I had to write about this horrendous teen mystery mini-series I've spent that last week or so slogging through, because it was just so mind-boggingly awful that it needs to be recorded for posterity.
"The Secret Diaries" by Janice Harrell would appear to be the teen version of Donna Tartt's "The Secret History". Do a little research on the Internet and check up on the similarities. The story involves dumb, over-emotional Joanna Rigsby, a teenager who decides that the only thing that would make life bearable is to date cool, calm Penn Parrish and be a part of his cool, calm clique. Said clique includes Casey MacNamara, a computer genius, and joined-at-the-hip couple, Tessa West and Stephen Garner. As it turns out, Joanna must be some sort of foxy knock-out, because Penn decides to start dating her. Joanna becomes part of his group, but senses that they're hiding something from her. What could be their secret?
The trilogy is broken down as:
Part 1: Temptation. As Joanna gets closer to Penn and his friends, she learns about Laurie Jenkins, another girl who used to be part of the group. She has gone missing. Due to the group's strange behaviour, Joanna suspects they know more about her disappearance than they're letting on. And she's right. Casey, the computer genius, changed one of Stephen's grades, and also helped one of Penn's speeding fines disappear. Laurie knew and was going to tell the truth. Stephen, with the group, confronted her - conveniently close to a clifftop, no less - and Laurie wound up falling off said cliff. The group then helped cover up Laurie's death. Ooh.
Part 2: Betrayal. Joanna gets drawn in deeper when she helps Penn destroy the typewriter used to write a fake note from Laurie. The group lives in fear of being found out by the police. This is made worse by Casey, who is slowly losing his grip, and shamelessly blackmailing them all. They all wish Casey would just die (they're nice kids, aren't they?) and then they'd all be safe. The group eventually go to confront him, and Stephen winds up shooting Casey dead. See a pattern here? Joanna and Penn realise Stephen is a murderer and they're not safe at all. (Did they see him push Laurie off a cliff or not? Why does Penn only now think that pushing a girl off a cliff might be a bit murderish?)
Part 3: Escape. Despite previously not being overly concerned about Penn and Joanna dobbing him in, Stephen decides now that they could be a threat and starts stalking them. He burns down Penn's precious cabin and shoots at Joanna's car. Penn and Joanna learn about Martha Landen, the teacher who gave Stephen a "C" in year nine (that Casey later changed); she has realised something is up after learning about Stephen's scholarship - there's no way he could have got that scholarship with a "C" in his past. (Really? A low mark from 3 years ago?). Penn and Joanna realise she will be Stephen's next victim, and plan to protect her and put an end to the drama once and for all. However, after his botched murder attempt on Mrs. Landen, Stephen dies in a motorcycle accident, leaving Penn and Joanna free to live forever in teen-romance peace.
Yes, that's right. After 3 books and nearly 900 pages, it's all resolved because STEPHEN DIES IN A FUCKING MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT. To be fair, it was only the final insult in a trilogy that had been insulting my intelligence every chapter since I began reading it. Let's go through what was wrong with it:
The characters. Joanna has a low intelligence (she never has anything interesting to say, or comes up with any good ideas), is over-emotional (her dialogue is characterised by cries, shrieks, yells and screams), and defines her entire personality and world through her relationship to a boy. Throughout all three books, he is the only thing that matters, and she constantly tells us that her life would be unlivable without him. She would appear to have zero external interests or influences outside of her relationship to Penn.
We only see the rest of the characters through Joanna's eyes, but I didn't like any of them. Laurie was supposedly one of their close friends, but you would never guess it by the way they act. They show zero remorse over her death or the fact that they covered it up. They're simply pissed off that they can't live their lives free of guilt and fear in case her body turns up. And when it does turn up, they whinge some more about how terrible it would be if they got caught, rather than show any sort of guilt over their actions. Harrell gets some more anti-feminism in later when Tessa threatens to kill Joanna if she dobs Stephen in. Obviously, having and keeping a boyfriend is more important than the fact said boyfriend is a murderer.
Plot inconsistencies. The group were all together when Stephen and Laurie argued and Laurie fell off the cliff. It was an accident, so they covered it up. Except in part 2, Penn decides that Stephen actually pushed Laurie. Either you see someone push another person off a cliff or you don't. There aren't any grey areas! The group do nothing about Casey's blackmail - but he was there and would go down with them if he told! Stephen's murder attempts make little sense. If Penn and Joanna died, he'd be under even more suspicion. There's more, but my brain is beginning to hurt.
I have done my civic duty as a human being to warn people away from this dreck. It really, truly stinks. What reviews I could find out there all seem to worship it, enjoying the romance and suspense. If only my standards were that low....
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Sunday, April 26, 2015
"Don't Stay Up Late" by R.L. Stine
Lisa Brooks is left with a minor brain injury after a car crash that kills her father. She is warned her condition will lead to strange visions and hallucinations. Her shrink suggests that she get a job to focus on something other than her injury. So she gets a gig as a babysitter for eight-year-old Harry Hart. Pretty soon, she is being stalked by a mysterious demon-like creature.
Is the creature real? Or is she just crazy? When people begin to die, it's clear that something evil is lurking out there, but poor Lisa can't get anyone to believe her.
"Don't Stay Up Late" takes the Fear Street series in a supernatural direction. That has lead to accusations that this story is more like Goosebumps, which could be apt, but it doesn't detract from what is a fun, fast-paced and appropriately cheesy B-grade horror tale. The Fear Street books of old usually weren't supernatural, but a few of them were. Several of the mini-series, such as "Cheerleaders", "99 Fear Street", "Fear Park", and "The Cataluna Chronicles" all had supernatural storylines. So it's not out-of-the-ordinary for this Fear Street entry to go that route.
There was a lot that irked me about the book, but I had to remind myself to let it go, and not approach the material as an adult, but as the 13-year-old who initially got hooked on this series. I woke up early and couldn't get back to sleep, and wound up devouring the entire book on my Kindle until the sun came up. Just like I used to do as a teenager. (I still remember the time I stayed up all night reading "The New Boy", way back in 1994). Stine is a little more careful with his chapter cliffhangers. There are several silly ones, but it's nowhere near as bad as the ludicrous cliffhangers found in "Party Games". It was done just well enough to keep me from taking a break.
I didn't like our main character, Lisa Brooks. Head injury aside, she was really insufferable. She spent a lot of time shrieking at people and flying off the handle, especially if they didn't believe her stories about the demon she was seeing. She knows that people won't believe her, but keeps on telling them, and keeps on getting upset and histrionic when they continue not to believe her. She made me roll my eyes several times. Her intelligence could be questioned as well:
1. Instead of shrieking at people who don't believe her, she could grab her phone and get some evidence to force them to believe her.
2. Despite knowing that boyfriend Nate will be making a horror movie at his house, and that he collects horror masks and memorabilia, she goes to his house and immediately thinks she's being attacked by an actual monster (obviously, it's Nate in costume). I mean, duh.
Stine's writing hasn't gotten any better since his 90s heyday, and the material is all pretty silly and juvenile, but it once again captured the spirit of what it was like to read a cheesy, scary story when you're young, which is pretty special. This is a big step up from "Party Games", and should hopefully see the Fear Street relaunch for a few years to come.
(RIP Point Horror Relaunch).
Is the creature real? Or is she just crazy? When people begin to die, it's clear that something evil is lurking out there, but poor Lisa can't get anyone to believe her.
"Don't Stay Up Late" takes the Fear Street series in a supernatural direction. That has lead to accusations that this story is more like Goosebumps, which could be apt, but it doesn't detract from what is a fun, fast-paced and appropriately cheesy B-grade horror tale. The Fear Street books of old usually weren't supernatural, but a few of them were. Several of the mini-series, such as "Cheerleaders", "99 Fear Street", "Fear Park", and "The Cataluna Chronicles" all had supernatural storylines. So it's not out-of-the-ordinary for this Fear Street entry to go that route.
There was a lot that irked me about the book, but I had to remind myself to let it go, and not approach the material as an adult, but as the 13-year-old who initially got hooked on this series. I woke up early and couldn't get back to sleep, and wound up devouring the entire book on my Kindle until the sun came up. Just like I used to do as a teenager. (I still remember the time I stayed up all night reading "The New Boy", way back in 1994). Stine is a little more careful with his chapter cliffhangers. There are several silly ones, but it's nowhere near as bad as the ludicrous cliffhangers found in "Party Games". It was done just well enough to keep me from taking a break.
I didn't like our main character, Lisa Brooks. Head injury aside, she was really insufferable. She spent a lot of time shrieking at people and flying off the handle, especially if they didn't believe her stories about the demon she was seeing. She knows that people won't believe her, but keeps on telling them, and keeps on getting upset and histrionic when they continue not to believe her. She made me roll my eyes several times. Her intelligence could be questioned as well:
1. Instead of shrieking at people who don't believe her, she could grab her phone and get some evidence to force them to believe her.
2. Despite knowing that boyfriend Nate will be making a horror movie at his house, and that he collects horror masks and memorabilia, she goes to his house and immediately thinks she's being attacked by an actual monster (obviously, it's Nate in costume). I mean, duh.
Stine's writing hasn't gotten any better since his 90s heyday, and the material is all pretty silly and juvenile, but it once again captured the spirit of what it was like to read a cheesy, scary story when you're young, which is pretty special. This is a big step up from "Party Games", and should hopefully see the Fear Street relaunch for a few years to come.
(RIP Point Horror Relaunch).
Friday, April 10, 2015
Most annoying genre tropes - the unreliable female narrator
I didn't tap Gillian Flynn's "Gone Girl" until after the movie came out. I downloaded it onto my Kindle, read the book, and then watched the movie. Even after all the hype, the book "Gone Girl" was terrific. I spotted the initial twist, but the book spread out in many different directions afterwards that I was just rapt. It was a terrific read, with excellent characterisation. The movie was pretty much exactly the same, but still highly engaging. I believe that the character of Amy will be remembered as a classic character for some time to come.
Around about the same time, "Before I Go To Sleep" was released to similar fanfare. It was an obvious story, contrived and highly unlikely. The movie was similarly stupid. It was like a bad Lifetime TV movie, except with some bad language and Nicole Kidman's bare butt.
Because of the success of these two novels, there is now a neverending flurry of "thrillers" and "suspense" novels in which the main female character can't entirely be relied upon. In "Before I Go To Sleep", it was because the main character woke up forgetting everything from the day before. I read some piece of rubbish called "Look Behind You" by Sibyl Hodge in which the main character had conveniently forgotten her memory. Now there are books like "The Good Girl", "The Girl On The Train", "Remember Me This Way", "The Girl With A Clock For A Heart" (really?), "The Headmaster's Wife"....the list just goes on and on. Most titles invariably manage to fit "Girl" into the title, hopefully to latch on to readers who thoroughly enjoyed "Gone Girl".
Even worse, even the established authors are getting in on the act. "Crash & Burn" by Lisa Gardner has a central female protagonist who had a bad, unreliable memory because of three bumps to the head throughout her life. She claims to have a daughter that doesn't exist. The awful, diabolical "Cold Cold Heart" by Tami Hoag also has a main female character who has suffered a traumatic brain injury.
Even worse that that, because of whatever it is that makes them unreliable, they are usually utter and complete drips.
I'm over it. What was once a fresh take on the genre has now become the norm.
Around about the same time, "Before I Go To Sleep" was released to similar fanfare. It was an obvious story, contrived and highly unlikely. The movie was similarly stupid. It was like a bad Lifetime TV movie, except with some bad language and Nicole Kidman's bare butt.
Because of the success of these two novels, there is now a neverending flurry of "thrillers" and "suspense" novels in which the main female character can't entirely be relied upon. In "Before I Go To Sleep", it was because the main character woke up forgetting everything from the day before. I read some piece of rubbish called "Look Behind You" by Sibyl Hodge in which the main character had conveniently forgotten her memory. Now there are books like "The Good Girl", "The Girl On The Train", "Remember Me This Way", "The Girl With A Clock For A Heart" (really?), "The Headmaster's Wife"....the list just goes on and on. Most titles invariably manage to fit "Girl" into the title, hopefully to latch on to readers who thoroughly enjoyed "Gone Girl".
Even worse, even the established authors are getting in on the act. "Crash & Burn" by Lisa Gardner has a central female protagonist who had a bad, unreliable memory because of three bumps to the head throughout her life. She claims to have a daughter that doesn't exist. The awful, diabolical "Cold Cold Heart" by Tami Hoag also has a main female character who has suffered a traumatic brain injury.
Even worse that that, because of whatever it is that makes them unreliable, they are usually utter and complete drips.
I'm over it. What was once a fresh take on the genre has now become the norm.
Saturday, March 14, 2015
"Poppet" by Mo Hayder
A.J. LeGrande is the senior nurse at the Beechway High Secure Unit, which houses mentally ill patients. There have been power cuts that have coincided with the deaths of patients. Staff are frequently calling in sick. Patients and staff alike fear the legend of "The Maude", the ghost of a dwarf nurse who sits on their chests. He must figure out who or what is really behind these sightings, and ultimately calls upon Detective Inspector Jack Caffery to help investigate.
Holy heck, what a pile of absolute shit this is.
I have no idea why I keep persisting with Mo Hayder's work. "Birdman" was impressive, and "The Treatment" remains one of the best, most terrifying thrillers I have ever read. I really should have stopped after the dreadful "Hanging Hill", but just couldn't seem to help myself. I keep thinking of how good "The Treatment" was and wonder if she'll magically deliver a good thriller again.
Nope.
I read "Gone" and this back-to-back, and what a dreary task it was. The Jack Caffery series has become nothing more than a soap opera involving the case of Misty Kitson. She was killed by Flea Marley's brother way back in "Ritual" when he ran into her while driving Flea's car. Flea covered the whole thing up. Jack knows what Flea did and has reopened the case of the disappearance in the hopes she'll come to her senses and help him close the case. He also has unresolved feelings for her.
I have to confess I don't know why Flea keeps roadblocking him, because frankly I just completely skipped any chapter that featured the stupid bitch. This absolutely fucking stupid Misty Kitson subplot has been going on for FOUR BOOKS NOW. It's waaaaaaaaaay past time to drop it.
The plot surrounding this, involving The Maude, is dead in the water. Despite being set in a mental institution, Hayder is completely unable to generate a sense of unease or creepiness, which you would think would be pretty fucking easy when IT'S A MENTAL HOSPITAL. There are no real twists and turns, with the focus mostly on the developing relationship between A.J. and the unit director Melanie Arrow. Because every other chapter jumps back into the completely pointless Misty Kitson case, it doesn't leave time to build many characters, so it's pretty obvious who the culprit is.
Because I read the two books back to back, I was able to pick up a big inconsistency - in "Gone", Jack is 38. "Poppet" is set nine months later, and he's suddenly 42.
And what was up with all the bloody dream sequences? They're endless.
I really hated this book. I'm both amazed and ashamed that I finished it. It is plotless, aimless, boring and stupid. And the worst thing is, I'll probably end up reading "Wolf", the next one, since it's only $7 on Amazon Kindle.
Holy heck, what a pile of absolute shit this is.
I have no idea why I keep persisting with Mo Hayder's work. "Birdman" was impressive, and "The Treatment" remains one of the best, most terrifying thrillers I have ever read. I really should have stopped after the dreadful "Hanging Hill", but just couldn't seem to help myself. I keep thinking of how good "The Treatment" was and wonder if she'll magically deliver a good thriller again.
Nope.
I read "Gone" and this back-to-back, and what a dreary task it was. The Jack Caffery series has become nothing more than a soap opera involving the case of Misty Kitson. She was killed by Flea Marley's brother way back in "Ritual" when he ran into her while driving Flea's car. Flea covered the whole thing up. Jack knows what Flea did and has reopened the case of the disappearance in the hopes she'll come to her senses and help him close the case. He also has unresolved feelings for her.
I have to confess I don't know why Flea keeps roadblocking him, because frankly I just completely skipped any chapter that featured the stupid bitch. This absolutely fucking stupid Misty Kitson subplot has been going on for FOUR BOOKS NOW. It's waaaaaaaaaay past time to drop it.
The plot surrounding this, involving The Maude, is dead in the water. Despite being set in a mental institution, Hayder is completely unable to generate a sense of unease or creepiness, which you would think would be pretty fucking easy when IT'S A MENTAL HOSPITAL. There are no real twists and turns, with the focus mostly on the developing relationship between A.J. and the unit director Melanie Arrow. Because every other chapter jumps back into the completely pointless Misty Kitson case, it doesn't leave time to build many characters, so it's pretty obvious who the culprit is.
Because I read the two books back to back, I was able to pick up a big inconsistency - in "Gone", Jack is 38. "Poppet" is set nine months later, and he's suddenly 42.
And what was up with all the bloody dream sequences? They're endless.
I really hated this book. I'm both amazed and ashamed that I finished it. It is plotless, aimless, boring and stupid. And the worst thing is, I'll probably end up reading "Wolf", the next one, since it's only $7 on Amazon Kindle.
Friday, March 13, 2015
Point Horror relaunch already dead?
Back in 2013, I was quite excited by the announcement that there would be a new generation of Point Horror titles released. Point Horror basically got me reading when I was primary school and high school. I've got a very heavy Nostalgia Fondness for them. I have collected just about every teen horror book from 1986 to 1996, so I like to consider myself something of an expert on the genre, even if I still have over 100 (!) I haven't read yet. (Seriously, the publishing companies really churned them out. I'm still conducting internet searches for any that may have possibly slipped through the cracks).
So yes, the Point Horror relaunch had me bouncing off the walls as if I was 12 again. (I'm now 35). The titles published would be:
"Identity Theft" by Anna Davies
"Followers" by Anna Davies
"Wickedpedia" by Chris Van Etten
"Defriended" by Ruth Baron
As it turned out, they were all riffs on current popular technologies. Ironically, this will date them even more than the 80s and 90s entries.
The problems were quickly apparent. Once you read the actual book (or e-book), you discovered that half the events described in the book description were not actually in the book! Did the publishers write the plot summary before the writer wrote the book? Seriously bad publicity there. The "Wickedpedia" description even got one of the main character's names wrong!
The first one I read was "Identity Theft". It was shit. My review is on this blog. The next one I read was "Followers". It was shit. Possibly worse than "Identity Theft". If Point Horror is indeed dead in the water again, much of the blame should go to Anna Davies, who is a terrible writer.
"Wickedpedia" was quite decent, but with the usual problems - villain is ridiculously easy to figure out, main character spends inordinate amount of time pining over a girl who's clearly not worth it, etc. But it did manage to capture just a little of the spirit of the original thrillers. I haven't read "Defriended" yet.
The other problem - for me personally - was the use of first person in all three that I read. First person was used in the Point Horror titles occasionally, but third person was the norm. I think this reflects the style that is used in young adult fiction nowadays. They're all first person. And usually dystopian.
The first couple of books in the relaunch came in 2013. The next two came in 2014. I haven't seen any signs of more to come in 2015. So is Point Horror dead again? Thanks, Anna Davies.
Fear Street has also been relaunched! But if the inane and simplistic "Party Games" is anything to go by, I don't see that lasting very long either. Sigh. I'll wait until I read "Don't Stay Up Late" before I make any final assessments.
So yes, the Point Horror relaunch had me bouncing off the walls as if I was 12 again. (I'm now 35). The titles published would be:
"Identity Theft" by Anna Davies
"Followers" by Anna Davies
"Wickedpedia" by Chris Van Etten
"Defriended" by Ruth Baron
As it turned out, they were all riffs on current popular technologies. Ironically, this will date them even more than the 80s and 90s entries.
The problems were quickly apparent. Once you read the actual book (or e-book), you discovered that half the events described in the book description were not actually in the book! Did the publishers write the plot summary before the writer wrote the book? Seriously bad publicity there. The "Wickedpedia" description even got one of the main character's names wrong!
The first one I read was "Identity Theft". It was shit. My review is on this blog. The next one I read was "Followers". It was shit. Possibly worse than "Identity Theft". If Point Horror is indeed dead in the water again, much of the blame should go to Anna Davies, who is a terrible writer.
"Wickedpedia" was quite decent, but with the usual problems - villain is ridiculously easy to figure out, main character spends inordinate amount of time pining over a girl who's clearly not worth it, etc. But it did manage to capture just a little of the spirit of the original thrillers. I haven't read "Defriended" yet.
The other problem - for me personally - was the use of first person in all three that I read. First person was used in the Point Horror titles occasionally, but third person was the norm. I think this reflects the style that is used in young adult fiction nowadays. They're all first person. And usually dystopian.
The first couple of books in the relaunch came in 2013. The next two came in 2014. I haven't seen any signs of more to come in 2015. So is Point Horror dead again? Thanks, Anna Davies.
Fear Street has also been relaunched! But if the inane and simplistic "Party Games" is anything to go by, I don't see that lasting very long either. Sigh. I'll wait until I read "Don't Stay Up Late" before I make any final assessments.
Most annoying genre tropes - secondary cop characters On The Case
And another one.
This doesn't apply to your typical police procedural. Those ones are all about the police characters investigating the crimes. And are usually really boring.
This applies to a thriller in which the detectives/police are not the central characters, and much of the action is happening to another main character. That main character is telling us, the reader, everything that is going on - what happened in the past, why it's happening, what might happen in the future. They're usually aware of some/most of the events surrounding the murder/crime and their relation to it. We primarily follow them as they try to solve it, or find a way out of their predicament.
However, we'll also get the odd chapter from the police officer/detective investigating the same murder/crime. They'll find clues, and they'll share theories with co-workers about what they think has happened.
The problem is, the reader already knows. The main character has already told us. But we still get pages and pages of the secondary cops On The Case chasing around clues and delivering theories. I suppose it's to get us to understand how they arrive at the right conclusion and help to save the day, but it's basically just repetition to bolster the word count.
This happens ALL THE TIME in Lisa Gardner's books. She may be one of my favourite writers, but sheesh! The books are always divided between a main (usually) female character caught up in a terrible situation, and the (usually) female detective investigating the terrible situation. In the past, the detective has usually been D.D. Warren. She is always five steps behind the other main character in figuring out what is going on. Why do I need D.D. Warren telling me what she thinks is going on, when the main character has already told me what is actually going on?
Lisa Gardner's lastest - "Crash And Burn" - thankfully managed to subvert this trope by having the main character not even really know who she was. So we, the reader, were as much in the dark as everybody else was. Unfortunately, it was one of her weaker efforts. The first 40% was literally just an investigation into a motor vehicle accident. A bit too much Research On The Page there.
This doesn't apply to your typical police procedural. Those ones are all about the police characters investigating the crimes. And are usually really boring.
This applies to a thriller in which the detectives/police are not the central characters, and much of the action is happening to another main character. That main character is telling us, the reader, everything that is going on - what happened in the past, why it's happening, what might happen in the future. They're usually aware of some/most of the events surrounding the murder/crime and their relation to it. We primarily follow them as they try to solve it, or find a way out of their predicament.
However, we'll also get the odd chapter from the police officer/detective investigating the same murder/crime. They'll find clues, and they'll share theories with co-workers about what they think has happened.
The problem is, the reader already knows. The main character has already told us. But we still get pages and pages of the secondary cops On The Case chasing around clues and delivering theories. I suppose it's to get us to understand how they arrive at the right conclusion and help to save the day, but it's basically just repetition to bolster the word count.
This happens ALL THE TIME in Lisa Gardner's books. She may be one of my favourite writers, but sheesh! The books are always divided between a main (usually) female character caught up in a terrible situation, and the (usually) female detective investigating the terrible situation. In the past, the detective has usually been D.D. Warren. She is always five steps behind the other main character in figuring out what is going on. Why do I need D.D. Warren telling me what she thinks is going on, when the main character has already told me what is actually going on?
Lisa Gardner's lastest - "Crash And Burn" - thankfully managed to subvert this trope by having the main character not even really know who she was. So we, the reader, were as much in the dark as everybody else was. Unfortunately, it was one of her weaker efforts. The first 40% was literally just an investigation into a motor vehicle accident. A bit too much Research On The Page there.
Thursday, March 12, 2015
Most annoying genre trope - the person who discovers a dead body
What's the most annoying crime/thriller/mystery/romance/suspense trope?
It's hard to make a list, but I thought I would list one of my pet peeves. For me, it's the entire chapter devoted to the life of a character who happens to discover a dead body that our main character (cop, medical examiner, etc) is eventually tasked with solving their murder.
9 times out of 10, they discover the body, have an interview with the police, and are never heard from again. Except we get a whole chapter about what's happening in their life, how they feel about their current circumstances, and all sorts of other information about them that is completely useless - because they disappear from the rest of the book! Why is this being included? It's not necessary! I suspect the big reason is to boost the word count. Secondly, the author may want the reader to think that this character will become important later on down the road. But, as I've said, 90% of the time this is not the case, and we're left with 15-20 pages that contribute nothing to the plot.
I see it in nearly every crime book I read and it drives me nuts.
It's hard to make a list, but I thought I would list one of my pet peeves. For me, it's the entire chapter devoted to the life of a character who happens to discover a dead body that our main character (cop, medical examiner, etc) is eventually tasked with solving their murder.
9 times out of 10, they discover the body, have an interview with the police, and are never heard from again. Except we get a whole chapter about what's happening in their life, how they feel about their current circumstances, and all sorts of other information about them that is completely useless - because they disappear from the rest of the book! Why is this being included? It's not necessary! I suspect the big reason is to boost the word count. Secondly, the author may want the reader to think that this character will become important later on down the road. But, as I've said, 90% of the time this is not the case, and we're left with 15-20 pages that contribute nothing to the plot.
I see it in nearly every crime book I read and it drives me nuts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)