Scan barcode
flowie_x's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
4.0
claire_dobson's review against another edition
4.0
A book I simply could not put down! Gruesome in places but a very gripping read.
geenyas's review against another edition
3.0
I liked the concept better than the execution. The audio version has multiple readers, each with multiple roles, and with all the bouncing around in time... it can be confusing. This is one book that is probably better in the print version.
09didi's review against another edition
4.0
Absolutely loved the book. I couldn't stop reading. If you love a good suspense and crime drama, then this is the book for you! Pleasantly surprised.
ohhluisa's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
jennc's review against another edition
2.0
This book is my disappointment of the year. I was looking forward to it, had it for awhile and decided to finally read it so I could watch the show. Sad to say, I absolutely hated it.
First off: Animal cruelty. We get a dog graphically tortured, a rooster made to have a seizure and chicks with their legs cut off. Not what I was here for. Oh and Rachel's delightful book about animals dyeing. Super fun.
We never find out why or how the house can travel through time or why these girls are the ones that must be killed. He says they shine. OK so you're telling me that one out of a billion girls shines in a decade? Then the part about him being the house...I was just done by this point.
Then there are the parts of the book that just seem like tangents. We get Kirby interviewing a guy in prison for a murder he didn't commit. No way is she going to be able to get him free because she can't prove who the murderer is. Did I really need to read a chapter about that?
The only part of the book I liked was the introduction of all the different girls. (Margot was my favorite. Though reading about back alley abortions after the Supreme Court leak was tough.) But of course then they all have to die. Why? Who knows...maybe so Harper can have a new place to jerk off because death really does it for him.
This book was bleak, pointless and just irritating. I know others like it and I am glad for them. It wasn't for me though. Definitely not a writer I'll read from again.
First off: Animal cruelty. We get a dog graphically tortured, a rooster made to have a seizure and chicks with their legs cut off. Not what I was here for. Oh and Rachel's delightful book about animals dyeing. Super fun.
We never find out why or how the house can travel through time or why these girls are the ones that must be killed. He says they shine. OK so you're telling me that one out of a billion girls shines in a decade? Then the part about him being the house...I was just done by this point.
Then there are the parts of the book that just seem like tangents. We get Kirby interviewing a guy in prison for a murder he didn't commit. No way is she going to be able to get him free because she can't prove who the murderer is. Did I really need to read a chapter about that?
The only part of the book I liked was the introduction of all the different girls. (Margot was my favorite. Though reading about back alley abortions after the Supreme Court leak was tough.) But of course then they all have to die. Why? Who knows...maybe so Harper can have a new place to jerk off because death really does it for him.
This book was bleak, pointless and just irritating. I know others like it and I am glad for them. It wasn't for me though. Definitely not a writer I'll read from again.
erickibler4's review against another edition
3.0
A young woman seeks to turn the tables on a time traveling serial killer who nearly ended her life. What the book gains in its inventive non-linear approach to storytelling, it loses somewhat in suspense.
Beukes is South African, and does a pretty good job at setting the scene in Chicago from 1929 to 1993. Certain words, such as "punter" and "spanner" are occasionally put into the mouths of Chicagoans, which took me momentarily out of the story, but I liked that when comic book appeared in the story, they were time-appropriate and pretty good selections for what would have been available at the time.
Three stars is by no means a bad review coming from me. I liked it. But it's a couple notches down from outright love.
Beukes is South African, and does a pretty good job at setting the scene in Chicago from 1929 to 1993. Certain words, such as "punter" and "spanner" are occasionally put into the mouths of Chicagoans, which took me momentarily out of the story, but I liked that when comic book appeared in the story, they were time-appropriate and pretty good selections for what would have been available at the time.
Three stars is by no means a bad review coming from me. I liked it. But it's a couple notches down from outright love.