Bookus Interruptus. Don't you just HATE when an otherwise EXCELLENT book, a book that was ending on a thriller-riffic note, just sort of... ends? WithBookus Interruptus. Don't you just HATE when an otherwise EXCELLENT book, a book that was ending on a thriller-riffic note, just sort of... ends? With no warning, it just ...pooft. THAT'S what happened to this book. Although saying that this book was "excellent" might be more than generous.
First of all, if you've watched the movie? You're still going to get a few surprises in this. While the movie is faithful to the book (moreso than, say, I, Robot was) the two are two separate stories. There is a LOT that the movie doesn't get into (to the point where "our" sympathies are actually manipulated toward Angier instead of Borden,) which, granted, one would expect of a movie, but the changes are both understandable for their being made, and makes these two different stories.
The book "reads" as if it were three separate books. One is the past, one the present, and one the ending. The past, when told through Borden's diary, is confusingly handled. I understand why Priest wrote it this way, but I felt it could have been dealt with better. The present has very little to do with the main "bulk" of the story, except to give the past a reason for being read, and to give Priest a way to end the book. Which brings us to the end, which came straight out of left field, both in style (it becomes a Gothic thriller,) making it feel like he'd combined two stories in a very haphazard fashion, and then ends just as abruptly, making me wonder where the rest of the book was.
If you can overlook the haphazard way this was written, and completely overcome the bookus interruptus the end gives, it's a great story....more
"I have no idea how to rate this." "Oh? Why not?" "Because this was a FANTASTIC book, up until the end, where it just COMPLETELY pissed me off." "Then sa"I have no idea how to rate this." "Oh? Why not?" "Because this was a FANTASTIC book, up until the end, where it just COMPLETELY pissed me off." "Then say that." "But how many stars should I give it?" "Average."
In I, Coriander, we have Gardner, a self-professed believer in fairies and fairy tales, who obviously knows that the original stories aren't as Disney puts them out to be, and she's built a world upon that darker fairy realm. This book has the tone of a "true fairy tale" throughout the story. Throughout this story, we're treated to a showcase of wordsmithing that is, while maybe not rare, certainly exquisite. We're presented with a main character who ISN'T involved with a relationship (or multiple,) which is SO rare in this genre. The plot, while plodding in a few places, is written in such a style that even the few lagging places don't stand out *too* badly.
And then, we get to the ending. After this wonderful story, we get to the ending. WHICH HAS SEVERAL HUGE PLOT HOLES, THE CHARACTER COMPLETELY CHANGES, AND IT GENERALLY SEEMS LIKE IT'S WRITTEN BY SOMEONE ELSE. The ending made me want to throw things, stamp my feet, and throw a temper tantrum. It was ...like seeing someone's five year old finger paint over a Monet....more