Famous books/series that you hate?

These books follow a pattern. It's like watching Pixar movies: they have a tested and proven structure that they just fill in the blanks with new clothing.
It works. That's undeniable. The problem is that the formula gets obvious when you read/watch too many in a short period of time.
perhaps, perhaps... lolo ... the fact is i like the first 2. the other 3 i thought were more forced
 
Series? Dune, I loved book 1 and every book after than got progressively worse. Back in the day when I bought books at books stores which only had limited S.F. I read for lack of anything else but eventually gave up.

I agree about Weber's "Out of the Dark" as a single. --- Actually, the book was decent, but climax was infuriating.
 
I can't say I hate the books, but The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant. I read the first three because I was ill and I'd read everything else. When I was bought the next trilogy I couldn't raise the enthusiasm to even start. I can't see why anyone likes them.
I thought the first trilogy was pretty decent, the second trilogy not so much. I bought and read the four final books and each was worse than the previous but I kept going because I wanted to find out how it ended. I thought the conclusion was utterly pathetic (and yet was always entirely obvious, but I convinced myself it couldn’t be so). I gave all the books away because I know I will never read them again.
 
Series? Dune, I loved book 1 and every book after than got progressively worse. Back in the day when I bought books at books stores which only had limited S.F. I read for lack of anything else but eventually gave up.

I agree about Weber's "Out of the Dark" as a single. --- Actually, the book was decent, but climax was infuriating.
I agree with you on Dune, the first one I read again and again but I have only read 2 and 3 once.
 
Wheel of Time. Interminable and unbearable

Twilight. Poorly conceived derivative drivel. Even more poorly written.

American Gods. I just don't get the appeal (I like his other stuff)
 
I love this thread! I have to agree with @tobl and say I don't hate any books, but there are a few popular series that I will say weren't for me.

Philip Paulman - His Dark Materials I really had to struggle to get through these books. It was such a disappointment too because my dad recommended them to me, and he and I usually have similar interests in books. After getting partway through the second one, I was completely appalled at how he could like them, but I figured since he did they had to get better. Unfortunately, they didn't and it took me over 2 years to finish the third book because it just dragged on boringly forever!

Stephanie Meyers - Twilight At the ripe young age of fifteen, I was reading Anne Rice and loving it. I was also watching a lot of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Some random woman in a library recommended the Twilight Saga to me when she overheard me telling my mom I was looking for a new vampire series. Again, this was a recommendation that turned into an astronomical disappointment. The writing style wasn't for me, the mopy romance did nothing for me, and I think of myself as an old fashioned gal who likes my creature of the night vampires to be creatures of the night!

J. K. Rowling - Harry Potter When these books came out, I was all over them. I can't tell you how many times I have read the series from start to finish. Unfortunately, my love for Harry Potter began to dwindle. I was never as impressed with book 7 as a lot of my peers, and even at the young-ish age I read it when it was first released, I felt like J. K. Rowling had just burnt out on writing the series. Reading a book with that nagging thought sort of dampened my love of the whole series. I don't think the ending did the first six books justice at all. There was a huge build-up, and then the ending just flopped.

Charlaine Harris - Southern Vampire Mysteries This was a series I never actually finished. It is incredibly rare for me to start a series and not finish it, as illustrated by my 2 year struggle with The Amber Spyglass from above. I got to book 5 or 6 of this series and just lost all interest. They became incredibly stale and redundant for me, and once again I had the feeling that the author had burnt out on the series. Reading a book that feels like an author doesn't want to write is like getting a root canal from a dentist who would rather be at the beach.
 
I'm not really sure if there are any books or series that I would say that I hated. Scratch that. I read L. Ron Hubbard's 10 book Mission Earth series in the late 80's and found it disappointingly puerile. To be fair, I did make it nearly to the end, (i hate giving up on a book), but the experience put me off of L. Ron Hubbard for life. I didn't finish Battlefield Earth, either.
 
I'm not really sure if there are any books or series that I would say that I hated. Scratch that. I read L. Ron Hubbard's 10 book Mission Earth series in the late 80's and found it disappointingly puerile. To be fair, I did make it nearly to the end, (i hate giving up on a book), but the experience put me off of L. Ron Hubbard for life. I didn't finish Battlefield Earth, either.
iliked battlefield... as for the orhers please...
 
Philip Paulman - His Dark Materials I really had to struggle to get through these books. It was such a disappointment too because my dad recommended them to me, and he and I usually have similar interests in books. After getting partway through the second one, I was completely appalled at how he could like them, but I figured since he did they had to get better. Unfortunately, they didn't and it took me over 2 years to finish the third book because it just dragged on boringly forever!

Shame about this. The first book, in particular - Northern Lights in the UK, The Golden Compass in the US, and possibly something else elsewhere - is one of my top 5 books. I just love the way it's written and the world it creates, one of philosophical instruments and aeronauts and no cars but fine wine. Books two and three in HDM I could somewhat take or leave as they seemed to lose the mystery as they dug ever deeper thematically into it. The Book Of Dust (La Belle Sauvage, The Secret Commonwealth) is something of a return to form imo.
 
I rarely hate a book, but I do find that a lot of very acclaimed books leave me wondering why they were supposed to be so good. I felt that about The Golden Compass, which seemed to be a pleasant adventure story with a few interesting ideas, but not much more. I do find that I'll occasionally discover that a book just isn't for me: I found that about Shards Of Honour by Lois McMaster Bujold, which turned into a romance (rather than a book with romance in it), at which point my interest waned. Likewise the first Harry Potter novel - I just felt that I'd seen it before and it wasn't for me (and I wasn't the intended audience).

I agree that the Dune sequels felt much weaker than the first book: many of the things that made the Dune setting so interesting were destroyed in Dune (I'd say the same thing about Titus Alone, but Mervyn Peake was very ill when he wrote it). Starship Troopers struck me as hugely overrated: it struck me as really dull and not very well written.
 
I rarely hate a book, but I do find that a lot of very acclaimed books leave me wondering why they were supposed to be so good. I felt that about The Golden Compass, which seemed to be a pleasant adventure story with a few interesting ideas, but not much more. I do find that I'll occasionally discover that a book just isn't for me: I found that about Shards Of Honour by Lois McMaster Bujold, which turned into a romance (rather than a book with romance in it), at which point my interest waned. Likewise the first Harry Potter novel - I just felt that I'd seen it before and it wasn't for me (and I wasn't the intended audience).

I agree that the Dune sequels felt much weaker than the first book: many of the things that made the Dune setting so interesting were destroyed in Dune (I'd say the same thing about Titus Alone, but Mervyn Peake was very ill when he wrote it). Starship Troopers struck me as hugely overrated: it struck me as really dull and not very well written.
You seem to have a thing with books focused on ideas. I understand that, for I have a hard time reading hard sci-fi short-stories (I can handle hard sci-fi novels though). For instance, The Golden Compass is all about promoting atheism and demoting the Catholic Church, Starship Troopers is an anti-war book through and through, Dune is a political book about cold war and imperialism through and through... and so on and so forth. The authors weren't very worried about anything else but pass along their messages. That said, you need to keep this in mind while reviewing such books. Saying that it's dull, that it has bland characters, that's full of deus ex machinas won't even sting the authors or the fans.
 
You seem to have a thing with books focused on ideas. I understand that, for I have a hard time reading hard sci-fi short-stories (I can handle hard sci-fi novels though). For instance, The Golden Compass is all about promoting atheism and demoting the Catholic Church, Starship Troopers is an anti-war book through and through, Dune is a political book about cold war and imperialism through and through... and so on and so forth. The authors weren't very worried about anything else but pass along their messages. That said, you need to keep this in mind while reviewing such books. Saying that it's dull, that it has bland characters, that's full of deus ex machinas won't even sting the authors or the fans.

I'm the opposite. You can sell me the shonkiest plot idea but it it worldbuilds compellingly, has cool characters and a unique writing style, I'm in. In the case of the Golden Compass, the actual story of it leaves me meh. What excites me is the execution of it.
 
Well, just briefly, the reason I don't like Starship Troopers isn't the ideas so much as the poor presentation of them. For a book that sets itself up as about space soldiers fighting giant insects, very little actually happens outside boot camp, and much of that is the author lecturing the reader. 1984 is a book of ideas and presents them in a much better fashion (despite having a literal chunk of textbook in the middle).

I really liked Dune, but by the end of the novel, half of the characters are dead or banished (and replaced by almost-identical Fremen) and the interesting setting is in tatters. I don't really see Dune as a "novel of ideas" (certainly not in the polemical way 1984 is), but I could see how it might be. To me, it's a drama set in a very well-realised setting with strong, grotesque characters. It's not quite accurate, but in a way I see it as "Space Gormenghast".

To answer your point, I would say that whether or not SF is based on clever new ideas or hard science, etc, it still must meet the criteria for being a good novel: story, characters, plot and so on. The presence of one doesn't excuse the absence of the other.
 
To answer your point, I would say that whether or not SF is based on clever new ideas or hard science, etc, it still must meet the criteria for being a good novel: story, characters, plot and so on. The presence of one doesn't excuse the absence of the other.

I agree, but would note there's a wide range of subjective in what constitutes a good novel, good story, good characters, good plot, good etc.

Randy M.
(stating the obvious since ... well, forever)
 
I rarely hate a book, but I do find that a lot of very acclaimed books leave me wondering why they were supposed to be so good. I felt that about The Golden Compass, which seemed to be a pleasant adventure story with a few interesting ideas, but not much more

I'm with you on that first point. Never having read Pullman specifically I couldn't say one way or the other, but it seems to me that many books receiving that acclaim are merely capturing the zeitgeist of the time. It's right place, right time type deal.

Take Harry Potter. I enjoyed reading them as a kid when they came out but I feel as though if I was just a few years older I would have recognised the shoddiness of them. As it was, the first book got me back into reading - along with millions of other children - so I'll class it as a good thing, despite it not being well written and having a plot that made virtually no sense.
 
I found reading The Hunger Games intensely unpleasant, really didn't like it and only got a chapter or so in. Not my kind of thing. I read and enjoy plenty of YA, so that's not the problem.

While I did finish reading both of the (currently complete) Rothfuss novels in the Kingkiller series, I never really enjoyed them and can't understand why people seem to like them so much.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top