Scan barcode
miss_majuu's review against another edition
3.0
Very fun and entertaining. Loved all the references!
I would've preferred if this was only one story instead of so many tales (of various lengths) combined.
I would've preferred if this was only one story instead of so many tales (of various lengths) combined.
timony_souler's review
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
elliesque's review against another edition
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
songwind's review against another edition
3.0
Are you a Holmes fan? Do you like dry humor and parody? Do you love the Kingsley/Caine movie Without a Clue?
If you answered yes to these questions, you'll enjoy Warlock Holmes. Denning has taken the major characters of Doyle's work and twisted them a bit to create an amusing bit of farce with a familiar face. Our narrator, John Watson, is still a doctor, but in this incarnation he uses his powers of observation and deduction learned from the practice of medicine to solve crimes. Holmes, for his part, is a practitioner of dark arts, all his quirks turned up to 11 and given some very unusual explanations. Lestrade and Gregson of Scotland Yard make appearances as well.
The book starts off with a parody of [b:A Study in Scarlet|102868|A Study in Scarlet (Sherlock Holmes, #1)|Arthur Conan Doyle|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1519031842s/102868.jpg|1997473], adopting the same basic narrative structure, but with enough changed to keep it interesting.
That was interesting enough, but the later stories are even more successful. I know that at least one is inspired by a canon Holmes story, "The Case of the Speckled Band," but I don't know enough to say for sure about the others.
In summary, a very successful and fun book. I look forward to reading about the rest of Warlock and Watson's adventures.
If you answered yes to these questions, you'll enjoy Warlock Holmes. Denning has taken the major characters of Doyle's work and twisted them a bit to create an amusing bit of farce with a familiar face. Our narrator, John Watson, is still a doctor, but in this incarnation he uses his powers of observation and deduction learned from the practice of medicine to solve crimes. Holmes, for his part, is a practitioner of dark arts, all his quirks turned up to 11 and given some very unusual explanations. Lestrade and Gregson of Scotland Yard make appearances as well.
The book starts off with a parody of [b:A Study in Scarlet|102868|A Study in Scarlet (Sherlock Holmes, #1)|Arthur Conan Doyle|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1519031842s/102868.jpg|1997473], adopting the same basic narrative structure, but with enough changed to keep it interesting.
That was interesting enough, but the later stories are even more successful. I know that at least one is inspired by a canon Holmes story, "The Case of the Speckled Band," but I don't know enough to say for sure about the others.
In summary, a very successful and fun book. I look forward to reading about the rest of Warlock and Watson's adventures.
being_b's review against another edition
4.0
That was just tremendous fun. Retellings of the early Sherlock Holmes stories if Sherlock were a none-too-bright Warlock instead, and Watson the investigator. As matters go on things get more and more interesting. Bought the next two books immediately.
A note for the people complaining about the stupidity of the first mystery: A Study in Scarlet, the very first Sherlock Holmes story, suffers from what can charitably be called "creative" narrative choices by Doyle. It's got a boring story in third-person omniscient POV that is used to explain the killer's motivations and backstory, and Denning justifiably mocks it. By replacing Lucy the woman (whose kidnapping, forcible marriage and eventual death drive the killer's desire for revenge in the original story) with , the author lampshades how totally irrelevant Lucy-the-person is to a narrative that is supposedly all about the killer's love for her. All in the spirit of DeConnick's "sexy lamp" test (can the female character can be replaced by a sexy lamp and the narrative still makes sense?)- clever idea, but it does make for flat reading.
A note for the people complaining about the stupidity of
Spoiler
the extended donut joke inSpoiler
Lucy the donutreadingwithrogues's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Loveable characters? Yes
4.0
braincell4rent's review against another edition
2.0
No tengo palabras... O, mejor dicho, no tengo palabras buenas para describir esta cosa. Ni siquiera entiendo por qué hay tantas buenas reviews alabando la comedia en esto.
Se supone que es una parodia de Sherlock Holmes, con un Holmes estúpido y poseído por demonios (¿creo? Lo cierto es que lo abandoné sin terminarlo), unos policías que son vampiro y ogro respectivamente, y un Watson que es... Watson.
En verdad quería leer una comedia, pero encontré esto bastante decepcionante. No hay ni un solo chiste inteligente en todo el libro, el humor es púramente de caricatura, sin ningún contexto y rayando en lo absurdo. Los personajes están mal desarrollados. El único que tiene un poco más de background (o resulta más interesante, por poco que sea) es Watson. Y la única razón de esto es porque es quien narra, de lo contrario ni siquiera sería así.
El plot de misterio es inexistente / se explica de manera todavía más estúpida. Y antes de que alguien me recuerde que es parodia, lo comentaré: No, no es que no tenga sentido del humor. Es que no me agrada este tipo de comedia sin ningún desarrollo ni explicación, que su único recurso es recurrir al chiste fácil del golpe accidental o a los sonidos de pedos. No me reí en 1/3 de libro, que es básicamente lo que aguanté antes de decidir que me estaba entrando sueño y abandonar.
Se supone que es una parodia de Sherlock Holmes, con un Holmes estúpido y poseído por demonios (¿creo? Lo cierto es que lo abandoné sin terminarlo), unos policías que son vampiro y ogro respectivamente, y un Watson que es... Watson.
En verdad quería leer una comedia, pero encontré esto bastante decepcionante. No hay ni un solo chiste inteligente en todo el libro, el humor es púramente de caricatura, sin ningún contexto y rayando en lo absurdo. Los personajes están mal desarrollados. El único que tiene un poco más de background (o resulta más interesante, por poco que sea) es Watson. Y la única razón de esto es porque es quien narra, de lo contrario ni siquiera sería así.
El plot de misterio es inexistente / se explica de manera todavía más estúpida. Y antes de que alguien me recuerde que es parodia, lo comentaré: No, no es que no tenga sentido del humor. Es que no me agrada este tipo de comedia sin ningún desarrollo ni explicación, que su único recurso es recurrir al chiste fácil del golpe accidental o a los sonidos de pedos. No me reí en 1/3 de libro, que es básicamente lo que aguanté antes de decidir que me estaba entrando sueño y abandonar.
a_robin_reads's review against another edition
Problematic stuff being mentioned the whole time
jmblocher's review
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
If you haven’t read Sherlock Holmes some of the jokes fall flat.