Michael’s review of Boneshaker (The Clockwork Century, #1) > Likes and Comments

308 likes · 
Comments (showing 1-50 of 60) (60 new)    post a comment »

message 1: by David (new)

David Because you started the review with a quote, I thought you were quoting the book. Then I didn't notice the end quote. I didn't realize that metagoofiness was your review until about halfway through. Well done, sir.


message 2: by Michael (new)

Michael I do my best to be meta and sneaky with my quotes. And I try to incorporate exploding heads into book reviews whenever possible.


message 3: by Luke (new)

Luke Zwanziger Oh man, I loved this review. I've been looking for this book to read, but your review has somewhat dampened my spirits. Perhaps I will still read it, but I will not look for it as fervently as I might have before.


message 4: by Michael (new)

Michael Yeah, it's a fun read, so I wouldn't discourage you from giving it a go. But, go into it expecting just a fun read, not necessarily something to really knock yer socks off. I had some really high expectations, and that made me a little harsher in my review than I could've been.


message 5: by [deleted user] (new)

Nice. Very nice.


message 6: by Moira (new)

Moira Russell Fantastic!


message 7: by Michael (new)

Michael Thank you! Thank you!


message 8: by Brad (new)

Brad I'm beginning to think there're as many fanboys/girls for P&P in the thirty-fortysomething goodreads set as their are fanboys/girls for Twilight and Potter. Not that there's anything wrong with that (since I am one)


message 9: by Michael (new)

Michael Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised, Brad. Of course, I'm younger than that crowd, for a couple more years, I guess one more year...by the gods, that's scary.

Then again, I think P&P has fanboys/girls of every age: my mother is almost 60 and still reads all those trashy P&P spin-off novels. She has a Jane Austen action figure as well, which earns her quite a few litgeek points. And my little sister was about 16 when she started working her way through all Austen's work...I don't know if that alone qualifies her to be a fangirl, but she's somewhere in the borderlands there.

But it is more of fanboy/girl mentality than people have for a lot of other old, dead authors...that's the only explanation for the endless stream of new film versions and spinoffs and P&P&Z and S&S&SM, etc.


Wicked Incognito Now well, you completely took me out of my auto-pilot daze of reading standard reviews in which I try to decipher if THIS reviewer's or THAT reviewer's opinions might match my own.

Well done.


message 11: by Jonathan (new)

Jonathan HAHAHAHAHAHAH. This review was both more entertaining AND more informative about what the book's actually like than any other! I'll move it down my to-read list; it sounds less like my thing.


message 12: by Michael (new)

Michael Thanks, April and Jonathan! I'm doing my best to quell the over-hype going on with Boneshaker...The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi is a hell of a lot better if you're in the mood for a modern-sorta-steampunkish book that rocks.


Wicked Incognito Now I'm actually reading The Windup Girl right now. So far, really excellent.


message 14: by Autumnmoon (new)

Autumnmoon LOL. This review is awesome.


message 15: by Miss Clark (new)

Miss Clark Fantastic review - Thanks for making it interesting.


message 16: by Sparrow (new)

Sparrow I HATE IT BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT ENOUGH!!! But also I liked it because I can tell it's smart. Is it entitled "Pride and Prejudice and Boneshaker"? I'm glad you decided to hop onto the Austen mashup bandwagon. Someone should be on there to keep the kids in line.


message 17: by [deleted user] (new)

LOL! Amazing. Thank you a million times for writing this review.


message 18: by Michael (new)

Michael Since it has your vote, Meredith, I know you don't REALLY hate it, and I'm no longer so excruciatingly offended by your lack of regard for my feelings. That is, in fact, its name!

I don't think it's meant to be totally understood, though. As long as you understand it is brilliant and funny, I am happy.

Thanks, Tk! Glad you liked the review.


message 19: by Sparrow (new)

Sparrow AHHHH. I SEE. IT IS SOME SORT OF DADA META-COMMENTARY. *snaps* Sweet. Whew that I got it because, as usual, it totally was brilliant and funny. I'm glad I could rectify that horrible offense.


message 20: by Miriam (new)

Miriam Nice. But I think if you are going to bring in Bloom he needs to make an obligatory classics reference. Unless you are thinking of Leopold rather than Harold.


message 21: by [deleted user] (new)

Unless you are thinking of Leopold rather than Harold.

Then there'd be a pooping sequence.


message 22: by Michael (new)

Michael The lack of clarity regarding the Bloom has been fixed. It should now be apparent I was talking about ORLANDO Bloom.


message 23: by Miriam (new)

Miriam Then the classical allusion is definitely not called for.


message 24: by Miriam (new)

Miriam I think practically everyone in the entire world got sick of so many books being set in London and New York. Seattle is the new hot locale.

But in this case, I believe Priest wrote the book soon after moving to Seattle from the South (where her earlier books are set).


message 25: by Michael (new)

Michael If this review is so old as shit, why is it showing up in my update?

It might not have been god's fault. It might be because I did some editing and forgot to unclick the box. Miriam wanted more clarification on which Bloom was involved.


message 26: by Miriam (new)

Miriam Michael's review is the Platonic form of satirical fanfic mashup, and thus exists outside of time.


message 27: by Michael (new)

Michael Ah, ignore my answer. Miriam's answer is clearly right.


message 28: by Michael (new)

Michael Well, it must've been Satan. I thought that was self-evident.


message 29: by Aoi (new)

Aoi Really? Was this an assignment?


message 30: by Michael (new)

Michael Really? Was this an assignment?

Alas, this was what my brain told me was the best way to review Boneshaker. It might still be my weirdest review, but I sincerely doubt it.


message 31: by Flail (new)

Flail Around ... That was fun! :D


message 32: by [deleted user] (new)

Laughed very very hard at this. Well done. XDD


message 33: by Michael (new)

Michael Thank you kindly!


message 34: by Joshua (new)

Joshua This review is better than the book.


Christina (A Reader of Fictions) I read this too, along with the next two books in the series. They're definitely fun reads, the idea behind them always sounds fabulous, and the writing isn't bad,however I have found Cherie Priest's characters utterly lacking. Of the three books I have read, two were primarily about the relationship between family members, but you never really got a sense of a real relationship there. None of them had any real romance to speak of, either. Priest really seems to hesitant, or possibly incapable, to write about love. Although given the sap-infested piece of YA fail that I am currently reading, maybe I'm grateful.


message 36: by Michael (new)

Michael What I don't understand is why she keeps making that the crux of her stories when she doesn't seem very skilled at fleshing it out. There are lots of possible plots out there, parents don't always need to go saving their children and showing how much they luuurve one another.

I think this whole book would've worked if the relationships in it had worked. But, I'm hugely influenced by how much I understand and like the characters...I even like books where nothing happens, as long as the characters are intriguing.


Christina (A Reader of Fictions) Me too. I didn't realize it until fairly recently, but good characterization is definitely the key. If they don't feel like real people, I will be so BORED. Or if they're real people, but the kind of real people you can't love or sympathize with. Sometimes a love to hate character works, but they need charisma, for sure. This is why I hate The Forest of Hands and Teeth so much. What a disappointment those books were.

For good characters, I will look past some weak plotting or questionable writing. They're number one!

I think the best of the three Cherie Priest books I read was the second one, Clementine (which is nigh impossible to get), because it was just about a lady spy and a dirigible captain going off and being adventurous. No family drama.


message 38: by Michael (new)

Michael A good friend of mine recommended the first FOHAT book, but he said the second wasn't so good. That's somewhere near the top of my to read list, so I'll let you know whether I agree or not sometime this summer...if I get through as much reading as I hope to, anyway. The book has a fabulous title, if nothing else.

I'm thinking the second one was a novella. Is that right? If so, I may give it a read if I come across a copy. I definitely won't go out of my way to track it down, though, even if it's better than Boneshaker.


Christina (A Reader of Fictions) The second was a novella and you're not very likely to come across a copy. Tor wouldn't publish it, so it was some small indie job with a limited run. When I looked, a copy of it was completely ridiculous in print, something like a hundred bucks. It looks like it's only 60-some now. Yeah, right.

I bought the Kindle version for 2.99, because I had ARCs of the first and third in the series, and it makes me go insane to read things out of order. If you have a Kindle, I could probably loan it to you, but, as you mentioned in regards to something else, there are always better things to read.


message 40: by Meghan (new)

Meghan awesome. read this and chuckled, *applause*


message 41: by Melinda (new)

Melinda Thank you for such a fun review!! It was informative, yet wildly entertaining. Well done!


message 42: by Michael (new)

Michael Thanks, M and Melinda! I'm glad you both enjoyed it!


message 43: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Wilson Funny, I especially like Holmes, "Usually I'm so attentive to details."


Erica (daydreamer) This review was rather brilliant. Highly entertaining ;)


message 45: by Michael (new)

Michael Thank you! Glad you liked it!!


message 46: by L'Poni (new)

L'Poni You, sir, have written the best review that I've read in this over-polluted wasteland of recycled popular books. The words you melded seem to give birth to a flash story, and I value this rarity-of-a-review. Sir, get away from Goodreads and publish some short stories for the commoners. They need you more than they need those rehash books.


message 47: by Michael (new)

Michael Lol, thank you, Nipaporn! I have trouble writing anything between the length of the book review and a novel--and I have serious problems with declaring a novel "finished"-- but if I manage to, I'll let you goodreaders know.


message 48: by L'Poni (new)

L'Poni Michael wrote: "Lol, thank you, Nipaporn! I have trouble writing anything between the length of the book review and a novel--and I have serious problems with declaring a novel "finished"-- but if I manage to, I'l..."

I hate writing novels too. I have problems sticking with one and most novels bore me after ten pages. You should make short stories instead, they pack a harder punch than novels.


message 49: by Clarissa (new)

Clarissa Fortin tThis is possibly my favourite review on Goodreads...I never did get around to reading Boneshaker but I came back here for the review :)


message 50: by Bridget (new)

Bridget I liked your review better than the book!....


« previous 1
back to top