Rating: 
Summary: The best Buffy book yet!
Review: I've read a ton of Buffy books and this one was the best. Something strange has taken over Sunnydale after a school shooting, and the citizens are getting violent, even Xander and Willow! With Oz missing everybody is tense and worried. I love the vampires and the whole 'fight or die' thing, and this book was heart breaking as well. Read this if you ever want to see the characters in a different light!
Rating:
Summary: Very Enjoyable - A Great Read!
Review: I've read all the Buffy novels so far, and this is one of the best. The storyline is interesting & gripping, the characterizations are dead-on, there's plenty of action & angst, some Angel history, some slayer lore, and a thrilling finish. The only small complaint might be that the conclusion seemed a bit rushed, but since the rest of the book was so good, this hardly mattered. If you've been reading other books in this series, you should definitely pick this one up!
Rating: 
Summary: Scary how true some of it was
Review: In the United States where there have been way too many schoolincidents, this book was scary. In all of the Buffy books that I haveread, this one shook me to the core in places as scenes of the real incidents flashed through my head. It was different in places as Buffy is not up against just the typical vampire, but an evil older than you can imagine. If you are anxious for a Buffy adventure during the summer reruns, this one will keep you on your toes and make you wonder if Buffy is going to make it out of this scrape.
Rating: 
Summary: Not very good
Review: In this book it was kinda boring at the begining, and then it got even more boring. I think this is worse than the 5th one!
Rating:
Summary: Hits close to home ...
Review: In this era of school shootings and family violence, Nancy Golden's book has a bit more reality than most Buffy novels. For once the residents of Sunnydale are somewhat in the loop on the strange happenings in their town, as a shooting spree can't be easily covered up or ignored. Of course that doesn't change the fact that there is more at work that can meet the eye, and that as usual the police don't have a clue. As principle Snyder has been heard to comment "In case you haven't noticed the police of Sunnydale are deeply stupid." Violence in Sunnydale escalates; can the slayer fight an entire town of crazy people? Golden also gives us a glimpse into the true horror's of being a slayer. Buffy is tormented by knowing the truth about some missing children, and by the fact that she knows the perpetrators of some of the horrendous crimes. Being the slayer she can say nothing, give no words of comfort to grieving families. One of the best. Great plot, great writing, great insight into our favorite characters. Don't miss it.
Rating:
Summary: terrible beyond belief
Review: Let's get one thing straight: I am a Buffy fan, and very glad to be one. This side idolatry, however. And it is mere truth that the second-worst feature of this great series is its unspeakable ignorance of history (the worst is its foolish and illiterate attitude to Christianity). BtVS likes to use long depth of past events; the results are lamentable, because Joss Whedon is one of the unfortunately large amount of people who know nothing about history, but have strong views about it anyway. All seven series are sodden with this, to the extent that I think I can seriously say that BtVS never once dealt with the past without some major unlikelihood or downright howler.
This is bad enough in the TV series, which has the charm of the interpreters and the frequent genius of Mr.Whedon; it is absolutely disastrous in derivative products. The writer of this novel has had the wretched idea to try to root its menace in the immemorial past, setting half of it in the Roman Empire; her idea of which it would be kind to call ignorant. This would actually be a fairly decent story, though nothing special, but for the dreadful void where an idea of the past should be. It is quite useless to enumerate Ms. Holder's errors (she seems to think that Caligula had something to do with the Fall of the Roman Empire); because the point is not merely the desperate, damaging ignorance, but the fact that she seems altogether unconcerned to do anything about it. The research for this novel is skimpier and trashier than a Christina Aguilera dress; but it is the mental environment which is hideous, satisfied with its ignorance, indeed actually unwilling to learn, lest the learning spoil its mental images - lest, that is, they may be forced to confront their prejudices against reality. The story as she tells it would not even exist if she had the least idea of Roman realities; any research would be death to the ideas she has conceived. It is therefore to her advantage to continue not to know, lest her work be made ever so slightly more difficult. That this means that she slanders the past would not, I suppose, trouble her; but she should also realize how counter-educational, how damaging to her readers, it is to deliver such an insane idea of our common background. She is effectively fostering ignorance for money, making a living as a writer by fostering ignorance.
The slight excuse for this is that it is difficult to set an horror story anywhere but in the modern age. Horror stories set, say, in the Middle Ages, or in Classical Greece, or in Han China, always have to subtly slant the environment to make it suitable for emotions or ideas that are not native to it. Horror is a modern genre, barely older than the Romantic age, and while ancient literatures had plenty of horrible stories to tell, it was the horror of reality, not of imagination: war, pestilence, betrayal, crime, death in its ordinary thousand forms. However, the masters of modern horror all worked hard, if not always successfully, to root their stories in good sound research: think of the elaborate reading, the careful research and intense feeling for the past in the work of, say, H.P.Lovecraft, or of the ecyclopedias, travel books and even railway guides consulted by Bram Stoker for DRACULA. For one thing, good reading can help any writer; part of the interest of Lovecraft's work is the fascination for the past that he conveys. But even more importantly, bad research is an insult to readers: not only does it say that the writer is ignorant, but that the writer expects readers to be ignorant and does not think them worth the effort. In THE CASE OF CHARLES DEXTER WARD, Lovecraft throws off, off-handedly, the fact that the Black Prince was notorious for a massacre in 1370, or that seventh-century British script had a particular shape (which he correctly imitates), and writes a whole colonial-age romance with names and places all in place. This says to the reader: I think you know all that, and, if that is not the case, I know that you are capable of finding out. Nancy Holder's says: I know that you are too lazy to get off your couch and get a book of reference from the shelf; therefore I will feed you pap in which Christians are being fed to the lions in the Coliseum in 40AD, because the only thing you care about is sex and violence.
This is the horror of this book: the shameless exhibition of its mind. Educators, especially history teachers, should read it as a set text, and shudder. A not uneducated, American citizen, who has enough familiarity with books to want to become a professional writer, has this sort of idea of the past: this is terrible beyond belief. This is what Americans have learned about history. This is what modern education has done to one of its subjects: not only ignorance, but self-satisfaction; not only blind prejudice, but no notion whatever that there is any virtue in trying to broaden your horizons, learn something beyond what you think you know, and discard the figments of the darkness in which you walk. This is not only the ignorance, but the spiritual darkness you have taught them to value.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Plot, Rickety Construction
Review: Nancy Holder and Christopher Golden are best when working together; I can only surmise that they complement each other's strengths and weaknesses well. Even as a team, they have a tendency to fall back on too many action sequences, and both together and separately they put more in a book than it really can comfortably handle. I have to preface this review by stating that Evil is a good read - it is just an undisciplined and overbusy one. It has one of the best openings in any Buffy book, a virtual re-enactment of the Columbine slayings, and maintains strong depth of feeling for all the characters. The antagonists of the piece, more or less the Spike and Dru of ancient Rome, are fascinating and well-drawn, and the historical backstories on them are among the best written scenes in the book. The central plot is clever, and allows for strong interplay among all the series characters. What's weak about it is the subplot, which becomes more distracting than enhancing. The Roman vampires, intent on recreating epic gladiatorial games, poison Sunnydale's water supply to create madness on the streets. Too much time is spent on Buffy and the Scoobies settling street fights that have nothing to do with the central plot, and the focus is badly diffused. Fans will definitely enjoy it, but Evil is probably not the best book for newcomers to the series.
Rating:
Summary: Great Plot, Rickety Construction
Review: Nancy Holder and Christopher Golden are best when working together; I can only surmise that they complement each other's strengths and weaknesses well. Even as a team, they have a tendency to fall back on too many action sequences, and both together and separately they put more in a book than it really can comfortably handle. I have to preface this review by stating that Evil is a good read - it is just an undisciplined and overbusy one. It has one of the best openings in any Buffy book, a virtual re-enactment of the Columbine slayings, and maintains strong depth of feeling for all the characters. The antagonists of the piece, more or less the Spike and Dru of ancient Rome, are fascinating and well-drawn, and the historical backstories on them are among the best written scenes in the book. The central plot is clever, and allows for strong interplay among all the series characters. What's weak about it is the subplot, which becomes more distracting than enhancing. The Roman vampires, intent on recreating epic gladiatorial games, poison Sunnydale's water supply to create madness on the streets. Too much time is spent on Buffy and the Scoobies settling street fights that have nothing to do with the central plot, and the focus is badly diffused. Fans will definitely enjoy it, but Evil is probably not the best book for newcomers to the series.
Rating:
Summary: Nancy Holder at her best
Review: Nancy Holder has been the most consistently inspired of the novelists to tackle the Buffyverse, and this may well be her best. The theme -- using the supernatural to mirror typical teenage worries and concerns -- matches that of the TV show, and her characterisation is superb. Both Oz and Xander (here portrayed as cynical, funny and heroic despite himself) shine. Buy it.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing
Review: Nancy Holder has co-written both of the excellent "Watcher's Guides" as well as the wonderful "Immortal", but "The Evil That Men Do" falls far short of those benchmarks. Why? 1. Everyone, especially Xander, is FAR too glib under the most extreme of circumstances. BTVS is reknowned for its wit and snappy dialogue, but the show doesn't have its characters making unrealistically wry quips right in the middle of life-or-death situations as Holder does. 2. Helen and Julian - beautiful insane vampire is infatuated with Angel, much to the dismay of her handsome, devoted British vampire boyfriend. Sound familiar? Could they BE bigger ripoffs of Spike and Dru? Jeez. It's so painfully obvious, it seems almost intentional. 3. Many of the Scoobs, especially Willow, act out of character, even before and after the insanity spell is in effect. There were many times during this book where I just put it down and thought, "I don't think this is in line with what the character would do. Did Joss approve of this?" On the plus side, it's always good to see a little Slayer history, especially as far back as this story goes. Actually, Helen's and Julian's origins are the best part of the book. In all, this is nowhere near as good as her "Immortal" or Gatekeeper trilogy (both collaborations with Christopher Golden). Save your money for those books instead.
|
