Scan barcode
A review by crystalstarrlight
Guilty Pleasures by Laurell K. Hamilton
2.0
Anita Blake has been given an assignment: find out who's killing the vampires. At first, she refuses, but when the Master of the City, Nikolaos, demands something, Anita learns that "no" isn't an answer.
I saw "Blade Runner" for the first time just last year--mostly to see Harrison "Han Solo/Indiana Jones" Ford but partly because of its status as epic scifi movie. I'll be honest...it wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't all that amazing either. Sure the effects were great (better than seeing loads of CGI), but the whole thing felt very "eh" to me.
And that got me to thinking about this little thing on TVTropes.org called Seinfield is Unfunny (I recommend going there AFTER reading my whole review, else you'll be there for the rest of the week). It's that thing where so much has been changed by this one particular THING that when a younger person sees the original, they go, "Eh, so overdone!" only, when that THING came out, it was new and brilliant and original.
I think you can see where I am going with this. I am sure that when "Guilty Pleasures" first came out back in the 90's, everyone was pumped. I mean, there weren't nearly as many vampire novels, and to have a vampire novel where the girl chewed bubblegum and kicked @ss? Definitely not something you saw every day.
Only now, in 2012, this has been done TO DEATH. Vampires are so blase, it is a struggle for a new author to lend anything new to them. Kick @ss female main characters are a dime a dozen (well, when they aren't torn between choosing one of their two beaus). And detective stories set in an urban fantasy landscape? I'm sure those who love Urban Fantasy can list several right off the tops of their heads.
So that definitely affected my opinion of Guilty Pleasures. By why 2 stars instead of 3?
I actually read and reviewed the graphic novel of this book before I read the novel. And one of my complaints was:
I thought that by reading the novel, a lot of my confusion about the plot would clear up. And while yes, the novel DID clear up a great many things, a LOT of stuff happens that I have no idea why. Why does Nikolaos want Anita to find the vampire murderers so bad? There is NO ONE else in the city that would investigate this? And why does Nikolaos spend SO MUCH TIME threatening Anita with death? (What is up with throwing Anita into the wererat den? Did I miss something?) Doesn't she realize that Anita can't investigate murders when she is at knife- or gun-point? Why does she send Philip to Anita? Why doesn't she just have Philip investigate--he seems to know more about the murders than Anita. Why does Anita return to Nikolaos' lair when she found out who the killer is? Why does Anita not do any real investigating until almost the halfway point? I wish I were joking about that last bit, but Anita gets captured and beat up THREE TIMES before she finally starts to investigate--and when she DOES start to investigate, it's to call up Ronnie, who seems to do more of the dirty work than Anita. And the end battle is confusing, confusing, confusing!
Reading the novel also did not change my opinion of Anita herself that much. That woman needs to go to anger management. She was constantly swearing about something, but seemed to produce very little results. She has an ENORMOUS chip on her shoulder and seems to think she is REALLY AWESOME. If she were my friend...yeah, well, that probably wouldn't happen. I couldn't stand to be around a woman like that for very long.
Jean-Claude was a bit silly if you ask me. His obsession with Anita (while nowhere near Edward-stalker creepy) just seemed odd. Though I can see where a lot of people might like him. He does exude sexuality and he and Anita do legitimately have chemistry.
The one character I ADORED was Ronnie. THAT was a woman who would be my friend. She kicked @ss! She was a great friend, dependable, caring, and stalwart.
The writing was pretty mediocre. It wasn't horrible, but it certainly wasn't the most sterling I've ever read. And I think having it told in first person, as if Anita were talking to a friend ALMOST made it more annoying.
I actually listened to this on audiobook...and the narrator made me hate Anita EVEN MORE. She affected this SUPER SNOTTY voice that made me want to drive a nail into my hand. The way she had Anita scream words, swear, or say "Riiiiight" (Anita saying that so much drove me bonkers--made me think Anita thinks she is VERY clever and funny)...GAH!
I'm kinda glad I finally got to read/listen to the novel. It kinda affirmed my opinion of the graphic novel (I have a hard time with graphic novels, honestly) and has cut down one Urban Fantasy series that I want to keep up on. Well, I'm actually going to be VERY generous to this series and try Book 2, in hopes that some of the problems get cleared up. But three strikes and yer out!
I saw "Blade Runner" for the first time just last year--mostly to see Harrison "Han Solo/Indiana Jones" Ford but partly because of its status as epic scifi movie. I'll be honest...it wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't all that amazing either. Sure the effects were great (better than seeing loads of CGI), but the whole thing felt very "eh" to me.
And that got me to thinking about this little thing on TVTropes.org called Seinfield is Unfunny (I recommend going there AFTER reading my whole review, else you'll be there for the rest of the week). It's that thing where so much has been changed by this one particular THING that when a younger person sees the original, they go, "Eh, so overdone!" only, when that THING came out, it was new and brilliant and original.
I think you can see where I am going with this. I am sure that when "Guilty Pleasures" first came out back in the 90's, everyone was pumped. I mean, there weren't nearly as many vampire novels, and to have a vampire novel where the girl chewed bubblegum and kicked @ss? Definitely not something you saw every day.
Only now, in 2012, this has been done TO DEATH. Vampires are so blase, it is a struggle for a new author to lend anything new to them. Kick @ss female main characters are a dime a dozen (well, when they aren't torn between choosing one of their two beaus). And detective stories set in an urban fantasy landscape? I'm sure those who love Urban Fantasy can list several right off the tops of their heads.
So that definitely affected my opinion of Guilty Pleasures. By why 2 stars instead of 3?
I actually read and reviewed the graphic novel of this book before I read the novel. And one of my complaints was:
"The story was nearly incomprehensible to me. It seemed to jump all over the place."
I thought that by reading the novel, a lot of my confusion about the plot would clear up. And while yes, the novel DID clear up a great many things, a LOT of stuff happens that I have no idea why. Why does Nikolaos want Anita to find the vampire murderers so bad? There is NO ONE else in the city that would investigate this? And why does Nikolaos spend SO MUCH TIME threatening Anita with death? (What is up with throwing Anita into the wererat den? Did I miss something?) Doesn't she realize that Anita can't investigate murders when she is at knife- or gun-point? Why does she send Philip to Anita? Why doesn't she just have Philip investigate--he seems to know more about the murders than Anita. Why does Anita return to Nikolaos' lair when she found out who the killer is? Why does Anita not do any real investigating until almost the halfway point? I wish I were joking about that last bit, but Anita gets captured and beat up THREE TIMES before she finally starts to investigate--and when she DOES start to investigate, it's to call up Ronnie, who seems to do more of the dirty work than Anita. And the end battle is confusing, confusing, confusing!
Reading the novel also did not change my opinion of Anita herself that much. That woman needs to go to anger management. She was constantly swearing about something, but seemed to produce very little results. She has an ENORMOUS chip on her shoulder and seems to think she is REALLY AWESOME. If she were my friend...yeah, well, that probably wouldn't happen. I couldn't stand to be around a woman like that for very long.
Jean-Claude was a bit silly if you ask me. His obsession with Anita (while nowhere near Edward-stalker creepy) just seemed odd. Though I can see where a lot of people might like him. He does exude sexuality and he and Anita do legitimately have chemistry.
The one character I ADORED was Ronnie. THAT was a woman who would be my friend. She kicked @ss! She was a great friend, dependable, caring, and stalwart.
The writing was pretty mediocre. It wasn't horrible, but it certainly wasn't the most sterling I've ever read. And I think having it told in first person, as if Anita were talking to a friend ALMOST made it more annoying.
I actually listened to this on audiobook...and the narrator made me hate Anita EVEN MORE. She affected this SUPER SNOTTY voice that made me want to drive a nail into my hand. The way she had Anita scream words, swear, or say "Riiiiight" (Anita saying that so much drove me bonkers--made me think Anita thinks she is VERY clever and funny)...GAH!
I'm kinda glad I finally got to read/listen to the novel. It kinda affirmed my opinion of the graphic novel (I have a hard time with graphic novels, honestly) and has cut down one Urban Fantasy series that I want to keep up on. Well, I'm actually going to be VERY generous to this series and try Book 2, in hopes that some of the problems get cleared up. But three strikes and yer out!