Unpopular Opinions

[DoughGirl]

I loved the Mayfair Witch saga until she felt the need to insert Lestat. I wish she would do a book on the Talamasca. I would love to read about them.

The only Mayfair Witch book I liked was the first one. I thought it was brilliant. Absolutely hated Taltos and the Mona character. (Don't even remember Lestat being involved.)

It seems to me that sometimes authors get all caught up in a certain character and will keep involving them unnecesarily in their other books. (Diana Gabaldon with Lord John Grey comes to mind.)

I don't know if this is an UO, but I loathed the Claudia character from Interview with a Vampire. I actually loathe most of Anne Rice's female characters anyway.

The Vampire Lestat was my favorite of her Vampire series.

[roamyn]

I hate Wuthering Heights. I wish all the characters except maybe Edgar would burn or fall off the moors.

This! And let me add Ivanhoe to my list

 

 

I loved the Mayfair Witch saga until she felt the need to insert Lestat. I wish she would do a book on the Talamasca. I would love to read about them.

Me too! Also she lost me when she started w/the Taltos.

Though I love Lestat & Magnus. That is what vampires are supposed to be like.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Athena
Quote format issues & Lestat

[roamyn]

Thanx Athena! Sometimes I screw up on my android.

BTW, that should be Lestat.

[nodorothyparker]

I was never wild about Interview with the Vampire either.  Because I was a broke teen back then, I was dependent on our small-town library to read them and they never had it so I didn't read it until well after The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned.  I was underwhelmed to say the least.  Lestat is so muted as a straight-up villain in that book that I don't know if I would have continued on with the series had I read it first.

[Amethyst]

I freaking hated The Time Traveler's Wife with the passion of a thousands suns and wanted to beat my own head in for reading it.  Blergh.

 

I couldn't even finish it.  It was so boring.  Didn't even attempt to watch the movie.

 

I HATED Huckleberry Finn when I had to read it in high school, mostly because of the Jim character. All of his dialogue is written in this "fo sho" style that forced me to read those sections aloud so I could figure out what the hell he was saying. It was one of the few times I went out and bought the Cliff's Notes for a book so I could do my assignments.

 

OMG, yes.  It took me ten minutes to read a paragraph because the dialogue was so thick and confusing.  Instead of "They're going to the store" it was something like "Dey gwine go to de sto'". Points for accuracy, but it made the story impossible to understand at times.

 

My own UO: I loved A Wrinkle in Time, but I hated the character of Meg.  She was such a brat.  She screams at her principal, she's sullen throughout most of the book...ugh.  She reminded me of a special snowflake.

[Athena]

My own UO: I loved A Wrinkle in Time, but I hated the character of Meg.  She was such a brat.  She screams at her principal, she's sullen throughout most of the book...ugh.  She reminded me of a special snowflake.

 

I loved this series, but Meg was never my favourite character or her brother. I did think it was very well written and thought provoking series when I read it. One of my favourite books in the series is actually the underrated Many Waters which was just so strange with its biblical references. The twins were great characters too. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

Here's a different tangent that I think is related to books, and an opinion that ALL my friends, continue to try to change:

 

I HATE Audio books. Don't like 'em. Can't stand 'em. I tried a couple. The first was a Robert Ludlum book, narrated by Hugh Campanella. It started out okay, but the minute he went into a falsetto, he lost me. I switched that sucker off so fast. Then a few years later, while on a road trip back to New York (where I was living at the time), from a Nora Robert's anniversary signing in MD, my friend put in the audio for one of my favorite books by her, True Betrayals. The hero is one of my favorites, and I have my own vision of him and what he sounds like. The narrator, who was a woman, made him sound like a redneck from Bumfuck Nebraska, or insert whatever small town where they talk like uneducated buffoons, and there you have it. I told my friend to eject that thing.

 

So, I don't care how good someone narrates a story. I'm not interested. Hell, I hate audibles too. I listened to one sentence of an Ann Stuart book, where the narrator, a woman, was voicing the hero, an English Pirate from the 1800s, and UGH. Just GODAWFUL.

 

The ONLY thing that would change my mind would be if Tom Hiddleston, Hugh Jackman or Daniel DayFucking!-Lewis were to narrate a book. I could listen to them read the phone book. Since that will NEVER happen, I'm not ever listening to another audio book ever again. I like to hear DDL's voice when I'm reading my JD Robb...DDL with his Oirish brogue when Roarke is speaking...and hell yes, Nora's (JD is a pseudonym for Nora) voice when Eve is talking. Yaphet Kotto when Chief Tibble is speaking...you get the idea.

[Pickles Aplenty]

I liked Meg, but I couldn't stand Charles Wallace.  Precocious little shit.

[psychoticstate]

I couldn't even finish it.  It was so boring.  Didn't even attempt to watch the movie.

 

 

I didn't watch the movie either (Time Traveler's Wife).  I figured I would hate it. 

 

My own UO: I loved A Wrinkle in Time

 

 

Did you see that a Disney movie is in the works?

[Amethyst]

The ONLY thing that would change my mind would be if Tom Hiddleston, Hugh Jackman or Daniel DayFucking!-Lewis were to narrate a book. I could listen to them read the phone book. Since that will NEVER happen, I'm not ever listening to another audio book ever again.

 

Tom Hiddleston narrated the The Red Necklace audiobook in 2007.  From the snippets I've heard, his voice sounds lovely on it.  :)

Did you see that a Disney movie is in the works?

 

I did.  I heard the TV movie was pretty weak, so not surprising that they're trying it again.  It all depends on the casting, as well as the director.

 

Sorry for the double post!

[Phebemarie]

There's a great adaptation of A Wrinkle in Time currently showing at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival until November 1.  

 

Unpopular opinion:  I have no interest in reading anything by Nicholas Sparks. 

[Bastet]

Unpopular opinion:  I have no interest in reading anything by Nicholas Sparks.

 

If the promos for the film adaptations of his books are anything to go by, he writes the same story over and over.  Not my cup of tea once, let alone multiple times.

Edited August 8, 2014 by Bastet

[Brn2bwild]

 

I really like Steinbeck's style, but I found Grapes of Wrath my least favourite of the three I've read from him.

 

The characters always seemed whiny to me, which was just exacerbated by the way Steinbeck wrote their dialogue.  Yes, they had real grievances (corporate exploitation), but before then: "Wah!  We stole our land from the Injuns fair 'n square, then destroyed all the minerals plantin' cotton year after year, 'til now it's a dust bowl!  Life's so unfair!"

[wanderingstar]

I was pretty meh on Pride and Prejudice. And I think Mr. Darcy is kind of an ass.

[ramble]

Unpopular opinion: I have no interest in reading anything by Nicholas Sparks.

Not only do I not want to read any of his books I don't want to see any movies made based on the books. While I'm griping I'll also add I don't want my friends, that deeply & truly love the books & movies, to tell me the plots verbatim in excruciating detail because I DO NOT CARE. Just listening to the play by play from someone else about the books leaves me bored & uninterested.

[Pickles Aplenty]

 

Not only do I not want to read any of his books I don't want to see any movies made based on the books. While I'm griping I'll also add I don't want my friends, that deeply & truly love the books & movies, to tell me the plots verbatim in excruciating detail because I DO NOT CARE. Just listening to the play by play from someone else about the books leaves me bored & uninterested.

That's because it's the same plot for every novel: Woman with a past finds love with a man everyone says is bad for her, something/someone from woman's past tears them apart, they reunite, they fall in love, anyway.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

[Jamoche]

Since it's all over the net: nothing I've read about the Outlander books appeals to me at all. "It's not really a romance, it was just marketed that way." Uh-huh. So setting up the husband as dull as ditchwater and then falling into bed with hot hunky bekilted Frazer Hines - oops, I meant "totally original character that just looks like him" - isn't a romance. Lots and lots of sex scenes (dear lord, everyone who recs this series cannot shut up about the sex scenes) isn't a romance. Historical Scotland as filtered through Victorian lenses (Victorians? Romantic about the past? Nah, never!) isn't a romance. Got it.

[nodorothyparker]

I've mostly enjoyed the Outlander series for both its historical element and its purely silly escapism, but I think the hype is ridiculously overblown.  When people gush over the sex scenes, I always wonder if they're reading the same versions of the books I am because they're not the most amazing thing EVER.  I mean, we're expected to believe that the male lead who we're assured is educated, cultured, and well traveled got most of his notions about sex from watching horses.  And then in the course of one night becomes the greatest lover EVER.  Seriously.  The whole fangirling thing was such a huge turnoff that I avoided reading these books for years. 

[Vera]

I was ten when I first read Jane Eyre and I couldn't understand what was supposed to be the romance between Jane and Mr. Rochester. It never made sense that Jane would take him back after the stunts he pulled. I have to admit, I'm not someone who immediately recognizes abuse in either fiction or real life but even at that age, I just felt that there was something very unhealthy about that relationship. I don't think CB's writing style helped either. It felt too cold and dry for what was supposed to be some great love and never actually made me feel anything for the characters.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Vera

[wanderingstar]

I read A Prayer for Owen Meany after enthusiastic recommendations from multiple people. I didn't get it. The main character bugged, as did everything about the book -especially it's length! And as a result, I have been reluctant to read anything else by John Irving.

[Sir RaiderDuck OMS]

At the risk of touching on a sensitive subject, I'm not at all a fan of Good Morning Vietnam. The late Robin Williams' comedic monologues were hilarious, but the rest of the movie drags interminably. No, I don't care about his obviously doomed romance. And when you add in that this "Based on a true story" movie is about as far from reality as you can get (i.e. there was an Armed Forces Radio DJ named Adrian Cronauer who really did play some good music during the Vietnam War, but that's about it: the real Cronauer was a self-described "card-carrying Republican" who did almost no comedy material and went home without incident when his tour was up), I'll enjoy the comedy bits and forget the rest of the film.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Sir RaiderDuck OMS

[Rick Kitchen]

I read A Prayer for Owen Meany after enthusiastic recommendations from multiple people. I didn't get it. The main character bugged, as did everything about the book -especially it's length! And as a result, I have been reluctant to read anything else by John Irving.

 

I've never read Owen Meany, so I can't address that, but I thoroughly enjoyed The World According to Garp and Hotel New Hampshire.

[Kalliste]

That's because it's the same plot for every novel: Woman with a past finds love with a man everyone says is bad for her, something/someone from woman's past tears them apart, they reunite, they fall in love, anyway.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

So like every Dan Brown novel then? I think I've read about 3 of his books and they're so formulaic, so very predictable.

[Holmbo]

I've read all the Twilight books and enjoyed them.
Which I suppose is not a OU in general, they are hugely popular books, but I think most of their fans are people that just haven't read much.
I considered myself an experienced reader, even at the time that I read that series, and I still enjoyed them. I guess I'm a bit of an omnivore when it comes to books.

[truthaboutluv]

Well I finally finished Gone Girl after purchasing it when I saw the trailer for the film during the Maleficent showing. Life put it on the back-burner but I've been meticulously avoiding any entertainment posts about the film, worried I'd read spoilers and even avoiding threads like this. But I'm finally done and yeah I can join those in saying the book was giant disappointment. The sad thing is though, it really didn't have to be. There were many interesting places Flynn could have taken the story that would have made it far more interesting. 

 

When I started, the first few chapters or so I really thought the story would 

detail how an innocent guy could easily be pegged for murder largely because he was a shitty, cheating asshole husband. Because I did think that was interesting. Where the reader would almost want to see Nick be prosecuted even though we'd know through his inner thoughts that he clearly did not murder his wife. But he'd looked so guilty because he was just such an asshole. And she could have still woven her mystery with Amy being murdered by the creepy neighbor or something. The book started going off the rails, the second all the stuff started coincidentally popping up showing Nick's guilt and then the diary entries started getting hammier and hammier with the "oh my goodness poor me, he looks at me like he's going to kill me and I'm so scared" and then I feel like at that point anyone with a brain figured that Amy was clearly still alive and had set Nick up for murder. As for the ending, I just don't even have the time or energy to even begin to poke holes in it and talk about how crappy it was. Again, pity because the book had the potential to be a good mystery novel/real character study and instead it veered into some hokey crime serial drama episode. But I imagine it might make for an exciting film.

Edited August 17, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[wanderingstar]

Aside from the first 50/60 pages, I really disliked The Kite Runner. I found it to be incredibly clichéd and trite.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Gillian Rosh

[Etta Place]

@Gillian Rosh, I've heard that one before - his plot relied too much on coincidence, and situations resolved in the expected ways. I loved the book, but I can see the argument!

[AuntiePam]

I appreciate the Potter books for Rowling's imagination -- she created an intriguing world -- but after the first couple of books, she needed an editor -- too much repetition and exposition. 

 

Also, one of my pet peeves is dialogue tags, especially with adverbs.  "She said, angrily."  If a writer has done her job with characterization and story, we will know without being told (1) who's speaking and (2) their frame of mind.  Rowling goes way overboard with dialogue tags, and adverbs in general.  Is she being paid by the word?

 

 

[galax-arena]

Forget the dialogue tags, I want to know what ellipses ever did to JK Rowling to make her abuse them so thoroughly. 

[truthaboutluv]

I appreciate the Potter books for Rowling's imagination -- she created an intriguing world --

 

 

I will take this and add that while I too appreciate the amazing world she created (and as I'm currently reading The Magicians and am struggling to get through the first few chapters, I appreciate the clever, humorous writing of hers even more) and the mystery elements of the book, it's my opinion that she never should have included romance. I know that would have bothered so many readers who were all about their shipping but I'm sorry, that woman can't write relationships for shit. Every relationship in the HP series was horrible in my opinion - yes that even includes the glimpses we got of the sainted James and Lily. And I have to say after reading A Casual Vacancy, I'm wondering if the problem is she just can't write healthy, happy and interesting relationships as everyone in that book was screwed up. 

[Rick Kitchen]

Forget the dialogue tags, I want to know what ellipses ever did to JK Rowling to make her abuse them so thoroughly. 

 

You say that ... like it's a bad thing ...

 

I am an ellipse addict, I admit it.  :)

[Sharpie66]

The ellipses bothered me mightily in HP! But then, I'd been victimized by them back in junior high when I was reading my aunt's Barbara Cartland collection. OMG, did that woman abuse the ellipse.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Sharpie66

[Mrsjumbo]

I HATED Huckleberry Finn when I had to read it in high school, mostly because of the Jim character. All of his dialogue is written in this "fo sho" style that forced me to read those sections aloud so I could figure out what the hell he was saying. It was one of the few times I went out and bought the Cliff's Notes for a book so I could do my assignments.

Oh, yes! I remember reading "shet de do" and thinking he said "shit to do" & realizing way later that it was "shut the door".

LOVED Trixie Belden as a child, more than Nancy Drew.

Hardest book to finish, IMHO- the mayor of Casterbridge. It was required reading in high school. I love reading the classics but this was the only book I would fall asleep reading, while sitting upright. I don't even remember the plot now.

I really hated the Twilight series. So poorly written. They were highly recommended by a friend who of course also loved the 50 shades books. I didn't even bother with those since she was raving so much about Twilight. We obviously don't have the same tastes.

I read the Notebook & also saw the movie, & did not like either one or cry.

[Mrsjumbo]

Although I loved the HP series, I disliked the Epilogue at the end. It just seemed so predictable- Ginny ends up with Harry, Ron with Hermoine, etc. These were high school crushes, not everyone ends up with the person they like at 18. There certainly was a larger wizard world beyond Hogwarts school.

[Jellybeans]

I hate Sex and the City.

[GreekGeek]

I read all the usual stuff assigned in high school--the Brontes, Catcher in the Rye, The Scarlet Letter, The Grapes of Wrath, A Farewell to Arms, The Old Man and the Sea, The Great Gatsby, Huckleberry Finn, A Separate Peace, Brave New World, 1984, et al. I liked all of them. The only two books I ever disliked were a couple of summer reading assignments: Captains Courageous and Kidnapped. One of my favorites was Advise and Consent by Allen Drury, an excellent political melodrama with a very well-done subplot about a closeted gay senator (in 1960!) I also never felt English teachers ruined the books by discussing them. Maybe I just lucked out with my teachers, but I'd love to know why other people felt teachers sucked the life out of the books. 

 

I can't get into Jane Austen. The only book of hers I finished was Northanger Abbey. I tried Pride and Prejudice and Emma, but never finished. I think it's prejudice against her obsessive fans rather than against the author herself. They strike me as conservative elderly ladies who would love to return to the days of exquisite manners when women had no options for a good life besides marrying well. That Austen was writing satirically about this type of world doesn't faze them. Apologies to Austen fans who are not like this.

 

I quit on Interview with the Vampire when the characters got to Romania.

[Pickles Aplenty]

 

I also never felt English teachers ruined the books by discussing them. Maybe I just lucked out with my teachers, but I'd love to know why other people felt teachers sucked the life out of the books.

I don't get this, either.  Maybe I was lucky, but I always had the opportunity to discuss the books assigned and form my own opinions about them.  School actually helped me appreciate books I might not have appreciated on my own.  I guess this is unpopular.

 

Also, I think A Song of Ice & Fire trumps Lord of the Rings in every conceivable way.  So there. ;)

Edited September 8, 2014 by Billina

[galax-arena]

Well, in high school it was because my teachers took a very “my way or the highway” mode to interpretation. Still remember one teacher flat out telling me that I was wrong about a book’s meaning. No “your argument/reasoning is flawed here,” just “you’re wrong, that’s not what the book is saying.” And I couldn’t even express distaste for a book without teachers getting offended. Once I said I didn’t like Fahrenheit 451, and my 9th grade teacher snottily replied, “Well, some people don’t like books that make them think.” Excuse you, asshole.

 

Anyway.

 

It was much better in college, where my professors didn’t seem to be so threatened by the fact that I had my own opinions on literature and wasn’t just going to regurgitate what they said. And I credit one professor with getting me past my bias against science fiction.

[Etta Place]

I don't feel I was particularly lucky with my teachers, but overall being taught a book added to it. (Nothing could help The Scarlet Letter.) The biggest case of this for me was with Heart of Darkness. I read it over the summer and tossed it aside, thinking, "ohhhh-kayyyy." When it was taught to us in class I could finally understand what I'd been reading.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Oh I totally lucked out/was blessed with GREAT English teachers. Especially for trying to get through The Grapes of Wrath. She was the one who rented the movie with Henry Fonda, to somehow, make it easier or something. I don't recall it working. It was torture to get through.

 

But all my teachers always allowed for different takes/opinions/analysis. I'm glad I was so fortunate.

[Mrsjumbo]

My English teacher as a freshman in high school helped stoke my love of Dickens. She loved Dickens so much she named her cats Sidney Carton & Charles Darnay. Funny what you still remember 30+ years later.

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

I'm just now starting the Outlander series, and while overall I like it, it brings me to my biggest pet peeve/UO in literature--dammit all to hell authors, don't write dialog in an accent! It's so damn distracting trying to figure out what "Weel, de wee lassie ha' a verra large big wi' 'er, ye ken." means. It's Scotland, we get it, they have Scottish accents. There are so many ways to indicate someone's speech differences without typing out the accent phonetically.

[Athena]

I'm just now starting the Outlander series, and while overall I like it, it brings me to my biggest pet peeve/UO in literature--dammit all to hell authors, don't write dialog in an accent! It's so damn distracting trying to figure out what "Weel, de wee lassie ha' a verra large big wi' 'er, ye ken." means. It's Scotland, we get it, they have Scottish accents. There are so many ways to indicate someone's speech differences without typing out the accent phonetically.

 

The Outlander books is nothing when compared to Trainspotting. I still don't remember how I got through that. 

[Rick Kitchen]

I can't remember the series, but it's set in the 16th century (I think) and so many people rave about it, but half of it's in French dialogue.  With no translation.  Why bother?

[GHScorpiosRule]

Here's something I've noticed when re-reading Nalini Singh's Psy-Changeling series.  She's created such a wonderful world of layered and different characters, with so many different racial backgrounds (though the last few have given me a headache because it's getting complicated and then there's the been there, done that with the "broken" heroine, but good enough, that I still read her).

 

In one of the books, where the hero's heritage is a mixture of Russian/East Indian...she explains what the Indian endearments/phrases are. Maybe because Hindi isn't a language that the general mass is familiar with, I don't know. But I know I've read my share of books, where characters will go off and swear in Gaelic, Russian, French, Spanish, or say love words/endearments, and the author doesn't have a line that says "so and so is the Gaelic/Russian/French/Spanish word for x, y, z.."  Yet Singh feels she had to put in "Nani was the Hindi word for maternal grandmother...beta was the Hindi word for 'beloved child'..."  That just...irked. And yes, I am of East Indian descent, so maybe that's why it irked me.  But then she had the hero say Mere jaan. My life.  See? explanation without having to type out and clarify/explain what the phrase means.

 

Or maybe it's just me. I've wanted to ask her why she did that...but the woman lives in New Zealand and I have no way of emailing her or asking her. durnit.

[DoughGirl]

 

I can't get into Jane Austen. The only book of hers I finished was Northanger Abbey. I tried Pride and Prejudice and Emma, but never finished. I think it's prejudice against her obsessive fans rather than against the author herself. They strike me as conservative elderly ladies who would love to return to the days of exquisite manners when women had no options for a good life besides marrying well. That Austen was writing satirically about this type of world doesn't faze them. Apologies to Austen fans who are not like this.

 

I am one of her fans not like this, but I have to admit that Jane Austin is the only author who's work I prefer on the screen rather than in the books.

[nodorothyparker]

The Outlander books is nothing when compared to Trainspotting. I still don't remember how I got through that.

 

I tried on two separate occasions to get through Trainspotting because I loved the movie and had friends who raved about Irvine Welsh.  Couldn't do it.

 

I'm willing to tolerate a bit of dialect and even a line or two of another language doesn't really throw me too much.  Because people talk how they talk.  But when it's so thick and incomprehensible that I have to read all the dialogue aloud to myself to try to make sense of what the hell they're saying, it's too much.  Huckleberry Finn is one of my favorite books but every time Jim has more than a line or two, I want to throw the book at something.  I've noticed a lot of authors seem to want to write black people in historical settings this way.

[galax-arena]

Heh, this conversation is reminding me of all the X-men fanfic I used to read (shut up) and how it’d drive me batty when people would write out Rogue’s accent. The killer was writing “ah” instead of “I.” NO, STOP IT.

[heebiejeebie]

I loathed Gone Girl.  I hate when authors reverse engineer a novel because they come up with some eight hour boner inducing idea (or at least in terms of feeling that the novel is nothing but a strained effort to make that ending "happen".  Even more, despite the author "cheating" imo (

characters being unreliable narrators and being outright dishonest in certain "thoughts" presented

) I still figured out a huge part of the twist rather early on.  I tend to do that because I have a weird logic dysfunction.  But a lot of the time a good book actually makes me more interested in the why and the how than the what. 

 

i just found this overwrought and trying way too hard to establish certain characters and plot elements that are only designed for the author to then scream "tricked you" every now and again. 

 

Flynn does have good prose. 

 

I am stunned at Affleck in the lead male role though.  Wow did that Oscar pay in spades.  First he gets to ruin the faltering but still possible to burgeon Superman franchise and now this? That or he can really blow the hell out of a lot of producer cock.

[FozzyBear]

I thought White Oleander was such a boring book. Just do terminally dull. Astrid goes to a foster home, everybody there is horrible, something bad happens. Repeat a thousand times. Plus the mom in the book is such a completely laughably trite moron that I could never buy how many people she was supposed to be able to manipulate with all her little bumper sticker philosophies. The movie was actually an improvement because they put a charismatic actress in the Ingrid role and cut about 1/3 of Astrid's never ending tour of bad foster homes. I finished the damn thing, but that last 1/3 was a death march.