Rating: 
Summary: Great Summer Reading - Scarey too!
Review: I am fascinated by the readers who call themselves King fans and yet cry for the old stuff. King has grown and so should his so called "fans". The book was very well written, very descriptive and the characters charming. Except for the Boogy Man. Loved the baseball aspect. I also thought the book was scarey in parts. I was reading alone in the house at night and a couple of times had to put the book down, it brought out things that go bump. A must read! Thanks Mr. King!
Rating: 
Summary: How Can People Say This Isn't Stephen King??????????????????
Review: I have read several of the reviews posted here and many of the not-so-good ones are just plain confusing. People say that it isn't the "old" Stephen King, that it isn't "scary" enough. But have any of you out there really read Stephen King? Do Any of you understand that Mr. King has fallen under the label of a "horror" writer? Probably not. I hope every one who picks up any of his books isn't always looking for gore and monsters. He's done that, sure he has. But what kind of writer would he be if he didn't attempt (and I daresay achieve) other genres. Stephen King has never truly scared me. Well maybe the short story "The Boogieman" did. Everything else he's written has just been interesting, entertaining reads. This book is no exception. Gripes about the story being too short, too involved with baseball, uninvolving and the likes either come from readers who are biased against the works of Stephen King or who just cannot grasp the concept of writing as expression, as art. If the palette of the writer doesn't hold many colors than the work becomes boring, overdone, the same old thing. I praise Mr. King for his jaunt into children's fare, but can it be labeled as such? There are simplicities in his writings that hide complexities that haunt the mind. So whether it's a town filled with vampires, a writer plagued with an evil twin, a hotel haunted and just maybe possesed, or a little girl lost in the woods pursued by "something" it all boils down to one great conclusion: Stephen King can write, he gets paid darn well for it, his family will never go hungry, and if you don't get that maybe, just maybe, you ought to apply for just a few more brain cells!!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: This book was slow, and weak.
Review: Not one of his bests....thank god! It was a very slow, weak, boring, ...I could go on an on! I thikn he shoudl stick to his usual frightening detailed books..this just didn't compare!
Rating:
Summary: Sweet
Review: I've read many reviews by King fans who are not happy with this book. Can it be that you are not Red Sox fans? Can it be that you don't understand what King was going for in this book? It does not all have to be action, horror, monsters or fear. This is the story of a lost girl who perseveres and survives. She has a hero who inspires her and after a few days, lives with her in her hungered mind. I loved this book. I think that King is exploring other avenues with great success.
Rating:
Summary: Quick, good read
Review: This was my first Stephen King book which is probably why I liked it (not having any of his other books to compare it to). I was drawn into the story and felt the pain Trisha went through as she found herself lost in the woods. I thought her feelings were totally realistic - one minute she was feeling extremely satisfied and content with feeling full for the first time in her life and then she was having a screaming temper tantrum wanting to get out the woods immediately. I might have to try another King book and see what I think
Rating:
Summary: A Good Summer Read!
Review: First, I'd like to submit that summer books needn't be long. Second, Stephen King novels don't need to make your skin crawl!! In this short novel I found plenty of suspense, this is written from a child's perspective and it brought me back to my childhood and some near misses with "getting lost". Despite being a guy in his early 40's I found myself relating very well to Trish'. As an adult I was hooked on the depth of detail in this adventure (after all with a one character story you better have background). Now this isn't "THE STAND" or "THE SHINING" and I don't think it should be compared to them. It was a nice summer read!!!
Rating:
Summary: ????
Review: What happened to Stephen King and his writing style? After BAG OF BONES, I started to read this one. Very dissapointing indeed.
Rating: 
Summary: Poor attempt at something new (New is Ok, poor is NOT!)
Review: I hate to jump on the band-wagon of negativity, but let's analyze the book. Probably a great book if you're a young teenager. However, the plot, storyline, and characters do NOT receive the intricate development that SK is so well known for. The anatagonist is weak to say the least (what's up with this bear). Put aside the issue that this is not a "horror" book. Authors should be able to expand their topics. However, I have followed SK since the mid 1970's (since Carrie), and this book does not live up to his talent. I believe he's resting on his name on this one. As a collector, I had to get it anyway, but unless you collect SK, don't waste your time. I only hope his next work (available 9-14-99) is better. Horror, or otherwise, SK is an excellent author, but this is not worthy of the tree that died to print it.
Rating: 
Summary: A children's horror novel?!
Review: I didn't like this book, but I did finish it. It was a short book, but seemed too long! To me, it's as disappointing as "The Blair Witch Project." Unless you've been lost in the woods, or you are a little kid, this isn't scary. A reviewer here on Amazon.com said "The Koran would be scarier!" and I have to agree.A lot about this book was unbelievable, too. I remember myself at 9 years old. I might have wandered off in the woods, but I certainly wouldn't think to myself "Gee, this is just like in Lord of the Rings" or "...just like a V.C. Andrews novel." Those are the supposed thoughts of a nine-year old girl who #1-loves her little dolly, carries her everywhere and #2-loves to watch baseball?! The character is just too impossible to believe. Nine year olds don't have this much personality or scope of experience. I know a "talented and gifted" nine year old who loves to read dinosaur books, Animorph books and Pokemon books. He collects pokemon cards. He certainly doesn't know a whole genre of fiction enough to make comments about a walk in the woods. Plus, the distance this girl travels is hard to believe, especially being sick and dehydrated. I'd recommend this book to teens, I suppose. I mean, I read scarier things in my early teens, that were part of those series (maybe it was called "The Darkwing Series" or something) with witches, voo-doo, ghosts and vampires. FWIW, I haven't read a lot of Stephen King, but I have read Pet Semetary and Thinner. I also read 1/2 of the Talisman.
Rating:
Summary: It wasn't what I expected, but overall I liked it.
Review: I recently finished reading Stephen King's latest book, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. It's the first of King's books that I've read, so I have nothing to compare it to, but I can say this: IT wasn't quite what I expecteed. The book is about a girl who gets separated from her mom and brother on a mountain train and ends up lost in the woods. She wanders for days, trying to find any sign of human life or of civilization. As she travels she listens to Boston Red Sox games on her walkman and has imaginary conversations with her favorite player, Tom Gordo. All the while, she senses a "thing" in the woods that is watching her and waiting for just the right moment to tattack. THe book is interesting, but not really scary, like I thought it would be. My favorite thing about it was all of the baseball references - I'm a huge fan of baseball (NOT the Red Sox!). Overall, I liked it, even though it wasn't quite what I expected. i wouldn't run to the library to get it, but if you happen ot be in one and you see The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, pick it up.
|
