Posted on

I Miss Crichton

We don't have anybody like Michael Crichton anymore. People will tell you to try Brown (Dan) if you say that too loudly, but it is true.

Sure you can read Brown, but only if you consider dumbed-down pseudo-science and poorly researched historical conspiracies presented as fact 'the exact same', then maybe.

I suppose Dan Brown is Michael Crichton for the masses; he draws normally uninterested readers in with socially controversial topics and makes them feel like they have some ridiculous new insight into them. Dan Brown writes basically the exact same kind of books Michael Crichton does.

The big difference is that with Dan Brown books he throws in cliffhangers at the end of every chapter.

I have yet to find any other author that matches Michael Crichton's dedication to proper research for a novel nor one that understands the topics he writes about as well as he did.

Read some of his older books (Terminal Man, Congo) and nothing in them seems all the extraordinary because today all of that technology is commonplace. Apply that to his newer books (Prey, Jurassic Park, etc. even aspects of Timeline) and consider that he might able to give a very real view of the future and problems we might want to contemplate before it's too late.

If we're able to produce enough anti-matter to blow up the Vatican (or do anything useful), measure the weight of someone's soul, or even create a practical rifle that can compress/heat snow/sand into ice/glass bullets in the next 40 years, I'll come back here for my public shaming.

As far as I know, there's currently no replacement for Michael Crichton.

Posted on

Elementary My Dear Watson

The fact that he could admire The Woman, and appreciate her cunning was something I felt humanized him. Sherlock Holmes knew he wasn't the best, yet, he was not a particularly humble individual, yet he was smart enough to know that he had flaws and here were people better than he was out there.

I think the value he placed on others that he deemed worthy made him the both likable and great.

And it is because of this I felt that the BBC version of Sherlock was one of the more faithful adaptions of that brilliant detective. But there is a bit of a balance problem that I have with it. I feel that Irene Adler was both over and under represented as herself in that series.

I felt that the show cheapened her. She showed up way more than necessary, for no purpose whatsoever.

The Woman beat Sherlock based solely on wit. It had none of that sexual undertone that was built into the show that I found particularly insulting.

She didn't seduce him.

She beat him.

The end.

And Doyle was smart enough to write a character that didn't win by luck, she beat him with guile. However she wasn't interested in seeing if she could lose. So she never came back.

I read the complete adventures of Sherlock Holmes when I was in 6th grade, and Irene Adler shaped how I view women, then and now. It's interesting to me how adaptations of Irene Norton, né Adler, a woman who loved her new husband so much that she would never use the incriminating photograph she possessed because it would harm them both, depict her as this criminal in love with Sherlock Holmes.

Aside from that gripe it is a good show. Though if I am to pick nits, I might as well be thorough.

I hate how he is perceived as bumbling- and I'd say it's because of the Nigel Bruce characterization, except that Agatha Christie apparently at least in part based her Captain Hastings character on Watson and he was an absolute bumbling idiot.

One of my least favorite characters ever.

Watson was a normal guy working with the tools he had and generally going an awesome job. Watson added a lot to the stories.

Posted on

That’s Odd Thomas

I really love the Odd Thomas series and after finishing the last book I haven’t been able to pick up another book. I am really interested in all the other characters that Odd encounters along the way. His powers and the responsibility that goes with them are immense but he just takes it in stride and acts as if saving lives is the most mundane thing in the world. When I got to that twist ending in the first book it was like getting punched in the face. I still remember putting the book down and just thinking on it. And realizing the foreshadowing leading up to it. I’m normally not caught off guard with twist endings, that one definitely got me. If you want to get the most out of it the only hint that I will say is pay attention to all the little aspects of the book because they call back to them through out the series. If you do that the ending is beautiful. The atmosphere and characters that Koontz brings to life have just always enthralled me since picking up the Jane Hawk books. You could try and read them out of order; the books in the Odd Thomas series stand alone well, but if you want to really carry the overall tone the books carry with them I’d start at the beginning. There is a sense of foreboding that builds through the series and Odd does go through a series of realizations that build upon each other. In a very real sense the entire idea that Stormy (Odd’s true love from book one) put forth about life being a boot camp plays kind of a big underlying role in the underlying themes of the series. Skipping around may lose some of that effect.

The Movie

As a big fan of the books I was skeptical before watching the movie. I was not disappointed. I thought it was a fantastic movie, and I think I’ve watched it 4 times already. I think this is a new and interesting take on the genre. This is something of a love story combined supernatural thriller. The best part about movies like this is that they don’t take themselves too seriously. They do inject a bit of humor. Anton Yelchin plays a clairvoyant short order cook. But not clairvoyant in the palm reading, Taro card sense. He has a gift for communicating with the murdered victims that allows him to help solve their case. At the same time, he is in no sense a detective. He likes the quiet life of a short order cook. But dark forces have other ideas. There is no way I can describe it in a way that would give you a good sense of the movie. If you like independent films, you will like this. If you are remotely into the horror genre, you will like this. If you like good suspense and mystery, you will like this. However, if you are entrenched in Hollywood Blockbuster fair, then you will still like the movie, just not as well. I think I would easily rate it 4 out of 5 stars.
Posted on

Michael Connely’s Bosch

I am brushing up on my Bosch after watching the show of the same name by novelist Michael Connelly who was a crime reporter in LA, which makes his work seems very authentic. There is nothing world changing but there are many stories and many reoccurring characters, and you can see them grow and change though their lives because the stories take place over many years of their lives. The early ones are the best (Black Ice, Black Echo, The Concrete Blond). Definitely read them chronologically. The later ones are good too, but the first 3 or 4 Bosch books are my favorite. It’s said in introductory journalism classes that the best writing is that which doesn’t call attention to itself, and that’s the case here. Connelly isn’t flashy prose-wise, but his characters are three-dimensional, his pacing is impeccable and has that infectious thing where you end up reading far later into the night than you initially intended, and his plots (and associated plot twists) are legitimately surprising and intriguing. Bosch is not a warm character, though he cares in his own way. Rather he is cold, abrupt, judgmental and the ultimate pessimist. Harry Bosch sees Los Angeles the same way that his namesake Hieronymus Bosch saw The Garden of Earthly Delights – a human stew of crime and degradation. And it is role, his identity, to find and bring to justice the worst of worst, the ones who commit murder. All victims matter. Equally. Either everyone matters or no one matters, that is the conclusion he came to after the police failed to investigate the murder of Bosch’s mother because she was only a prostitute. A cop show is a cop show. There’s only so much that can be done to vary things up, but its’ an above average cop shop. Yet, the show seems to be working hard to stay true to the books. Connelly wrote the character so as to age ‘in real time’ – as a consequence the Harry in the first books is a good twenty years younger than the Harry in the more recent ones. As such, the way the character reacts to certain events / situations will change, as he himself changes. They’re not ground breaking – Connelly is no Dashiell Hammett, nor is Bosch a Sam Spade for modern times. That said, they’re perfectly enjoyable, fast, reads. As it is the series is fun for light reading, yet they still have compelling narratives. Fans of the books going to the show, they’ve made Harry more likable – though I found him hard to get over at first when I started reading the books. ~XO
Posted on

Binge Watched Bosch (Spoilers)

So … I do watch TV, too. Though I enjoy a good book as much or more and I’ve tried a couple of Michael Connely’s books, mostly Lincoln Lawyer but one Bosch. It turns out that I may have done Bosch a disservice since I just got done watching the show. Yes, the whole show. And it was good. As for rating I would say:
  1. Season I
  2. Season IV
  3. Season II
  4. Season III
I know that season V is in the works, and I see a lot of potential to fall into the trap that season II & III did. That was the action aspect. Drawing on his military career. Aside from being a tunnel rat we don’t know what happend to him in the war. And I am fine with that, it worked well in season I to hint about it since it fit into the world and the case that he was trying to solve. With the death of Elenor I feel like they may be trying to take it back into an action Harry direction (original show runner is also coming back from season I-III). Let Harry be a cop. There’s plenty of trauma and drama right there. Don’t make him take on the world.