Scan barcode
apathu's review against another edition
1.0
Good concept. The writing was pretty bad and honestly nothing about this was interesting? The characters...Well... I can't name half of them and the rest I don't really care? Don't care about their story.
Honestly this concept was pretty good. But this ...well this is just bland.
Not a dystopian so the possibility of such a dramatic storyline seems unreal. Unnatural.
Clearly the only reason I didn't DNF this is that it was narrated but Tom Hiddleston and I'd drink poison if it's given by that man!
1⭐ for Tom Hiddleston
I shall go now and watch the movie
Honestly this concept was pretty good. But this ...well this is just bland.
Not a dystopian so the possibility of such a dramatic storyline seems unreal. Unnatural.
Clearly the only reason I didn't DNF this is that it was narrated but Tom Hiddleston and I'd drink poison if it's given by that man!
1⭐ for Tom Hiddleston
I shall go now and watch the movie
audioandereadergrrly's review against another edition
5.0
Metaphors…so many metaphors: birds, dilapidated residential services, the fragility of what makes us human. The reading experience was uncomfortable and at times disgusting, but I appreciate all the discomforts of the putrid analysis that this book provokes. Tom Hiddleston’s narration is soothing, in stark contrast with the subject matter.
kittyroar666's review against another edition
challenging
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
adrienneleighton's review against another edition
5.0
Fantastic read. I found the societal critique very interesting. It is a gritty novel, not for the fainthearted but you get that from the opening. The way Ballard creates his characters as well is gripping, even though there are so many people in the novel you don't lose track of who is who because of their striking personalities and attitudes.
marikareads's review against another edition
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
2.0
Mi è stato prestato e ho "dovuto" leggerlo, purtroppo io non funziono così e quindi ho finito per odiarlo e saltare pagine su pagine pur di arrivare alla fine.
Non mi ha fatto impazzire, volevo leggerlo da anni ma non è stato all'altezza delle mie aspettative.
Ho amato la premessa e speravo fosse diverso, purtroppo arrivata a metà avevo già voglia di chiuderlo e non aprirlo mai più.
Non mi ha fatto impazzire, volevo leggerlo da anni ma non è stato all'altezza delle mie aspettative.
Ho amato la premessa e speravo fosse diverso, purtroppo arrivata a metà avevo già voglia di chiuderlo e non aprirlo mai più.
hollywatson's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gore, Sexual violence, Rape, Cannibalism, Domestic abuse, Body horror, Infidelity, Sexism, Alcohol, Animal cruelty, Blood, Animal death, Violence, Sexual assault, Sexual harassment, and Torture
ryzmat's review against another edition
challenging
dark
2.0
I’m honestly not sure why I read this whole thing because I didn’t enjoy it a bit. Maybe I was curious to see how many times the word high-rise was actually included (225 by the count of my Kobo… but she’s old, so may be wrong!)
lulibelle76's review against another edition
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.75
alexisrt's review against another edition
2.0
I wish I could say I liked this more. It was very well written and kept me hooked to the end.
Unfortunately, there were serious underlying flaws with the premise and construction of the book. The concept has obvious appeal, especially given the backdrop of 1970s Britain. The problem is that Ballard left significant weaknesses in his setup, and left everything obvious. Very little in the plot felt surprising. While the initial setup hooks you--you want to know how Laing winds up on that balcony--it also damages the plot: You know the ending, the book does not attempt to deviate from a straight line in getting you there, and things feel ham-fisted. The division of the building into literal lower, middle, and upper classes makes sense from a plot point of view, allowing the elevators and Wilder's ascent of the building to be used as elements of the plot, but feels simplistic.
Throughout the book, I found myself complaining about the obvious plot holes, and getting annoyed at myself for it, because strict factual accuracy isn't the point and I was being needlessly pedantic. Unfortunately, even on reflection, I don't think the book achieved the necessary level of suspension of disbelief for me to be able to overlook them. Obviously, in order for the plot to work, the events inside the high rise must occur without interruption from the outside world. I can accept the premise of the tenants actually enjoying social breakdown at some level and therefore not leaving or calling the police. However, Ballard sacrifices consistency for convenience. When it is necessary for the outside world to be involved; they are, but when it isn't, they're not. Tenants leave to go to work almost until the end, but none seem to bring food back. Food runs out before alcohol. How are they having these constant alcohol fuelled parties? How is the liquor store restocked, but not the supermarket? Ballard wants the reader to ignore these pesky details and merely accept the breakdown of social order. It's not convenient for the store to be restocked, so it isn't, and we're meant to believe that the residents just don't care about it--only it seems they do care about hunger.
I finished the book frustrated, feeling that Ballard had taken a promising concept and not developed it well.
Unfortunately, there were serious underlying flaws with the premise and construction of the book. The concept has obvious appeal, especially given the backdrop of 1970s Britain. The problem is that Ballard left significant weaknesses in his setup, and left everything obvious. Very little in the plot felt surprising. While the initial setup hooks you--you want to know how Laing winds up on that balcony--it also damages the plot: You know the ending, the book does not attempt to deviate from a straight line in getting you there, and things feel ham-fisted. The division of the building into literal lower, middle, and upper classes makes sense from a plot point of view, allowing the elevators and Wilder's ascent of the building to be used as elements of the plot, but feels simplistic.
Throughout the book, I found myself complaining about the obvious plot holes, and getting annoyed at myself for it, because strict factual accuracy isn't the point and I was being needlessly pedantic. Unfortunately, even on reflection, I don't think the book achieved the necessary level of suspension of disbelief for me to be able to overlook them. Obviously, in order for the plot to work, the events inside the high rise must occur without interruption from the outside world. I can accept the premise of the tenants actually enjoying social breakdown at some level and therefore not leaving or calling the police. However, Ballard sacrifices consistency for convenience. When it is necessary for the outside world to be involved; they are, but when it isn't, they're not. Tenants leave to go to work almost until the end, but none seem to bring food back. Food runs out before alcohol. How are they having these constant alcohol fuelled parties? How is the liquor store restocked, but not the supermarket? Ballard wants the reader to ignore these pesky details and merely accept the breakdown of social order. It's not convenient for the store to be restocked, so it isn't, and we're meant to believe that the residents just don't care about it--only it seems they do care about hunger.
I finished the book frustrated, feeling that Ballard had taken a promising concept and not developed it well.