Reviews with content warning for Gore - Time of Contempt

Reviews tagging 'Gore'

Time of Contempt by Andrzej Sapkowski

28 reviews

camoo3032's review

adventurous dark emotional tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.25

The author is a genius at choosing which perspective to write from. It's this creative storytelling that makes it so interesting to read

Content Warnings

stephen_welch93's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

The writing style is interesting. A lot of the action happens on the periphery of the narrative. That makes the world feel very alive. A lot happens away from the main characters. But that also makes it very complicated and difficult to keep track of what’s happening. The cast of characters is also very large, so keeping everyone straight can be tough. The plot is interesting and the characters are cool. I definitely want to know what happens next.

Content Warnings

anni_swanilda's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark tense fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

Content Warnings

thebibliobibuli's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

Content Warnings

tilo's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark emotional mysterious sad tense medium-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? Yes

5.0

Wie immer: Unglaublich gute Fantasy und die Story ist fesselnd.
Besonders spannend finde ich nach wie vor wie facettenreich die Charaktere sind, denn hier kommen so viele verschiedene Motive aufeinander, Gruppierungen mit unterschiedlichsten Interessen und trotzdem hat jeder mit jedem irgendwie zu tun, wodurch ein faszinierendes Netz gespannt wurde.

Content Warnings

billyjepma's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

A much better entry than the last one, though not without the typical bevy of "yeah, a straight white man definitely wrote this." The worldbuilding kicks back into high gear, and it rules. Sapkowski gets to dig into the politics of his cruel fantasy world and develop the different factions scheming against each other. I'm a sucker for that stuff, so obviously, it worked for me. His action scenes are also stellar, as per usual, and I don't think I'll ever get tired of how much specificity he invests in the quick but brutal bouts of combat.

Not all of the development lands, and Sapkowski would benefit from a slightly more ruthless editor. And, again, the way he writes his women characters is a big ol' mixed bag. Sometimes, it's really good, and I genuinely appreciate how complex his cast's morality and motivations are, men and women alike. He doesn't suffer from cliches in that way. What he does suffer from are many of the other problems that plague most fantasy penned by male writers. He relies far too heavily on the sexuality and violence the women are defined by or threatened with. These issues aren't as pronounced as in the last book, but they're still here, and I don't see them miraculously disappearing moving forward.

Still, I enjoyed this immensely, and my fascination and investment in the Witcher series are here to stay.

Content Warnings

gameoftomes's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark mysterious sad tense fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.25

3.25 / 5 stars
Very harsh, a lot of players in the game without the needed characterizations or backstories. But I’m a lover of YA fantasy, which is frequently character-driven.

I understand that in Ciri’s precarious position late in the book that there is a realistic threat of rape. But having Mistle save Ciri from being assaulted only to then have it be very unclear as to Ciri’s consent is too much for me. The text disgusts me: “a warm and wet well of resignation and helpless submissiveness. A disgusting and humiliatingly pleasant submissiveness.” I’m not sure if things were lost in translation, or if that is what the writer considers female consent is. It’s especially disturbing because Ciri is 14 and frequently described as being not far from childhood. I know she’s dealt with a lot in terms of survival and war. I know she’s been trained in violence and combat by witchers. But the unclear consent and circumstances surrounding it just doesn’t feel right. There’s no romance, no lust. Ciri’s not an adult, not in a position of power, barely in a position of safety, and the text quickly moves on from it, showing Ciri being tender with Mistle and being a full member of the gang.

There are a lot of great plot twists and switching allegiances before that. Unfortunately I feel like there isn’t as much of a story payoff as there could be, considering the reader gets very little detail and characterization of the key players beforehand. I think the Netflix adaptation of these storylines could greatly improve upon this narrative and give the viewer a satisfying, thrilling, and enthralling watching experience. Fingers crossed.

Content Warnings

alliswyattonthewesternfront's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark emotional medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.5

Content Warnings

zyllah's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

Content Warnings

liz_ross's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

3.75

"But do you know when stories stop being stories? The moment someone begins to believe in them."

I complained about this when I reviewed Blood of Elves, but it wasn't as clear as it will be now, because I wasn't sure if that was the problem and I actually ended up blaming the impossibility to know where the plot was going for not liking the book. Which was absolutely true, but now that I have two books to base my opinion on, I know for sure that the plotline problem is the result of a much bigger one.

Sapkowski's writing style is definitely not the best out there to write a novel. It is quite good if he is writing a short story, but for a novel... it is not a good choice. It makes the story weird. Sapkowski jumps from place to place, character to character, leaving you completly lost on what's going on, which is the reason why you have absolutely no idea where the plot is supposed to be leading you.

The saddest part is that everything about his descriptions is absolutely perfect, no matter if we are talking about people, places or situations. You can perfectly imagine it all, which means that if he wouldn't jump from character to character more often than not, the book would have everything to be amazing, becausd I am 100% sure that if that didn't happen the plotline would be much more clear and therefore easier to follow.

I am not saying it would be a 5 stars book, because that's not the only thing I dislike about this book, but it would get a higher rating. But let's not follow Sapkowski's example and keep jumping from place to place because I know from experience that it doesn't work.

So, confusing plot because we keep jumping from place to place like some mutant kangoroo. It was so frustrating that I felt like giving up after reading only 2 chapters. But the book was so short that it felt like a waste to just give it up. Which turned out to be a quite good decision.

If you ask me to tell you when did the plotline started to make sense, I won't be able to tell you. I have no clue. All I know is that I was reading and suddnely I realized I wasn't jumping from place to place so often and I was starting to actually see the path the plot was taking. Which made things better, sure, but for a while wasn't enough.

And the reason for that was the political intrigue. When I said I wasn't jumping from place to place so often, it doesn't mean it didn't happen sometimes. It did. And some would say that since the reader has to put up with that, then at least the reader should be allowed to get some advantage out of that. Sapkowski doesn't agree. I love political intrigue, but only when it is done right. Having to walk blindly and getting backstabbed by both sides because I have no clue of what's going on is not at all my definition of political intrigue done right.

What does that has to do with the jumping from character to character? It's a smart question. The answer, EVERYTING. You see, this book has this character, which I can't decide if I like or not, because I do admire her, but at the same time it sometimes feels like she only exists so Sapkowski can say his books aren't mysognistic, which pisses me off. Her name is Yennifer and she is right in the middle of the political intrigue that is going on, which would make her Sapkowski's best choice to introduce us to the political intrigue. Instead, everything related to it is presented to us when it's Gerald's story that we are following. The same Geralt who would rather be neutral and doesn't give a damn about politics. It doesn't take a genius to understand why using a character that doesn't care about politics to introduce us to the political intrigue is not a good idea. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO AT LEAST HAVE ONE CLUE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON. ONE clue and I would have been happy, or at least better than I was walking through all that completly blind.

Of course, that could have been Sapkowski's objective, to make us know as much as Geralt (which was nothing), but for me that doesn't work. Even if the reader doesn't know everything, there's a minimum of information that the reader needs to have access to in order to make some sense out of what's happening.

Eventually, after being backstabbed more times than I would have liked, the political scheme became clear. And that, along with the fact that I no longer felt like a mutant kangoroo, allowed the story to be incredibly good. It got much more action (and trust me, if there's one thing Sapkowski absolutely knows how to do, it is writing an absolutely phenomenal fighting scene) and I found myself fully invested on it.

Truth is, that only happened in the last two or three chapters, but that's the good thing about short books, sometimes two or three really good chapters are enough to make up for all the others. That's the case with this book. I absolutely loved these last chapters and now I can't wait to read the next book to know what will happen to Ciri and Geralt.

But my desire to know what will happen isn't just innocent curiosity to know what will happen next. It's also the need to make sure that important matters are approaced in the right, serious way that they should be. Sapkowski chose to make all that happen too close to the end to give him room to adress those matters in any way, but the way he mentioned them felt way too casual. I am hoping that feeling of casuality is wrong and that adressing it in the end of a book wasn't a mistake Sapkowski made and that he will talk about it again in the next book.

Overall, I still think Sapkowski's writing style is not the best for a novel, but as the story develops and the several characters cross paths, making the jumpings less frequent, things get better and it's even possible to enjoy the story.

Content Warnings

More...