Scan barcode
efrancart's review against another edition
dark
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
0.5
Raunchy and gross. Good ideas within about afterlife and death but def the worst Steven King I’ve ever read. It feels like the gunslinger is sexualizing the 10-year-old boy. He’s just so beautiful 🤮🤮🤮 of course this was after he used his gun as a dildo on a woman but was careful not to touch her secret flesh. I swear. I just. No.
No idea why this book and subsequent series is held in high regard.
No idea why this book and subsequent series is held in high regard.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gun violence and Sexual violence
Moderate: Pedophilia
raginsagein's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
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? It's complicated
1.5
First real foray into Stephen King, and I wasn’t terribly impressed.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny, Murder, Violence, and Gun violence
Moderate: Addiction, Blood, Child death, Cursing, and Death
Minor: Torture, Sexual content, and Sexual violence
axeltheredpanda's review against another edition
adventurous
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
Overall a very good book! I found it a little challenging to read (very flowery text) but that’s likely due to me only reading one book in the last ten years and only just coming back to reading.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual assault, Car accident, Animal death, Injury/Injury detail, Sexual violence, Drug use, and Sexual content
Moderate: Gun violence, Addiction, Child death, Child abuse, Abandonment, and Blood
Minor: Schizophrenia/Psychosis , War, and Cursing
dovahkiin_freyja's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Physical abuse, Sexual assault, Death, Emotional abuse, Gun violence, Child death, and Sexual violence
Moderate: Miscarriage
Minor: Animal death
gbyronwilliams's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gore, Violence, Gun violence, Pregnancy, Mass/school shootings, and Child death
Moderate: Sexual violence and Drug use
knightzach's review against another edition
The plot was somewhat interesting, but I could not ignore that extreme abundance of anti-Christian imagery and themes. The book seems to appeal to the lowest base instincts of fallen man--plenty of senseless gore, sex, and "religious weirdos" tropes. The grit and crudeness could be excused if it was done so in a higher narrative purpose, but it didn't deliver. After finishing half of the book, it simply wasn't worth it to finish.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexual violence, Sexual content, Sexual harassment, and Religious bigotry
moonlitemuseum's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
This book was incredible at putting me to sleep. I would turn on the audiobook (which is beautifully narrated by George Guidall) and let the blandness seep into my body like warm water. There is a lot of indescribably stupid and callous edgelord garbage in this book, which I enjoy on occasion, but it never feels anchored in anything that matters. Roland is a cipher. The women in the book, when they do appear, are there to have sex with or be bible-thumping harlots subject to sexual violence. Jake, probably one of the world's first Isekai protagonists, is a delight—King's strength is in the modern day, with modern things and modern landmarks—but even he feels curiously flat when Roland is using him as an emotional tether.
I really love King books, for the record, and I so want to like this book. His sprawling fantasy. And I do plan on reading the next one. But boy, this was rough. I just finished it and I barely remember anything about it. (I am going to request it from the library again though. Fantastic sleep aid!)
I really love King books, for the record, and I so want to like this book. His sprawling fantasy. And I do plan on reading the next one. But boy, this was rough. I just finished it and I barely remember anything about it. (I am going to request it from the library again though. Fantastic sleep aid!)
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual violence, Rape, Pregnancy, Mental illness, and Abortion
Moderate: Gun violence, Child death, Sexual assault, Car accident, Addiction, Vomit, Violence, Sexism, and Murder
Minor: Fatphobia
Whatever the hell is going on with that woman who is given a thing she is not allowed to ask about, with the knowledge that she will have to ask about it. No neat content warning for that, but it was weird and unpleasant.ggcd1981's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
TRIGER WARNING: Animal death, Animal cruelty, Sexual Assault, Miscarriage, Child death, Violence, Sexual content, Misogyny, Objectification of female characters, Murder
Eu comecei The gunslinger com baixas expectativas, pois eu vi vários Booktubers tendo problemas com esse livro. Além disso soube que o próprio Stephen King, em edições posteriores a primeira publicação do livro, escreveu uma Intro meio que se “desculpando” pelos problemas do livro. Dessa forma eu não tinha grandes esperanças para o início da série The dark tower, mas como todo o meu projeto para ler King foi para ler esta série, eu prossegui. Para minha surpresa eu gostei. Não é ótimo mas a escrita e história de King foram interessantes e originais o suficiente para me entreter, mesmo nos momentos “estranhos” e “viajados” da narrativa. Acredito que depois de 3 livros e 1 conto posso afirmar que gosto da escrita de King. The gunslinger é o terceiro livro do autor que leio (por enquanto não tenho um preferido) mas a leitura de The gunslinger foi mais fácil e fluída que Eyes of the dragon ou The stand. Posso dizer até que gostei dos momentos mais “viajados” (e houveram diversos) pois a escrita flui. A cena inteira em que Roland confronta the dark man e contempla a criação do universo e a possibilidade deste ser apenas um átomo numa folha de grama em um universo maior foi extremamente complexa porém nenhum pouco maçante, fluiu perfeitamente e foi bastante intrigante.
Não tenho muito o que dizer em termos de pontos negativos ou positivos pois este é apenas o livro introdutório da série (apesar disso foi nada informativo sobre o universo da história). Como pontos negativos aponto apenas: a objetificação dos personagens femininos, que nesta primeira obra existiram apenas para serem sexualizadas; a violência gráfica contra animais (este é sempre um gatilho para mim); e a total ausência de explicação a respeito do universo da série The Dark tower, dos personagens e os papeis que desempenham (ler esse livro é como começar um filme pela metade). Os pontos positivos até o momento são: como já mencionado a escrita de King; os personagens são bastante intrigantes (Roland, Jake, The dark man), são mistérios a serem descobertos; O mundo e história são tão inesperados e misteriosos para Fantasia ou terror que é inevitável querer saber o que raios está acontecendo e porquê.
Não tenho muito o que dizer em termos de pontos negativos ou positivos pois este é apenas o livro introdutório da série (apesar disso foi nada informativo sobre o universo da história). Como pontos negativos aponto apenas: a objetificação dos personagens femininos, que nesta primeira obra existiram apenas para serem sexualizadas; a violência gráfica contra animais (este é sempre um gatilho para mim); e a total ausência de explicação a respeito do universo da série The Dark tower, dos personagens e os papeis que desempenham (ler esse livro é como começar um filme pela metade). Os pontos positivos até o momento são: como já mencionado a escrita de King; os personagens são bastante intrigantes (Roland, Jake, The dark man), são mistérios a serem descobertos; O mundo e história são tão inesperados e misteriosos para Fantasia ou terror que é inevitável querer saber o que raios está acontecendo e porquê.
Em geral gostei da obra e continuarei com a série. Apesar dos problemas apontados é um sólido 3.75 estrelas.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal cruelty, Animal death, Child death, Genocide, Gun violence, Miscarriage, Murder, Sexism, Sexual violence, Violence, Death, and Sexual content
Moderate: Alcohol, Misogyny, and Pregnancy
captainboring's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexual violence and Violence
Minor: Death
rockatanskette's review against another edition
challenging
dark
tense
slow-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
1.0
This is my first Stephen King novel and honestly? Not impressed.
There's an intriguing plot somewhere, I think, but it's hard to tell with Stephen King's raging boner in the way. I'm usually not one to care about sexual content in books, but it frustrates me when it's extraneous, distracting, and, in this case, intensely sexist. Almost every woman mentioned is described only by her sexual appeal to the main character and his own mother is defined entirely by her sexual (note: not even romantic) relationships with his father and a secondary character. If that wasn't bad enough, King sets various women up as sexually open and then calls them whores (whorish also seems to be a favorite adjective for describing even random, unnamed women). It reminds me of a John Berger quote:
"You painted a naked woman because you enjoyed looking at her, put a mirror in her hand and you called the painting 'Vanity,' thus morally condemning the woman whose nakedness you had depicted for your own pleasure."
There are two or three women mentioned who aren't defined by sex; they're cooks and maids. So do with that what you will.
It's not even the sexual part of it mostly, it's sometimes just bizarre references to genitalia. King describes Roland's balls like the meme about men writers describing breasts. At one point, I read the line "His loins were suddenly filled with light, a light that was soft yet hard" and groaned so loudly my mom asked me if I was in pain. I was.
I'm trying to decide if the questions left open are compelling enough to read the rest of the series, or if I'm just going to Google it to sate what little curiosity I have. I'm leaning toward the latter. There's only so many apparently sentient dicks I can take.
There's an intriguing plot somewhere, I think, but it's hard to tell with Stephen King's raging boner in the way. I'm usually not one to care about sexual content in books, but it frustrates me when it's extraneous, distracting, and, in this case, intensely sexist. Almost every woman mentioned is described only by her sexual appeal to the main character and his own mother is defined entirely by her sexual (note: not even romantic) relationships with his father and a secondary character. If that wasn't bad enough, King sets various women up as sexually open and then calls them whores (whorish also seems to be a favorite adjective for describing even random, unnamed women). It reminds me of a John Berger quote:
"You painted a naked woman because you enjoyed looking at her, put a mirror in her hand and you called the painting 'Vanity,' thus morally condemning the woman whose nakedness you had depicted for your own pleasure."
There are two or three women mentioned who aren't defined by sex; they're cooks and maids. So do with that what you will.
It's not even the sexual part of it mostly, it's sometimes just bizarre references to genitalia. King describes Roland's balls like the meme about men writers describing breasts. At one point, I read the line "His loins were suddenly filled with light, a light that was soft yet hard" and groaned so loudly my mom asked me if I was in pain. I was.
I'm trying to decide if the questions left open are compelling enough to read the rest of the series, or if I'm just going to Google it to sate what little curiosity I have. I'm leaning toward the latter. There's only so many apparently sentient dicks I can take.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexism, Gun violence, and Violence
Minor: Sexual violence
More...