additional comments?

If you are thinking you're going to get a jaw dropping narrative on swindling Hilter, forget about it. You get a long winded blovation about a 2 bit hustler, and about 10 hours of setup for very little payoff. Writer needs to learn about pacing and keeping the audience interested. I had hoped for much better.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Grisham phoned this one in...and it's awful

Revisado: 01-08-16

What disappointed you about Rogue Lawyer?

The story compared to his many other excellent works is simply awful. Amateur hour through the whole collection of short stories. Unbelievable plot, timeline is something out of a low rent soap opera. Main character is a 1 dimensional d-bag, but just smart enough to run the marbles on everyone else. The remaining characters are simply afterthoughts, and used simply to progress what limited story is being told. One character is simply called 'Partner' as though that suffices for imaginative thought. I'm surprised Grisham managed to name "Ex-Wife" Judith.

I don't wish to spoil the book for those that can stomach the terrible plots and unbelievable 'twists'.

What could John Grisham have done to make this a more enjoyable book for you?

Not published it? It's really that bad. I stopped with about 1/3 left, and switched to the "Lincoln Lawyer" which is well written, has a coherent plot and although the main character is similarly unlikable, he's actually interesting.

Would you be willing to try another one of Mark Deakins’s performances?

The reader did the best he could with the material as presented.

What character would you cut from Rogue Lawyer?

All of them. It shouldn't have been published.

Any additional comments?

I'd like a refund.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña