Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by nancyflanagan
Hardcore Twenty-Four by Janet Evanovich
1.0
Okay. One and a half stars.
Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum books are like Milky Way bars. The first bite is familiar--bland, sweet, soft. Another two bites and the sweet gets sickening. This escalates to a mouthful of goo that you know will make you feel terrible in a couple of hours. Plus, you'll be hungry again.
There have been stretches where I walked past the last Stephanie Plum novel (and unlike the late, rightfully lamented Sue Grafton, Evanovich chose a titling scheme that could lead to an infinity of Plum books). I knew better. I'm not sure why I pulled this one off the shelf, and read it.
Because it's bad on so many levels--besides the central fact that Evanovich has written the same novel twenty-four times. Mainly, it's offensive in its use of stereotypes. And the zombie plot is flat-out inane.
The extra half-star is because Evanovich is not a bad writer, just a lazy one. She has an eye for comedy and the double entendre, and can turn a phrase. So why doesn't she wrap this up and turn in several new directions?
Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum books are like Milky Way bars. The first bite is familiar--bland, sweet, soft. Another two bites and the sweet gets sickening. This escalates to a mouthful of goo that you know will make you feel terrible in a couple of hours. Plus, you'll be hungry again.
There have been stretches where I walked past the last Stephanie Plum novel (and unlike the late, rightfully lamented Sue Grafton, Evanovich chose a titling scheme that could lead to an infinity of Plum books). I knew better. I'm not sure why I pulled this one off the shelf, and read it.
Because it's bad on so many levels--besides the central fact that Evanovich has written the same novel twenty-four times. Mainly, it's offensive in its use of stereotypes. And the zombie plot is flat-out inane.
The extra half-star is because Evanovich is not a bad writer, just a lazy one. She has an eye for comedy and the double entendre, and can turn a phrase. So why doesn't she wrap this up and turn in several new directions?