What have you just read? Opinions, recommendations & reviews Showing 5,451-5,500 of 12,687

[Angela M]

Saint Mazie. 4 stars . My review : https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Gill]

Leslie wrote: "Gill wrote: "I've got a quarter of the way through Nostromo and have decided to give up on it. I'm not enjoying it; it's a shame, because I've read ..."

Oh dear, that is on my TBR s..."

Hopefully it would do more for you than for me, Leslie!

[Suz]

I enjoyed Lucy in the Sky, something light after a heavy read! My review is here:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Petra]

I just finished We Need to Talk About Kevin, which was very well told, I thought. The story is a disturbing one. There are no winners.

My review can be found here.

[Chrissie]

I have written a very short review for Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. I highly recommend it. I cannot summarize adequately the important message of this book.

My review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

You really should read the book.

[Susan]

I've just finished Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen as part of a book to movie challenge. Enjoyable, but a long way from unputdownable. My review is here https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4....

[Chrissie]

Susan, what I particularly liked about that book was the nursing home scenes. Unfortunately all too accurate! I also like the circus people and their situation during the Depression.

[Susan]

Chrissie wrote: "Susan, what I particularly liked about that book was the nursing home scenes. Unfortunately all too accurate! I also like the circus people and their situation during the Depression."

I agree, Chrissie. Old Jacob was the outstanding character in this book. In a way that was what disappointed me because she can obviously do character, it's just that she abandoned character in favour of description in the main body of the book. Her descriptive passages are good, and as you say, you get a real sense of the hopelessness and desperation that must have characterised the American Depression - but I really wanted some better character-bulding in there to bring the love story alive. I think it would have made the difference between an average to good book and a good to great one.

[Chrissie]

Susan wrote: "I really wanted some better character-bulding in there to bring the love story alive. "

I definitely understand what you are saying. People go into books looking for different things. It is really hard to define what that is.

[Nivedita]

I recently finished 'All the Shah"s men'. It's my first book on history and politics and loved it. I'm looking forward to reading more booking in this genre.

[Susan]

Nivedita wrote: "I recently finished 'All the Shah"s men'. It's my first book on history and politics and loved it. I'm looking forward to reading more booking in this genre."

Just read the synopsis and it sounds like interesting reading, Nivedita. Would you say it has any particular bias attached to it, or did it seem a fairly presented account please?

[Susan]

Chrissie wrote: "Susan wrote: "I really wanted some better character-bulding in there to bring the love story alive. "

I definitely understand what you are saying. People go into books looking for different thing..."

Well, I have my own notional scoring system, and it goes like this. I gave it a Goodreads 3*, which would just about equate to a 6 / 10.

I'm a hard task master!!

1 = absolutely bloody - don't touch it with a bargepole
2 = bloody - probably don't bother, but it might be one up from the back of a cereal packet
3 = poor - approach with hope but without expectation
4 = below average - readable with a few redeeming qualities
5 = average - good for a duvet day
6 = above average - good characters or a good plot but not both
7 = good - good characters, good plot and well researched
8 = very good - all the above and beautifully written as well
9 = excellent - all the above in spades
10 = do not miss this under any circumstances - even if you have to sell the children to obtain a copy

[Chrissie]

Susan wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Susan wrote: "I really wanted some better character-bulding in there to bring the love story alive. "

I definitely understand what you are saying. People go into books looking fo..."

Susan, my rating is super simple, i simply ask myself how I felt about the book and follow the GR rating:

1. I did not like it! YUCK.
2. Yeah, it was OK
3. I liked it
4. It was VERY good.
5. Amazing, utterly amazing

This is why I cannot have half-stars!

What is difficult is clarifying for myself why I have responded to the book as I have. Then I write my review to explain, to myself and others. If I don't I will forget....

[Chrissie]

I could not continue Blackout. It doesn't work for me.

My review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Petra]

Chrissie, I like time travel books but Connie Willis doesn't work for me either. I had many of the same issues with Doomsday as you had with this book.

[Chrissie]

Petra wrote: "Chrissie, I like time travel books but Connie Willis doesn't work for me either. I had many of the same issues with Doomsday as you had with this book."

Petra, that is good to hear. Nevertheless, I am not going to be trying another time travel book

[Petra]

Chrissie wrote: " Nevertheless, I am not going to be trying another time travel book
. ..."

:(
...but I understand, too. It's a weird concept and not for everyone.

[Angela M]

Finished Let Me Explain You. 3.5 stars rounded to 4 . My review :https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Suz]

Loved this! All Good Deeds. Here's my review, I'd recommend to thriller and suspense lovers:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[GeneralTHC]

Chrissie wrote: "Petra wrote: "Chrissie, I like time travel books but Connie Willis doesn't work for me either. I had many of the same issues with Doomsday as you had with this book."

Petra, that is good to hear. ..."

Petra wrote: "Chrissie wrote: " Nevertheless, I am not going to be trying another time travel book
. ..."

:(
...but I understand, too. It's a weird concept and not for everyone."


Speaking of time travel books, Stephen King's 11-22-63 I think is the best book he's ever written. I HIGHLY recommend it for people who like that kind of thing.

[Chrissie]

Chuck wrote: "I HIGHLY recommend it for people who like that kind of thing. "

Everybody except me. Once upon a time I did read and like Stephen King. Times have changed.

ETA. Or is it me?

[Angela M]

I have only read two books by Stephen Kjng , neither of which were horror stories and I thought both were excellent- 11/22/63 and Joyland . I do enjoy time travel and my favorite is Time and Again but I don't think Blackout is one I'd like .

[Suz]

Aussie author Vicki Tyley has written a great short story Two Birds, 5 stars. My review:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Suz]

I have so many Stephen King books on my physical shelf but still have not read one. I will though at some stage. Very curious.

[Greg]

Chrissie wrote: "Chuck wrote: "I HIGHLY recommend it for people who like that kind of thing. "

Everybody except me. Once upon a time I did read and like Stephen King. Times have changed.

ETA. Or is it me?"

The crazy weird religious characters banging on about endtimes were extremely tiring to me in the ones I read, but I get the strong feeling that I read the wrong ones by him. The fact that Jean and Angela like some of his books is enough for me to give him another chance! .. plus I see him mentioned in another of my groups frequently by people that generally have tastes similar to mine.

[Chrissie]

Re Stephen King:

Maybe so, Greg. I just don't feel up to him. Not now at least. I have to go back and enjoy what I usually enjoy.

[Patricia]

I haven't read King since the 80's. I remember I really liked The Stand and told everyone I knew it was just the best book ever! I remember reading Cujo and Pet Cemetary but lost interest in King after Christine.

[Greg]

I can certainly understand that Chrissie!

[Alice]

I'm least well-read in American novels, but I think Stephen King would be near the bottom of my list of American authors I'd like to try :)

[Angela M]

Alice , I thought that about King too because I thought he wrote only horror stories and I would never read those. A couple of years ago , I discovered 11/22/63 which was a terrific story and I discovered what a good writer he is . Since then I only have read Joyland which I also really liked . I will never read his horror stories but at some point may try some of his others that are not .

[Alice]

Thanks Angela for your input! But realistically I can't see myself trying a King novel in the short term.

[Angela M]

Alice , I understand where you are coming from and there are so many books to read !

[Greg]

Angela M wrote: "Alice , I thought that about King too because I thought he wrote only horror stories and I would never read those. A couple of years ago , I discovered 11/22/63 which was a terrific story and I dis..."

Thanks for your input Angela. You and Jean have convinced me to give him another try, either Joyland or 11/22/63.

Very occasionally I do enjoy horror as well but only if there's good character depth and an engaging writing style. I was put off King as I said because I read a couple of his with highly stylized (and improbably written) religious nuts nattering on about the end of days; those books were tiresome. I don't even remember anymore what they were. Probably I just picked bad ones - he's written so many.

[Julia]

I just finished reading The Gathering and The Calling by Kelley Armstrong. They're the 1st two books in the authors YA paranormal trilogy about 16 year old protagonist Maya and her friends who live in a secluded medical research community on Vancouver Island. There is a nice balance of teen angst, romance and intrigue. Both books were an enjoyable fast paced read and I'm looking forward to the 3rd book in the trilogy "The Rising"

-

[Matthew]

I just finished Vol. 2 of In Search of Lost Time and phew, is that a dense book. Going to enjoy a few less challenging books before I even start thinking about Vol. 3!

[Jon]

Susan wrote:
1 = absolutely bloody - don't touch it with a bargepole
2 = bloody - probably don't bother, but it might be one up from the back of a cereal packet
3 = poor - approach with hope but without expectation
4 = below average - readable with a few redeeming qualities
5 = average - good for a duvet day
6 = above average - good characters or a good plot but not both
7 = good - good characters, good plot and well researched
8 = very good - all the above and beautifully written as well
9 = excellent - all the above in spades
10 = do not miss this under any circumstances - even if you have to sell the children to obtain a copy

Susan, like the taste a ripe mango, this is a refreshing alternative to the damn 5 stars. Thank you. I intend to 'borrow' it for reviews, if you don't object, changing out 'bloody' for something all-American. Jon

[Leslie]

Jon wrote: "Susan wrote:
1 = absolutely bloody - don't touch it with a bargepole
2 = bloody - probably don't bother, but it might be one up from the back of a cereal packet
3 = poor - approach with hope but w..."

This is basically how I rate with the half stars; just take Susan's # and divide by 2 & you will get my rating (so 8 becomes a 4 and 7 becomes a 3½).

[Pink]

I'm not a half star rater, only very, very rarely do I waver between 3 and 4 stars, otherwise they always seem to make sense. The same as Chrissie, I pretty much stick to the GR method.

1=didn't like
2=okay
3=liked
4=really liked
5=loved

This results in more 1 star rated books than I guess others give, but it keeps things simple. Sometimes I change my mind much later, but I think I've only ever gone back once to change a rating and that was for Burial Rites which I'd originally given 3 stars, but after a year I was still thinking about it, so I bumped it up to 4.

I've certainly got meaner with my ratings than when I first joined and most of the 5 star rated books on my shelf are ones I read before joining. I wouldn't give them 5 now, but I never know whether to downgrade them or not.

[Chrissie]

I am a pickier rater now too, than I was when I joined. The more books you read and remember b/c you have recorded them here on GR, the more books you have to compare a new one with.

I VERY rarely change a rating, but occasionally I do, like I did when I upgraded Lolita from 4 to 5 stars recently. I knew that my true feelings for the book were 5 rather than 4. I can't think of another book where I have changed the rating.

[Shirley]

I'd love Goodreads to change to marks out of ten, because for me, it makes it easier - I rate books as below, but sometimes when I look at my 3 and 4 star books there is quite a range there which I feel would be better suited to a ten star system.

1 (I really didn't like this!)
2 (It was ok - managed to finish this, but only because I was reading it for my bookclub/group read)
3 (I liked it, but wouldn't particularly rave about it)
4 (I really liked it and would recommend to others)
5 (This book is really special - loved it!)

[Chrissie]

I could easily recommend some of my my three star books to some people. It is a matter of fitting the right person to the right book. I like a three star book, but something went wrong for ME. What bugs me could be another person's cup of tea. That is the point of the review - to explain clearly.

[GeneralTHC]

I go as far as to use quarter stars in my ratings. I've even thought about using 1/10 of stars, but that's probably a bit much. I just don't think it's realistic to expect ALL books to fit into one of five categories.

I've even thought that maybe there should be different rating systems for different types of books. I mean, you can't expect the same thing out of a literary fiction book and a genre fiction book. Or a nonfiction book. For a while there only nonfiction books were eligible for 5-stars. Because I can see a nonfiction book actually changing a person's worldview, actually affecting their life. I can't see a fiction book doing that.

[GeneralTHC]

I've read at least half of King's books, and the other half I've seen on screen. I think he's an excellent writer.

I also think he gets a bad wrap for being a horror writer. Not because he's not that, but because there seems to be a misconception about what horror actually is. People think blood and gore, but it's not necessarily that. The Horror Writers Association has a good article about this: http://horror.org/horror-is.htm

I bet many people didn't even realize they were watching Stephen King when they saw Stand by Me or The Shawshank Redemption.

Apt Pupil was another good one. Or, of course, The Green Mile.

I don't think he's going to be winning the Pulitzer anytime soon, but there's a HUGE difference in literary quality between, say, James Patterson and King.

[Angela M]

Greg , I think you would enjoy either one
of those King books .

Chuck , I agree that he's a really good writer. I still won't read the scary stuff , though .

[Diane S ☔]

I use halfs. And round up or down, but besides that I use the GR rating system. Some books I do hold to a higher standard than others. Steve King, can't remember the last book I read of his, though I do won Joyland. My favorite is The Stand, read it way back and something just spoke to me with that book.

[Janice]

Chuck wrote: "I've read at least half of King's books, and the other half I've seen on screen. I think he's an excellent writer.

I also think he gets a bad wrap for being a horror writer. Not because he's not ..."

Chuck, I, too, agree with you on your points in favour of King vs Patterson (couldn't stand his writing)

[Petra]

It's always interesting to read how/why people rate books. The 3-star rating is the most interesting, for me.
I see a 3-star read as a good book....just not memorable. It's a book I enjoy and would recommend but it probably didn't hit me emotionally or deeply in any or many ways.
If I feel any dislike for the book for some reason, that's a 2-star book.

I don't review or rate books that I don't finish. Those just disappear from my TBR list.

My rating system:
1= Absolutely horrid but I finished it (even if just so that I could rant about it in a review)
2= Irksome book; something about it was irritating.
3= A good story; doesn't stand out much but an interesting read
4= Stands out in some way. Very good and will reside in memory.
5= Marvelous! May even re-read it one day. Will stick with me. Touched me in some way.

[Jon]

What I "liked" about Susan's rating system was not just that it opened up the ratings to ten choices. More important, it gets rid of the word "like" and uses more interesting descriptions that relate to why she "likes" or doesn't like a book: character, plot, research. Not all of her ratings are this specific, unfortunately.

Questions: Should DNF books be rated? reviewed? Should the reason(s) be included? For consistency, should every DNF be rated and reviewed?

[Chrissie]

Jon wrote: "Questions: Should DNF books be rated? reviewed? Should the reason(s) be included? For consistency, should every DNF be rated and reviewed? "

I think it depends on how easily you give up on a book. For those, like me, who rarely give up and have read a larger portion of the book and are absolutely sure and know why they so dislike the book, these people should rate it. I also think it is important to write a review and explain how much you have read and why exactly you have dumped it. If people who dump books don't rate then the rating is skewed.

[B the BookAddict]

I really banged heads with another GR person who wrote a scathing review after reading less than 50 pages of a book, so maybe I shouldn't comment as it still angers me 12 months later.

However, I do agree with Chrissie's comment "I think it depends on how easily you give up on a book. For those, like me, who rarely give up and have read a larger portion of the book and are absolutely sure and know why they so dislike the book, these people should rate it."

Personally, simply to see that someone has 'DNF' the book is enough of a rating for me.

I don't rate books which I do not finish. I also have the shelf 'tried but not for me'.