Reviews - The Long Walk by Stephen King

You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.

5.97k reviews for:

The Long Walk by Stephen King

Richard Bachman

3.92 AVERAGE

vickieblloyd's review against another edition

3.0

challenging dark hopeful sad tense slow-paced

2xjackmanx8's review against another edition

4.5

challenging dark sad tense fast-paced

Plot or Character Driven: Character

Strong character development: Yes

Loveable characters: Complicated

Diverse cast of characters: Yes

Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

gina_kortuem's review against another edition

3.0

I gave this three stars after finishing but have fond memories of it. Let’s say that means it ages well.

elizabitch's review against another edition

3.0

This has been on my TBR from the very beginning and now that I'm taking a break from fantasy and romance to do more sci-fi/dystopian reading and historical fiction reading, it was time to dig this up.

Stephen King is a misogynistic bitch. Apparently he's gotten better in his treatment of women according to friends but Jesus Christ he's a piece of work. Apparently he writes just to write, without structure, and it shows in the wild, unnecessary insertions of objectification of women. I'm also disappointed with the homophobia and racism.

The premise is very unique and what drew me to want to read this, a Hunger Games before Hunger Games. However, nothing is answered and the further I read the more frustrated I became with the mounting questions and plot holes. A good sci-fi often leaves unanswered questions but the basic premise of this story doesn't make sense. I understand it's a metaphor for the Vietnam War, which I see in the mental spiralling of the children. But you can't hinge a 300 page novel on the statement "war is pointless", you need more than that (and war is often not pointless, there are reasons, thoughts, and propaganda from all sides, even if we might not feel they are worth the price of lives.) This would have been better as a short story, which can thrive on mysteriously leaving out foundationally important information.

Questions/Holes:

What is the purpose of the Walk? Why does the government do this? What is its history? It's mentioned the government raises 2 billion from bets taken but what is the need for that money and why was this method chosen? Who created and masterminded this?

Why do the boys volunteer? Why boys and not women? How are boys selected? It's voluntary, the boys must pass tests to do it, but nobody can vocalize why they're there. I can't believe the Prize would be enough for 100 boys to put themselves through this, and many of them do not seem to need it. Why don't the boys see the death march for what it is? They're excited to participate. The Walk IS televised, they've seen the horrors and the boys murdered...why do they not see how terrible this is? Why does Garretty participate and uphold the Major? After his father tried to show him the horrors of this, of the politics, and was taken away from his family by the government for doing that? What happened to previous winners? Are they dead? How did they cope? What was their Prize request?

Why Maine? (Besides the author setting everything there.) Why do the boys not know the route, when the Walk has taken place for decades and is reported on and televised? Why are the boys so unprepared for this? Why aren't corporations getting in on using them for marketing their materials, supplying them with supplies (better shoes, socks, backpacks, food, etc.)? Why didn't they train, they had time?

I can't buy that the answer to any of this is "war is pointless." People complain that Suzanne Collins stole King's ideas but her version is so much more meaningful, fully developed, and thoughtfully challenging.

Tldr, the book answers no questions, which is unfulfilling, but it is a decent portrayal of the mental breakdown that folks experience during the horrors of war.