Unpopular Opinions

[psychoticstate]

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

 

 

I can buy Affleck in the role.  I thought he did a great job in The Town and was strong in Argo.  I can see him being Nick and playing someone the audience is unsure as to whether to believe he may have harmed his wife or not.

[Pickles Aplenty]

I think Affleck is perfect for Nick.  Doesn't Nick say at one point that he has the kind of handsome face you just want to punch?  Yeah, that's Affleck.

[Blergh]

Moby Dick- The classic monstrosity that was foisted on me in high school which made me root for the whale because I knew with the whale's KO, it had to end    ! I'm convinced that those 1850's readers and reviewers who HATED Mellville were absolutely RIGHT and that this only became a 'classic' after some Lit profs in Massachussetts in the 1920's were convinced that the current [1920's Jazz Age] students had it too soft compared to their WWI brethren so they unearthed it from its totally deserved obscurity to  punish  the students and too many teachers have wasted too much time on this doorstopper to not want new generations of students to be punished like they were.

  Oh, and it wouldn't surprise if Mellville's MO for  writing this book came from Mrs. Mellville getting annoyed with him hanging around the house and telling him 'Herman, go to the study and write down that drivel but get out of my face!'

[heebiejeebie]

Well in part I think Affleck does not have a pretty face at all.  It can be handsome.  It also can hide behind a jaw pretending to be the haunch of a wild ass.  Samson could go postal on some Philistines with that thing.

 

I think Affleck has done well in other roles.  But I don't translate that into doing well in all roles.  Particularly this one.  Nick is glib and a guy who on the immediate surface you are supposed to dislike since he embodies a perceived handed to success in part due being so dang purdy despite his initial misfortune that prompts the story. 

 

Chris Pine is Nick in my view.

Edited September 19, 2014 by heebiejeebie

[Athena]

Just an FYI: we have a Gone Girl (2014) topic in Movies. 

[truthaboutluv]

So after struggling to initially get into The Magicians, I stuck with it, especially after reading others positive comments in the Recommendation thread and made it through. And I can now conclude that I hated it. The book had its decent points I guess but honestly, my biggest issues with it were two-fold. One, I felt like for almost 200 pages nothing happened. I just got a whole bunch of exposition and telling of facts and using scientific terms to show this book's magic was nothing like those other silly books about magic and it was just incredibly tedious. That's why I struggled to get through it in the first place. I felt like I was just going through page after page after page of nothing, other than the main's character's whinging of course.

 

But the main reason I ultimately hated this book is that I HATED the main character and frankly hated or simply was disinterested in pretty much all the other characters. The one 

character I actually sort of liked because she was pretty much the only seemingly decent and cool person who didn't spend all the book wallowing in her self-pity like those other tools, died.

And this is for me personally, a major issue for what is essentially a book series. I ended The Magicians having zero interest in reading the second book because I don't care about any of those assholes and don't care at all what happens to them and their story. 

 

For a book series to work for me, I have to care about the characters and/or at least care about their story. That's the same reason I never finished Twilight. I got half-way through the first book and hated both Bella and Edward so I figured what the hell was the point. And on the flipside it's why I finished the Harry Potter series, whatever issues the books had aside, because I genuinely cared about and was interested in seeing Harry and company's journey to the end. It's why I stuck with The Hunger Games series - I cared about Katniss even while she pissed off sometimes and I loved Peeta. 

 

And to be clear, it's not that I am against unlikable main characters. One of my all time favorite novels is Wuthering Heights, a book I often sum up as the love story of two selfish, self-absorbed, toxic assholes. But the thing is even while Catherine and Heathcliff were horrible people, I found their story fascinating and was interested in seeing their full self-destruction to its end. The problem here for me with The Magicians is that not only do I not like Quentin or any of his friends but I don't give a shit about their story. Grossman didn't do enough in my opinion to build up the magical world so unlike Harry Potter for example where the wizarding world was almost like a character in its own right, I don't have that to interest me either.

 

eta: Forgot to add that if I were ever so inclined to change my mind about reading the sequel and think maybe I was too harsh about the characters and maybe the point of the sequel is that things change, reading this in the book synopsis of the second book at Amazon, convinced me to steer clear. 

 

Quentin Coldwater should be happy. He escaped a miserable Brooklyn childhood, matriculated at a secret college for magic, and graduated to discover that Fillory—a fictional utopia—was actually real. But even as a Fillorian king, Quentin finds little peace. His old restlessness returns, and he longs for the thrills a heroic quest can bring.

 

 

Because of course. Of course the little shit is not happy and finds more reasons to whinge and complain and be unhappy and be miserable, just like he did for all of the first book. Which once again further pisses me off that 

Alice dies. The only person to call out Quentin on his bullshit and tell him that he'd never be satisfied and happy because no matter how much he gets what he wants, he'll find someway to sabotage it and fuck it up just to have an excuse to be miserable.

Edited September 20, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[Queena]

I loved Gone Girl! Can't wait to see the movie.

I agree with everyone about 50 Shades. It bored me to tears. After the 5th inner goddess dialogue, I had to close the book. Never to be opened again.

Love Huckleberry Finn...loved! I love Twain!

No to Harry Potter, and all of the rest of the YA lit.

I love Cynthia Voight. Homecoming was such a great book. I'm going to purchase the rest of the series for my Kindle.

I also wasn't very fond of The Goldenfinch. It seemed to go on, and on.

My unpopular opinion? I'm a 39 year old Black woman who loves all things Laura Ingalls. I am way too excited for Pioneer Girl.

[galax-arena]

I don't understand all the praise for The Wimpy Kid series. I realize that I'm way past the target demographic for the books, but I still enjoy middle grade as a genre, perhaps more than YA to a certain degree because there's less melodramatic emphasis on overheated romance or bad boy woobie jerkasses with hearts of gold. 

 

Greg drives me bonkers as a character. Not because he's an unlikeable jerk because the book at least seems to be aware of that, but because he comes across as a much younger character than he's supposed to be. In one book, he talks earnestly about believing in Santa Claus. Dude's in the eighth grade at that point. What eighth grade boy still believes in Santa? I think we're supposed to realize that Greg is on the immature side (despite what Greg himself thinks), but believing in Santa as a 13-year-old is on another level. 

 

And that's just the most recent example that I can think of. All throughout the series, I was thinking, "This kid does not sound like a 12/13-year-old..." but then I read the part about Santa and put my book (er, Kindle) down. Guess that was my breaking point, lmao. 

 

I get why its target demo would like the book because when you're 8 you might not realize how weird it is for Greg to believe in and do a lot of the things he does. But adults keep praising the book and acting like it's this great glimpse into a middle school kid's head, and.... nah.

[Anna Yolei]

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

I've read many books in my life, and Cathy from that is one of my least favourite characters, followed closely by Catherine from East of Eden. But at least the latter was in an infinitely better book.

Funny thing is, in the sevond or third Twilight book, Bella makes a direct nod to Wurthering Heights and compares herself and Edward to the main pairing.

Never read WH before and after many Twilight fans pointing out the similarity, I probably never will.

Edited September 22, 2014 by Anna Yolei

[Anna Yolei]

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.

My UO is, apart from the horrific combination of names Harry gave Albus Severus, I really don't care about the epilogue pairings. In light of all the crazy shit the three of them had been through, it makes some slight sense for Hermione to end up with either Ron or Harry. It's easy enough to skip upon a re-read of the series, unlike the crapola that was book 6.

[galax-arena]

unlike the crapola that was book 6.

What, Harry's chest monster didn't get your motor running? 

Edited September 22, 2014 by galax-arena

[Brn2bwild]

 

Funny thing is, in the sevond or third Twilight book, Bella makes a direct nod to Wurthering Heights and compares herself and Edward to the main pairing.

 

Wow, did she say that like it was a good thing because... it really wasn't!

[truthaboutluv]

Wow, did she say that like it was a good thing because... it really wasn't!

 

Yeah I remembered hearing about this and it just further confirmed to me I made the right decision not finishing the series because Meyers is an idiot. If I got the impression she made the comparison because on some level she realized that Bella and Edward were kind of fucked up and unhealthy that would be fine but nope, I think she said it because she sees them as "so romantic as Heathcliff and Catherine's love story" and I'm sorry, I can't respect someone who calls themselves an author reading Wuthering Heights and thinking it was some super romantic love story. No, it was the unhealthy and toxic love story of two kind of shitty people.

 

What, Harry's chest monster didn't get your motor running?

 

 

Ugh that mess. Incidentally, I think Harry/Ginny is one of the most divisive fictional relationships and in my opinion, that's a testament to the shitty job JK did writing them. It's telling that just last year, what more than 5 years since the series ended, Entertainment Weekly wrote a piece arguing why the relationship made sense and why Ginny was supposedly this great character. And in my opinion, when an author has to defend something that much...you fucked up. 

[Shannon L.]

This is my first time venturing into the book section and I wanted to comment on this:

 

 

Not sure if this would be unpopular or not but I was a fan of Danielle Steel's back in her heyday (80s) - - until I read Lightening.  What a piece of shit!

I loved Danielle Steele back in the day, even some of her more ridiculous ones like Mirror Image, but this one pissed me off, too!  I stopped reading her after a while because it was the same old thing over and over.  I know a lot of popular fiction authors do that, but for some reason hers bugged me more than anything else:

 

Woman's husband is an ass and has affair(s), changes his ways, she takes him back.

Woman has an abortion and it either physically or emotionally destroys her.

Man falls in love with woman pregnant by another man.

Man and woman fall in love at first sight!

Natural childbirth is awful, but the very minute it's over, the mother says "It wasn't bad. I'd do it over again."  Oh, and mother wants epidural, but it's always too late.

 

Am I missing any?

 

Bastet, she has written for homosexual couples before.  That surprised me given how conservative she is on certain issues. 

[psychoticstate]

ShannonL, don't forget that every Danielle Steel heroine must be incredibly beautiful - - but she doesn't know it.  And she's still a doormat for her husband/boyfriend/SO at the start of the book.

 

I always used to say that DS basically had 3 plots that she recycled over and over, changing only the names, locations and/or era. 

[Shannon L.]

 

I always used to say that DS basically had 3 plots that she recycled over and over, changing only the names, locations and/or era.

And yet, and this is embarrassing to admit, since I hated history in high school, my knowledge of it wasn't great and it was her novels that had me learning a few historical facts and questioning them--learning more about them.  I had a friend that called her stuff "good junk", a step or two above the Harlequin romances.

 

Also, don't most popular fiction authors have the same basic plot that they recycle over and over?  I still enjoy the heck out of many of them, though.

[JaneDigby]

I cannot get into Gone Girl. I've tried three times and it feels like talking to the most boring guy at the office.

 

I love mystery novels (although I loathe serial killer novels) but the tendency to build "romance" into the story lines usually makes me want to commit a crime myself. 

 

Elizabeth George's fascination with crimes involving children has moved into creepy territory. 

[Joimiaroxeu]

Gone, Girl is a stinking piece of obvious shit and if I have to read that inane "cool girl" paragraph one more time, I might become a sociopath myself.  It's a stupid women who hate women book

Thank you. "Women who hate women" crystallizes my longstanding feelings about this book, feelings I had even before I finally got around to reading it. I think this book would have been received very differently if it had been written by a man. Why Gillian Flynn largely gets a pass on its misogyny is beyond me.

 

A chunk of my women's book group left over Gone Girl because they wanted our group to read it and I didn't. (I finally relented only because of the upcoming movie.) The whole female misogyny and women backbiting other women thing now makes total sense.

 

Gillian Flynn clearly knows how to write and has the ability to write well. I can only assume that she chose to do Gone Girl the way she did for primarily mercenary reasons. It's a book that was pretty much guaranteed to be made into movie.

[psychoticstate]

And yet, and this is embarrassing to admit, since I hated history in high school, my knowledge of it wasn't great and it was her novels that had me learning a few historical facts and questioning them--learning more about them.  I had a friend that called her stuff "good junk", a step or two above the Harlequin romances.

 

Also, don't most popular fiction authors have the same basic plot that they recycle over and over?  I still enjoy the heck out of many of them, though.

Oh, I understand.  I actually preferred DS' historical novels to her contemporary ones.  I would say my favorites back when I read her books were Family Album and Jewels.  I definitely had a thing for family saga type stories back in the day.  So yeah, you could certainly learn historical facts from DS' books and there were a step or two above the Harlequin romances that used to be sold in the rotating racks in the grocery stores.

 

I guess that most popular fiction authors have similar styles if not plots.  But it just seemed so much more obvious to me with DS.  Her early books seemed to have more variety but as she got more and more popular and as the miniseries started get cranked out, it felt like she called it in. 

 

I cannot get into Gone Girl. I've tried three times and it feels like talking to the most boring guy at the office.

 

I love mystery novels (although I loathe serial killer novels) but the tendency to build "romance" into the story lines usually makes me want to commit a crime myself. 

 

Elizabeth George's fascination with crimes involving children has moved into creepy territory. 

Ha ha!  I love a good mystery too but I have to agree there are times I want to read a mystery that doesn't have some type of romance inserted into the mix.

[Anna Yolei]

What, Harry's chest monster didn't get your motor running?

Hahaha, that thing. I honestly forgot about that snd was mostly thinking of Hermione abd Ron and Lavender Brown, and the catty behavior of the women towards poor Fleur for...reasons. Also, Tonks and Remus. I'm surprised Rowling didn't pair off the Giant Squid with the Whomping Willow....it would makes as much sense as every other pairing we got.

Since it was brought up, is it wrong to want to ship Harry's chest monster with Ana Steel's Inner Goddess? #crackfic

[Qoass]

Oy, I should stay out of this thread as a couple of my favorites keep getting bashed about the spine and pages but I just had to say that I really didn't like Jennifer Egan's A Visit From the Goon Squad one little bit.

[Athena]

Oy, I should stay out of this thread as a couple of my favorites keep getting bashed about the spine and pages but I just had to say that I really didn't like Jennifer Egan's A Visit From the Goon Squad one little bit.

 

With the exception of the slideshow chapter, I didn't like this book either. I found it so boring and the characters unrelateable. It just sorta ended. I was surprised it won a Pulitzer. I generally like or appreciate most of the fiction winners from that award, but not this one.

[Deanie87]

Elizabeth George's fascination with crimes involving children has moved into creepy territory.

What is with her lately? She has been one of my favorite mystery writers but the last 2-3 books of hers have gotten waaay too dark and depressing. And they have started to read more like socialogical theses more than novels. The last one was a bit better but still really depressing.

[psychoticstate]

I haven't cared for a single Jodi Picoult book I've read.  There, I said it.

 

Ever since the whole amazon/ratings issue broke about Emily Giffin, I can't stand that woman.  I refuse to read any of her books, I don't care how good they may be.

[truthaboutluv]

Ever since the whole amazon/ratings issue broke about Emily Giffin, I can't stand that woman.  I refuse to read any of her books, I don't care how good they may be.

 

 

Care to elaborate? I haven't about this and I am particularly interested as I just gave her latest book a 1 star on Amazon because it was so awful. 

[Athena]

Care to elaborate? I haven't about this and I am particularly interested as I just gave her latest book a 1 star on Amazon because it was so awful. 

 

I've read all of her books and the last one was the worse of them all.

 

These two posts talk about the Amazon scandal. I had no idea this was a thing until now and it's turned me off of her too. 

[psychoticstate]

Care to elaborate? I haven't about this and I am particularly interested as I just gave her latest book a 1 star on Amazon because it was so awful. 

 

Uh oh, you'd better watch out! 

 

This happened about 2 years ago.  She was bemoaning her oh-so-bad luck at being #2 on the bestseller list and rallying her fan base (including her assistant and her husband) to go to war against those Amazon reviewers who gave her book a low rating.   Bad enough, right?  One reviewer was harassed, called names, told she should just kill herself and even received death threats (her identity was discovered.)   Ms. Giffin's response to this bad behavior?   "If the reviewer is getting death threats, she should remove her review." 

 

All this from a one star review and started because Ms. Giffin's husband called the reviewer "psycho" and said a proclaimed avid reader would not just have one review on Amazon, blah, blah, blah.  Then Ms. Giffin shared that on her Facebook page and Twitter and the diehard fans went nuts.  She did nothing to discourage them, as is clearly evident by her reply above.

 

For that reason, I will never support her.  I will never buy her books, or even check them out of the library, and they will never be featured on my book review site.

 

ETA:  Athena beat me to it!  :)

Edited October 3, 2014 by psychoticstate

[truthaboutluv]

Oh wow, thanks for the information. I knew none of this because honestly, I only just started writing reviews on Amazon. I always just read them. Wow, that is some level of narcissism right there. So I guess in Ms. Giffin's world her writing is immune to criticism? That is very interesting since while I have enjoyed some of her books, I found issues with many of them, even one of her most successful Something Borrowed where my sister and I both agreed that Rachel, the supposed heroine of the book was one of the whiniest people ever and no amount of trashing the best friend made me root for her. As for her latest book, I guess it's so shitty that she can't mobilize enough of her nutjob fans to harass people because it has  A LOT of 1 star reviews.  And now I'm thinking those 5 star reviews are even more suspect considering I was already baffled by them before reading this.  

[psychoticstate]

truthaboutluv, here is the original blog post about the Giffin disaster.  It's really unbelievable.   She is from my hometown but if I ever see her, I may go for the combo spit-in-the-eye/throat-punch manuever.   I could go on all day about how blessed she is to be a successful published author (and with movies made from her books) and yet she acts like a completely demented shit over some 1 star reviews.  Honestly, if I see a book with nothing but 5 stars reviews I'm suspicious.  I think it's normal to have some low reviews.  Books are subjective, after all.  I can't think of one that EVERYONE universally loved. 

[juneday]

I haven't liked any Jodi Picoult books I read, either. I read halfway through Nineteen Minutes and it was probably the worst book I've ever read. I can handle swearing, but the "f bomb" was dropped far too frequently. Along with it just being bad writing.

Unpopular opinion (maybe?): I had to read Animal Farm by: George Orwell for school and did not like it.

[Proclone]

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.)

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.

I LOVED The Witching Hour when I first read it. I loved the world of the Mayfair witches and I loved the characters of Rowan and Michael (and I may have been a little in love with Michael, I was in my early teens when I first read it after all), then I read Lasher and I was very disappointed to put it mildly. It took a big crap on the characters I loved in the first book and made Michael basically a pedophile (I realize that he was pretty much possessed when he slept with Mona but it's still gross, she's only thirteen if I remember correctly). Then Taltos came along and decided to focus on Mona who I despised. I couldn't read any of her other books involving the Mayfair witches after that. It's really sad because I think it could have been a very interesting series if it hadn't gone off the rails.

The Vampire Lestat is also my favorite book in the Vampire Chronicles. My unpopular opinion is that I actually also really liked Tale of the Body Thief. But to be honest I really haven't read any of her books after Memnoch.

[galax-arena]

I feel like y'all are interrogating Emily Giffin's behavior from the wrong perspective! 

[FozzyBear]

I only ever read Something Borrowed. Emily Giffin performs magic as an author. Dark, evil, stupid, unintentional magic. No matter what I'm supposed to feel about a character, I feel the exact opposite. I thought Rachel and Dex were horrible, narssacistic sociopaths. Ethan was creepy and way over invested in seeing the downfall of someone who was kind of mean to him(kind of, but not really) in High School. And Darcy was the least annoying of the bunch and could do way better than a bunch a passive aggressive neurotics who have pretended to be her friend or boyfriend for years just so they could exact some bizarre revenge in the Hamptons. Really it's impressive how much I did not read the story she wrote. And how much I never wanted to be anywhere near one of her books again.

Edited October 15, 2014 by FozzyBear

[truthaboutluv]

Fozzybear you and I are so on the same page. Honestly, this is why I found Something Blue FAR more enjoyable than Something Borrowed because I felt like Darcy was actually an interesting and compelling character and I loved the progression of her and Ethan's relationship, even if I too had to forgive his bullshit Rachel propping from Something Borrowed. But honestly I felt as a pairing they had way more chemistry than Rachel, the whiny, simpering pathetic dolt and Dex the personality less Ken doll. 

 

Honestly, I picked up Something Borrowed because I found the premise fascinating. I was genuinely interested in seeing how this author would make me root for the woman sleeping with her best friend's fiance. And frankly, by the book's end, I didn't think she accomplished her goal at all and I always felt like even she knew it which is why she pulled that out of her ass ending with Darcy and Dex's best friend. I felt that was some contrived shit to make Dex and Rachel's actions seem suddenly far less horrible.

 

I think what bothered me most about these people was for all their whiny bullshit about what an awful person Darcy was, they CHOSE to be in her life for all those years. Darcy didn't hold a gun to Rachel's head to keep being her friend and she didn't hold a gun to Dex's head to stay with her for SEVEN damn years. That's what made me call bullshit on that whole story. We were supposed to buy that Darcy was this god awful, selfish, horrible person and yet Dex who Rachel held up as some super amazing perfection of man chose to stay with Darcy for that long. Seven years is no little amount of time to be with someone.

 

And then the book never showed this supposed great love that existed between Rachel and Dex. I couldn't tell what they supposedly loved so madly about each other. Again, I respect the idea Emily Giffin had, it was certainly unconventional but maybe it was too ambitious for her. And then she made the mistake of having Rachel and Dex show up again in Heart of the Matter which was about Dex's sister and my goodness, she made them, especially Rachel, even more pathetic than I remembered. 

 

And speaking of not reading the story she wrote, her latest practically epitomizes that on every level which is why I gave it a 1 star on Amazon (well and I couldn't give it 0 stars). I read the book and all I saw was a weak, pitiful, no ambition, personality less idiot with a Daddy complex who develops a creepy obsession with a man who represents everything she's obsessed with and convinces herself it's love. But sadly I don't think that's the story Giffin thinks she told. 

Edited October 15, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[FozzyBear]

Fozzybear you and I are so on the same page. Honestly, this is why I found Something Blue FAR more enjoyable than Something Borrowed because I felt like Darcy was actually an interesting and compelling character and I loved the progression of her and Ethan's relationship, even if I too had to forgive his bullshit Rachel propping from Something Borrowed. But honestly I felt as a pairing they had way more chemistry than Rachel, the whiny, simpering pathetic dolt and Dex the personality less Ken doll.

Honestly, I picked up Something Borrowed because I found the premise fascinating. I was genuinely interested in seeing how this author would make me root for the woman sleeping with her best friend's fiance. And frankly, by the book's end, I didn't think she accomplished her goal at all and I always felt like even she knew it which is why she pulled that out of her ass ending with Darcy and Dex's best friend. I felt that was some contrived shit to make Dex and Rachel's actions seem suddenly far less horrible.

I think what bothered me most about these people was for all their whiny bullshit about what an awful person Darcy was, they CHOSE to be in her life for all those years. Darcy didn't hold a gun to Rachel's head to keep being her friend and she didn't hold a gun to Dex's head to stay with her for SEVEN damn years. That's what made me call bullshit on that whole story. We were supposed to buy that Darcy was this god awful, selfish, horrible person and yet Dex who Rachel held up as some super amazing perfection of man chose to stay with Darcy for that long. Seven years is no little amount of time to be with someone.

And then the book never showed this supposed great love that existed between Rachel and Dex. I couldn't tell what they supposedly loved so madly about each other. Again, I respect the idea Emily Giffin had, it was certainly unconventional but maybe it was too ambitious for her. And then she made the mistake of having Rachel and Dex show up again in Heart of the Matter which was about Dex's sister and my goodness, she made them, especially Rachel, even more pathetic than I remembered.

And speaking of not reading the story she wrote, her latest practically epitomizes that on every level which is why I gave it a 1 star on Amazon (well and I couldn't give it 0 stars). I read the book and all I saw was a weak, pitiful, no ambition, personality less idiot with a Daddy complex who develops a creepy obsession with a man who represents everything she's obsessed with and convinces herself it's love. But sadly I don't think that's the story Giffin thinks she told.

Honestly, Rachel was one of the most unsympathetic characters ever in literature. She's 30! 30 years old and she's still best friends with someone she hates. Just let Darcy fade away to Facebook friend status you immature dolt. The last straw for me was when she went back to Indiana for a baby shower and stays with her perfectly nice parents who pick her up from the airport and ask her about her life and order her favorite pizza and Rachel complains that they put up new wallpaper instead of painting like Rachel would have. I was all like "self-absorbed bitch says what?" I mean, your favorite pizza and you're still complaining? Anybody who can be unhappy when eating delicious free pizza is the problem in the room. Where's Darcy with the drinks? I need a stiff one to hear anymore Rachel bullshit.

[Pickles Aplenty]

This whole discussion has made me curious about these books.  It's been a while since a good hate-read, so I might give them a shot.

[psychoticstate]

This whole discussion has made me curious about these books.  It's been a while since a good hate-read, so I might give them a shot.

 

Please don't buy the books - - borrow them from the library.  Don't line EG's pockets any more than they have been.

[scarynikki12]

I agree that Something Blue is far superior, though even there I only got interested about half way through (I only read it in the first place because I was curious about what would happen to Darcy).  EG inadvertently wrote Darcy to be more three dimensional than Rachel and Dex, so giving her a POV just added to what was already there.  I thought Ethan was much better than in Something Borrowed and liked their dynamic.  In the first book, it really seemed like Ethan was hung up on Rachel, and maybe he was, but the second book did a much better job of making him a loyal friend who didn't want to lose either woman as a friend rather than Rachel's lap dog who would always side with her no matter how horribly she acted.  I also got a kick out of Darcy's later amazement that she ever cared about Dex, much less had a serious relationship with him for almost a decade. 

 

Even with these improvements, I still hated how Darcy was viewed as the one who wronged Rachel rather than the other way around.  Darcy's dumb lie about getting into Notre Dame, which Rachel dwelled on for over a decade and never let go, was brought up yet again as evidence of how she mistreated Rachel.  Darcy calls Rachel to tell her about giving birth and Dex is in the background giving her (Rachel) a pep talk about not letting Darcy make her feel bad, because they just assumed that Ethan had told Darcy when their wedding date was.  I like that Ethan didn't tell Darcy, because that wasn't his place and because it showed how focused he was on her health and comfort.  I did hate that Rachel and Dex were invited to the wedding, because they both seemed to really hate Darcy in the first book, to the point that both were more upset about being cheaters than about hurting her, and both seemed relieved and happy when their respective relationships with her ended, yet they attended her wedding and seemed happy for her.  Douchebags.

 

I also hated that Darcy cheated too, to absolve Rachel and Dex, and it doesn't make me sympathize with them.  It makes me think Darcy was an ass as well, for cheating on her fiancé but that doesn't mean Rachel and Dex weren't massively awful for their actions.

 

The only EG book that I read that I felt was reasonably true to real life, in story and how the characters behaved, was that one where the protagonist didn't want kids and her husband did.  She didn't want kids, in large part because of her horrible mother and how she was treated growing up, but she was shown to adore her little niece and love spending time with her.  Her husband, conversely, didn't understand the distinction between liking kids and wanting them (all to true of real life) and it caused real friction in their relationship.  There were places where I'd make improvements but, overall, I found it to be really interesting and could make for a decent miniseries with a screenwriter who can do strong character studies. 

[ouinason]

My UO is that I LIKED the Epilogue of Harry Potter, unlike the vast majority of the adult world. I went into the series looking at the Wizarding World as a Victorian society, so them meeting young and sticking with that person and getting married didn't phase me. In fact, the fact that their oldest kid is 13 surprised the crap out of me, since I sort of expected that they would get married and start having kids young. Harry and Ginny were about 22 and 21 when James is conceived, and Ron and Hermione waited another 2 years after that for their first kid. It all tracks for me, unlike everyone else I know.

[Pickles Aplenty]

I don't feel strongly about the HP epilogue, one way or another.  People warned me about it and told me I would hate it, but it doesn't bother me.

[truthaboutluv]

I hated the epilogue because I hated all the couples in the Harry Potter books, don't know if that's an unpopular opinion. And I mean ALL - though I have a special hatred reserved for Harry/Ginny because I hated Ginny's character. I thought that pairing was a ridiculous joke and JK's excuses years later for people who called out how poorly developed it was, are ridiculous in my opinion. Not to mention when they did get together, I found them both kind of obnoxious and insufferable which made me even more bitter because till that point Harry had always been my favorite character in the series. There was a little too much "most popular guy and most popular girl" feel to them, in Half Blood Prince especially, for my liking. I for one never found "personality Ginny" as clever and bad ass as everyone else went around calling her in the book. More like obnoxious and insufferable.

 

So I loathed the epilogue because it denied me the fantasy of thinking that they all stayed friends and moved on with other people that I could have had if it had just ended after the war. Not to mention I especially LOATHE that whole saccharine "one big happy Weasley family" bullshit like after all that Harry had meant to the family and shared, he had to end up with Ginny to be a real Weasley. Not to mention like somehow that was this major goal for both Harry and Hermione.  

 

Frankly one of my other issues with the series is that I was always far more interested in Hermione's parents and home life and hated how little JK showed of that. Harry was an orphan, fine, but we still got a lot of back-story on James and Lily's great love and then he lived with the Dursley's, so we knew a little about them. Hermione's parents were just there like random people referenced every once in awhile and her big accomplishment later ended up becoming a Weasley too.

 

Yes the family were nice people but I hated that corny" they're just the greatest, happiest, most awesome family ever" and Harry and Hermione just had to marry one of them because being a Weasley is absolutely necessary. I remember rolling my eyes so hard when JK had that interview saying she originally planned on killing Ron and that she would have put Hermione with Fred. Like why? Damn, aren't there other families and people in the wizarding world or hell why couldn't Hermione marry a Muggle.  I think that would have been awesome. 

Edited October 16, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[Athena]

I don't feel strongly about the HP epilogue, one way or another.  People warned me about it and told me I would hate it, but it doesn't bother me.

 

Yeah it didn't really bother me either because the ships were on the wall for awhile. I called Harry/Ginny from book one even though in the HP fandom, I enjoyed other pairings. I found the epilogue cheesey, but not egregious in terms of being out of character. I couldn't see Harry with anyone really. I thought it was realistic they would marry. The wizarding community is not only traditional (Victorian as someone mentioned above), but small. While people do marry muggles, it made more sense that Ron, Hermione, Harry, and Ginny would stick together. All of them went through traumatic experiences in the books and very few people would ever get that. They went through a war and battles together. They only managed to stay together because of their friendships and connections. Harry would cling particularly hard to the Weasleys. I don't love the romance aspect in the books, but I understood JKR's thought process with the characters. 

[kathyk24]

I liked the epilogue too. All Harry ever wanted was a family and in the end he got what he wanted. I agree that Herminonie's family was underdeveloped I would have liked to see Harry spend time with her family as well as Ron's

[proserpina65]

3. Games of Thrones is not the best book series ever.

 

The first three books are dynamite, and if the series had continued to be that excellent, you and I would be squaring off in a bear pit somewhere.  But while A Dance With Dragons has some wonderful chapters, it also has some real clunkers, and the less said about most of A Feast For Crows, the better.

[proserpina65]

psychoticstate, on 06 Aug 2014 - 1:20 PM, said:

 

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.

 

It's Disney.  I fully expect them to fuck it up the way they did The Black Cauldron and The Dark Is Rising.

falling into bed with hot hunky bekilted Frazer Hines -

 

Wait, what?  Maybe I should try reading Outlander! 

 

(Nah, not really, the plot descriptions I've read of that series start out ridiculous and get even less believable.  But falling into bed with Frazer Hines circa Doctor Who sounds like fun to me.)

[turbogirlnyc]

Oh lord, this is one book I just could NOT get into. I don't think any of us in my class, who had to read this thing as part of required reading, managed to get past the first two chapters. Even showing us the movie with a very Hawt looking Henry Fonda didn't help. I've only ever been able to read through and enjoy Of Mice and Men by Steinbeck.

 

 

 

I didn't read this tripe out of sheer stubbornness. I could only roll my eyes when I read about how many "women" and "wives" were making sure that their husbands and boyfriends, etc., would also read this to show them "this is how a woman wants sex" or whatever shit the media was peddling. I have a friend on FaceBook, who, bless her, would painstakingly type out several pages and we'd snark about it. The hideous dialogue, the eye rolling "Inner Goddess" crap, and the horrid, horridly written text.  I guess these women and wives had never heard of Robin Schone, Thea Devine, Susan Johnston (to name a few)--now that's how you write Erotica. But I guess it was a dirty little secret to actually venture into the Romance section, and romance wasn't "mainstream."  UGH.

 

And I will take this stance--I'll take Jane Austen over either Bronte sister. There, I said it. Now, where's my flak jacket?

 

 

I thought I was the only person on the planet who bought Susan Johnson books. I agree that she and the other 2 authors you mentioned know how to write erotica. Robin Schone is my least favorite of those three but still... So in short, thank you for this post. I didn't touch any of the 50 shades books and as it happens, I didn't miss a thing.

[ribboninthesky1]

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. 

 

Yep, it definitely felt reverse-engineered.  That, and I think we were really supposed to feel for Amy on some level.  I did not. 

 

I can't find the post now, but I so agree about the "Cool Girl" spiel, though for different reasons. 

I feel like that's supposed to make Amy more sympathetic, but ultimately, it read like a "broken clock is right at least twice a day" thing.  A lot of women seemed to relate to that, but all I read was "sociopath revealing her true self."  Look, people put their best foot forward when they date - men and women.  Women certainly have more of a disadvantage after hitting 30, but the Cool Girl persona is a different animal. Especially since, for Amy, it was a part of her sociopathy, not a reflection of generally stable, mentally healthy women who struggle in their dating lives.  

 

I didn't find the book misogynistic.  If anything, it felt like Nick was written to be as flawed as possible

but short of a murdering husband to justify Amy's feelings. Yeah, that's what divorces are for. Which is applicable to Nick as well, but at least he intended to ask for a divorce before she disappeared.

  I mean, I've read comments elsewhere equating Amy and Nick as similarly horrible people, and...no.  Nope. Nada. I refuse.  Clearly, I read a different book. I also think that the baby was the only reason he stayed, though the author tried her best to convince me otherwise. No, Gillian, I did not buy what you were selling.

[Pickles Aplenty]

 

I mean, I've read comments elsewhere equating Amy and Nick as similarly horrible people, and...no.  Nope. Nada. I refuse.  Clearly, I read a different book. I also think that the baby was the only reason he stayed, though the author tried her best to convince me otherwise. No, Gillian, I did not buy what you were selling.

This is exactly how I feel.  I hear people talk about being conflicted, like Nick and Amy were equal in their awfulness, but I don't think it was close, and I did not feel conflicted for one second.  I enjoyed the book, but I don't think it's as brilliant as people say it is.

[psychoticstate]

This is exactly how I feel.  I hear people talk about being conflicted, like Nick and Amy were equal in their awfulness, but I don't think it was close, and I did not feel conflicted for one second.  I enjoyed the book, but I don't think it's as brilliant as people say it is.

 

I am not conflicted either.

Amy was hundreds of times worse than Nick.  The worst thing Nick did, IMO,

was cheat.  There is no doubt in my mind that he was going to leave her

after the dust settled.  He set a trap for her to come back, not because he

was so into her and the game playing, but because he wanted to clear his name

and make sure he didn't go to prison, which is what she was hoping for.  I

felt sorry for him and absolutely hated her at the end.

[Pickles Aplenty]

I caved and started reading Something Borrowed by Emily Giffin.  I don't read a lot of chick lit, so this is a first for me.  Anyway, the character of Rachel doesn't make much sense to me.  She is a thirty year old lawyer living in Manhattan, yet she is completely and utterly passive when it comes to her dating life, and really seems to hate the woman who is supposed to be her best friend of some twenty-odd years.  You would think the type of woman who had the balls to climb the ladder and become a successful lawyer wouldn't be such a wuss when it came to her social life.  Also, she seems to be the only woman on earth who values men for their personalities, rather then their good looks; Darcy is constantly telling her to go out with hot guys, and so is every other female friend she has.  None of them can wrap their heads around why she would prefer a guy with a great personality who doesn't look perfect, Rachel is the only woman around who isn't shallow and re-living her sophomore year of high school.  What the hell?  Is this an attempt on Giffin's part to give Rachel some sort of depth?  Because it's contrived and lame and not realistic, at all.  Again, this character is a total mystery to me.

 

Don't even get me started on Dex.  Douchebag.  I know I'm supposed to root for this guy, but it took him all of two drinks to fuck Rachel behind his fiance's back, so you know he's the kind of sleaze who secretly had it churning in his brain for quite some time.  But no, he's the perfect man!  BARF.