bobblybear

I'm more like this now than I used to be. I also used to hate giving up on a book, and force myself to carry on, whereas now I'll just gladly put it to one side. Maybe it's because we have so many books to read but so little time to read, that it's just another semi-subconscious way of separating the wheat from the chaff.

Oh dear! I've heard such good things about this book! My library has a copy, so I might borrow it rather than buy it, just in case it doesn't live up to the hype.

The only reason I thought that is because at the end when Kipps is told that a child dies every time the woman in black appears, he thinks back to the row of children at the cemetery. I just assumed they were all the ghosts, but I could be mistaken. I shall have to re-read that passage to see if it clears it up. Probably my over active imagination. The film sounds completely different, which doesn't surprise me. If they'd made it into a film, staying completely faithful to the book, I'd imagine it would be a real snoozefest. The atmosphere of the book probably wouldn't translate well without some adjustment. The ending sounds a bit silly, but that's probably only because I'm comparing it to the book. I'm sure I'll get around to it at some point.

I'm starting it from the beginning and it's so much easier. I don't find it boring at all now; there's quite a bit of biting humor, a lot of which was lost with the Dowson translation. I'll try to remember them.

The Penguin translation of Dangerous Liasions is so much better! I'm only about 10 letters in but I've already picked up on 3 or 4 subtleties that just got lost in the other translation.

The Virgin Suicides by Jeffrey Eugenides is the Kindle Daily Deal, UK.

Totally agree with this; it's good to read a book that has a simple and reasonably uncomplicated plot. I loved brave little Spider, and was so glad he got rescued out of the marsh. I like this as well, and I've noticed with many books that I've highly rated they have this in common. It's like a different kind of mystery - not 'where are they going to end up?' but rather ' how did they get there?' - which in my mind is a lot more interesting. Same here. I think that's the thing that surprised me most about the book. Do you know what part of the ending they changed? I imagine that they've changed it so his son lives. I suppose it would be a dark way to end a movie and I can imagine it wouldn't sit well with many people (test audiences perhaps?). Still, if they are going to make a movie based on a book, they should really remain faithful to the story as told in the book!

Just finished this one. I'll answer the questions without reading the previous posts, as I don't want to be influenced by the other answers. 1. Did you like the book? What was it that you enjoyed? If you didn't like the book, what were your reasons for disliking it? I liked it, but I didn't love it. It seemed somewhat superficial, and not detailed enough for my liking. I was very surprised when I saw it was just a touch over 200 pages, and I kept looking at the percentage at the bottom of my Kindle wondering how the story could be packed into so few pages. I liked the darkness and the story, and the simplicity of it. A lot of stories try to pack too many twists and turns into it as a way of making it more interesting when often all they do is make it more confusing. Having said that, I expected there to be more to the story, especially from the way the main character led into his tale at the beginning, when his children were discussing ghost stories around the fire. It was like 'a couple of nights in a haunted house'. I was a bit disappointed that Arthur didn't stay at Eel Marsh House for a longer period. I also thought the ending was a bit abrupt. 2. The narrative is quite sparse and the characters few, did you find it easy to engage in the story? While the depth of the story seemed to lack, I found the story quite easy to read and follow. There were no twists and turns, and it wasn't a complicated book. I know I said I wish it had more detail, but I suppose it's good that the author just told the story she wanted to tell, without any filler. 3. What were your expectations when you started this book and were you proved right or wrong? I was expecting something a lot scarier and a lot more detailed. I thought the book would be about 400-500 pages, so it was very different to what I expected. I also couldn't get the image of Daniel Radcliffe out of my mind, unfortunately. I just can't see him as the main character. 4. If you have seen the stage production, TV version or film of The Woman in Black, how did it compare to the book? Can't comment, as haven't seen either but while I was reading it I did try to imagine what the movie would look like. I'm surprised they made it into a movie actually; I suspect they must have had to flesh out the story a fair bit for it to be a decent length film? I'll get around to watching the movie at some point, no doubt, so I can see for myself. I don't get scared too much by books, but movies scare me easily, so I may need to watch it in broad daylight. 5. Was this the first book you've read in this genre/ by this author, has it encouraged you to read more? First book I've read by this author, and I've read a few ghost stories (not many - The Drowning Pool and The Secret of Crickley Hall spring to mind). I wouldn't mind reading more of Susan Hill's work, but I wouldn't actively rush out to buy or borrow her books. 6. One of the themes of the novel is fear. Did you find the novel creepy – were you scared? The part I found most creepy was when he described the woman in black as having an expression of 'desperate, yearning malevolence'. That creeped me out a bit - it's the idea of malevolence, rather than sorrow being a ghost's driving force which is unnerving. Surprisingly I didn't find much else scary - not the noises in the house or the abandoned nursery. I suppose the mist covering the causeway was a bit scary, and I'm so glad Spider was rescued! 7. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with? No, I found it a very quick and easy read. I just wish there was more detail about the house, maybe more about the paperwork he found. I know the letters were covered in a couple of pages and said all they needed to say, but I just wish there was more to it. 8. Overall, was reading the book an enjoyable experience? Yes, overall I liked it, though as I keep saying I would have liked something meatier. 9. If you've read any 'classic' ghost stories, how do you think this compares to them? I haven't read any 'classic' ghost stories (aside from A Christmas Carol but I don't think that counts!), so I can't comment. I am surprised to read the the author considers this a full-length ghost story, when my main gripe is that it isn't long enough. 10. How successfully do you think Hill has captured the feel of the 19th century? I couldn't tell which period the story was set in, though I knew it wasn't 'now'. The pony and trap gave it away, as did little things, such as Mr Bentley's dislike of the telephone. But aside from that, I don't recall too many references to the 19th century. 11. Do you think the book works well as a full-length novel, or in your opinion would it have been better as a short story? To me it felt like a short story. I don't think anything could have been cut out to make it any shorter, without losing a great deal of the plot. How short does a story have to be for it to be a short story? Fifty or a hundred pages? If that's the case, I really don't think anyone could have condensed the story down to that length. Just a quick question: When Arthur first saw the woman in black at the cemetery, he also saw a row of children standing at a fence. Were these children the ghosts of the ones who died everytime Jennet had been seen?

I'm about half way through The Woman In Black. Loving it so far and I didn't realise how short it was. Once I'm finished, I'm moving back on to Dangerous Liasions, but the new version I downloaded.

Roast chicken tonight - the Sunday tradition. Looking forward to the roasties and the yorkies.

^Very depressing and tragic film.

Mine is the same as yours I think, Alexi, translated by Ernest Dowson. However, mine wasn't free on the Kindle, it was £2.05. I've downloaded a sample of the Penguin Edition, and I'll see if it's much different. I hope so....and I don't think it could be any worse than the current version. Alexi, I think you've managed to read further than me - I'm only up to page 44, and every few pages turns I keep pressing Menu to see how far I have gotten. That's never a good sign, is it? Alexi, just to add - you can return your Kindle purchase for a refund within 7 days of purchase. I've just missed my window but it's good to know for future reference. Edited to add: Oh, for goodness sakes, I've just downloaded the sample and it only contains the editors preface. Nevermind though, I've taken the plunge and bought the new version. Fingers crossed I find it an easier read. Further edit: I can tell already from the first letter that it's a far easier read than the Ernest Dowson translation. Thanks chesilbeach!!

Flight - I thought it was mediocre, though it picked itself up a bit at the end.

Welcome Jennifer!

Hi Felis, and welcome.

Never knew there was a TV series. I wonder if they are related? Just googled it - the TV show is loosely based on the film.

I have to put it aside for a while as I'm getting too annoyed with it. I'll be really interested to see how you find it, Frankie. I don't mind complex stories, but complex writing styles put me off. I'm moving on to The Woman In Black by Susan Hill. Something tells me I'm going to be spooked by it. Flu sucks - hope you feel better soon.

At least it didn't cost me anything. Who knows - you may enjoy it. I just found it very lacking, and I think the only reason I bought it was because I was in my "download everything that's free!" phase, regardless of whether I thought it would be my kind of book.

I love this film. Haven't seen it in years, but I have it somewhere on DVD.

Water. Chugging it down!

Dangerous Liasions is certainly not an easy read, is it? I'm finding myself having to re-read sentences very slowly to get the full meaning. It's a bit frustrating, to be honest.

I've just read your review - I don't mind Dan Brown. I know he's not the best writer, but his stories keep me intrigued, so hopefully I'll like it. If not, nevermind as it's free! I hope you like Under The Dome. I think it's one of his better ones, especially of his later books.

I've just downloaded The Phoenix Conspiracy for my Kindle. Sounds good and it's free!

The Golden Acorn - Catherine Cooper This was a Kindle freebie with some pretty good reviews, so I loaded it up. It's free, so what do I have to lose? Jack Brenin is a young boy (I don't think the book mentions how old he is - maybe 10?) who has recently been sent to live in England with his grandfather. One day, on his way home, a golden acorn drops on his head. Jack picks it up and so confirms his fate as the chosen one who is destined to save the trees and those druids and nymphs living within them. There's time-travel, druids, talking ravens, shape-shifting and all sorts of other-wordly bits and pieces. While it was readable, I felt it lacked something. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seemed like there was a lack of excitement or urgency to the characters and their actions. Considering time was running out for Jack to save this little part of the world, everyone just seemed to be taking their sweet time with it. The book wasn't short, coming in at just over 350 pages. I think this could have been reduced by a third without losing anything from the story. It had sections which were very readable, quite funny and interesting, but then they were followed by long bits which just dragged and didn't push the story forwards at all, or reveal anything new about the characters. I'm not the target audience - it's clearly a children's book - so maybe that's why I didn't 'get' it. Not to say I disliked it, but it just somehow felt empty. There are four books in the series, but I won't be reading them, as I don't feel interested in Jack or the rest of his adventures. 2/6