Carol. 's Reviews > Monster Hunter International

Monster Hunter International by Larry Correia
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
3978225
's review
May 09, 14

bookshelves: urban-fantasy, male-lead, action, actions-speak-louder-than-words, unicorns-and-rainbows
Recommended for: Correia fans and people who don't want to know about authors' politics
Read from April 28 to May 01, 2011

Three and a half stars. Turned out to be a fun, engaging read, and I'll definitely check out the next book in the series. The first person point of view is told by an unusual hero; a large, "ugly," now scarred accountant who was raised in family that emphasized guns and survival skills. As such, his language is straightforward, but not so simplistic that I was bored. Flashes of humor and modern references kept the voice fresh, making me feel like although he took situations seriously, he also saw the humorous side. A Twilight reference made me laugh but may end up dating the book. It was also nice in the way his voice engaged me into Owen's point of view; the introduction to the world of monsters, the love of guns and his growing competency in fighting monsters.

The overall plot involves confronting one of the ultimate evils that abound, and while there isn't much mystery surrounding the final confrontation, there were a few twists along the way that had me surprised. Correia does a good job of making the ultimate evil frightening, especially when using Owen's psychic connection to give insight into C.O.'s megalomania. The secondary romantic plot was unsurprising in development or resolution. It was a little surprising to me to find it in such an action oriented book, but at least is remained secondary and didn't dominate Owen's thoughts or the storyline.

It felt a little Hollywoodish when (view spoiler) Hard to top that for the final fight. Still overall-very fast paced read that I didn't want to put down.

Cross posted at http://clsiewert.wordpress.com/2013/0...

** Stars removed on 05/14 due to author behavior regarding the Hugos, liberals and generally being a lackwit. His latest blog is ranting against the campaign to raise awareness about the abducted schoolgirls, as well as mocking the men involved in the anti-pedophile campaign. Plus there's the whole effort to destroy the Hugos by "getting underrepresented white minority conservative writers" 'represented.' monsterhunternation.com (linking done through donotlink to minimize his blog upticks).
37 likes · likeflag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Monster Hunter International.
sign in »

Comments (showing 1-27 of 27) (27 new)

dateDown_arrow    newest »

Evgeny Can you give a link to author's bad behavior? I have been living under a rock lately :)


message 2: by Carol. (last edited May 09, 2014 01:07PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Carol. He's a dick. His latest blog is ranting against the campaign to raise awareness about the abducted schoolgirls, as well as mocking the men involved in the anti-pedophile campaign. Plus there's the whole effort to destroy the Hugos by "getting underrepresented white minority conservative writers" 'represented.' monsterhunternation.com (done through donotlink.com to avoid giving his blog upticks).


message 3: by Courtnie (last edited May 09, 2014 12:49PM) (new)

Courtnie Carol. [All cynic, all the time] wrote: "He's a dick. His latest blog is ranting against the campaign to raise awareness about the abducted schoolgirls, as well as mocking the men involved in the anti-pedophile campaign. Plus there's the ..."

just shoot me.

eta: sometimes, sir author, your opinion is best left to yourself. smh


Evgeny Thanks, I did not know - not that I am going to read his books; I will not.


message 5: by Stephanie (new)

Stephanie Read his blog (thanks for the link)... That is shocking and disgusting. Will NEVER read anything by this guy...


Carol. I knew he was a conservative, but when I found out about the Hugo campaign, I checked his blog for his posts about it (you know, go to the source, right?) Then I bumped into his other misogynist, anti-liberal, hater crap. I don't normally take this route, but, man, he deserves it.


message 7: by Kaora (new)

Kaora Score one for the will never read pile.


Carol. Allison wrote: "Score one for the will never read pile."

Yes. Dropped like a live scorpion.


message 9: by Stephanie (new)

Stephanie Swint I couldn't get into the book, despite people recommending it,and felt bad about it. I have absolutely no guilt about abandoning it after the information you provided


Carol. Me either, Stephanie.


message 11: by Claire (new)

Claire You know what they say about Hitler being a painter..


Carol. Claire wrote: "You know what they say about Hitler being a painter.."

That he was still a mass-murdering psychopath who should have concentrated on art instead?


message 13: by Claire (new)

Claire Pretty much yes!


message 14: by Virginia (new)

Virginia Was going to put this on my to-read list. Thanks for the heads up that prevented me from inadvertently financing douchebaggery.


message 15: by Mark (new) - rated it 4 stars

Mark I agree the guy seems like a blowhard and if you want to boycott his books, more power to you. However, I question your removal of stars from the rating of the book because you don't like the author.


message 16: by Carol. (last edited Jun 27, 2014 03:29PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Carol. Question away! He's diminished his brand.


Brigid (is a massive coffee addict) HAHAHA! romances for men *snort* Thanks for making me laugh Ilona, as always.


Carol. I had to track that reference down, Brigid. Ilona is funny.


message 19: by Brigid (is a massive coffee addict) (last edited Aug 20, 2014 08:44AM) (new)

Brigid (is a massive coffee addict) Carol. [All cynic, all the time] wrote: "I had to track that reference down, Brigid. Ilona is funny."

she's the queen of wit.

edit: I honestly thought I commented on Ilona's review, but I guess I commented on yours by mistake. Wonder how that happened....weird.


message 20: by Mark (new) - rated it 4 stars

Mark I understand that Carol, and I respect the fact you dislike the author. However, my point was that if I'm looking through ratings and reviews of books to help me determine the next book I want to read, it would be very confusing to have sort through ratings that were based not just on the book but on the author.


Carol. Mark, I will provide you with this excerpt from my "Why I [Unicorns and Rainbows] Goodreads."

As a reviewer, my goals were very simple: to thoughtfully reflect my views on a book and my reading experience. I've bought into the idea that the personal is political, and I incorporate it, when appropriate, into my reading and thus my reviews.

Some authors are content to release their books into the world and let them develop a life of their own. Others leverage their social power into political power, using their artistic voice to make comments in the political arena. For the most part, I've only followed or heard from authors I've loved, so it was natural to me to focus on the positives. But as I grew more widely read and the barriers between authors and readers have melted down on Goodreads, I've come to realize there are authors I want to avoid as well, some because of their public persona, some because of boorish behavior in groups.... I reserve that right to discuss it in my notes on reads or books.


To which I will also add:
The source matters.


message 22: by Mark (new) - rated it 4 stars

Mark Well stated but I'm not disagreeing with lambasting the author in your written review, merely with the removal of stars from the rating. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree! I'll still follow your reviews. ;-)


message 23: by Brigid (is a massive coffee addict) (last edited Aug 21, 2014 11:31AM) (new)

Brigid (is a massive coffee addict) Carol. [All cynic, all the time] wrote: "Mark, I will provide you with this excerpt from my "Why I [Unicorns and Rainbows] Goodreads."

As a reviewer, my goals were very simple: to thoughtfully reflect my views on a book and my reading ex..."


agreed. I can't for the life of me pick up Orson Scott Card's work.


message 24: by Chowder (new) - added it

Chowder You are obviously entitled to your opinion. I have read several of your reviews and find them to be very in-depth and informative and truly appreciate the effort you put forth (as too many reviews are "it was good" or "I hated it" without any real substance). My own opinion, however, is that to downgrade how much you enjoy a book because of the author's political views is not what this site is for. You obviously enjoyed the book somewhat, but to put it at the lowest ratings because his political beliefs don't align with yours?

What if the book was 100% a piece of garbage and intensely painful to read, but the author was an incredible humanitarian, a wonderful philanthropist and his/her political beliefs were identical to yours - would you give the book a 4 or 5 star rating based on that?

Once again, you are entitled to post whatever your opinion is, and I do hope you continue to review authors' works (because you do write wonderful reviews), but I will have to agree to disagree that book ratings should be changed and readers should be discouraged from reading an author because he/she doesn't see the world the same way as you do.


message 25: by Carol. (last edited Sep 08, 2014 10:28PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Carol. Chowder, thanks for sharing your thoughts and your compliments.

I do happen to disagree on what this site is for, which is why I rarely post full reviews here.

My justification for letting someone's personal life affect my judgement of their work thusly: I pay very little attention to social media, in most forms, including the glorified facebook feeds that are most magazines. So if someone's behavior makes it onto my radar, its likely a very loudly stated view. Corriea really disappointed me with the Hugo stuntmanship. Ergo, he/they fired the first shot in making discussion of their work as more than about the work themselves was the author.

It does work both ways. And it isn't about being identical--it's about being thoughtful. Compassionate. Human. Art is, after all, interpretation. Knowing some of the author's public stances has allowed me at least the illusion of greater interpretation ability. Somehow, Corriea's white-trash fairies have a new spin, maybe?

Ways it's worked positively: I'm only mildly interested in Scalzi's writing, but I give him the benefit of the doubt because I like what he does outside of writing. Likewise, Jim Hines. Cat Valente I admire as a writer and as a semi-public persona. Janny Wurts--another fabulous persona, and I have no idea what her politics are, but I don't care for her writing. So the works I read of hers get uprated because I'm prone to interpret them in slightly more positive ways.


So to be clear, it isn't about identical to me. In fact, I think that's rather a large assumption on your part, as I never stated my opinion on any of the issues, only on his behavior. Because it is about integrity and thoughtfulness. Oh, and not being an asshat.


message 26: by Crystal (new)

Crystal Thanks for the warning. I don't need.more assininery in my life. Book deleting.


Logan Curious as to why my comment was deleted. Because I disagreed with retroactively rating all of an author's books with 1 star because you didn't like a blog post of his? How many other comments have you deleted?


back to top