Rating: 
Summary: One of the best books Stephen King has written
Review: I read this book and I thought it was great. From the first page to the last page it held my interest. King's books normally take me about 150 pages before I get into the story. This was from the very first page. I recommend it highly.
Rating:
Summary: A KING "KLASSSIC"
Review: THIS BOOK IS FANTASTIC. STEVEN KING WENT BACK TO THE BASICS WHILE WRITING THIS BOOK. THE BOOK CONTAINS PLENTY OF SUSPENSE. AT TIMES WHILE I WAS READING THIS BOOK, I WOULD BREAK OUT IN GOOSEBUMPS. AS OTHER GREAT CLASSICS BY STEVEN KING, THIS BOOK GETS INTO YOUR HEAD AND PLAYS WITH YOUR MIND. WHILE 'BAG OF BONES' IS NO 'IT' THE BOOK DESERVES ONES ATTENTION. DETAILED AND VIVID. ALSO, THE BOOK HAS A GREAT ENDING. IT IS NOT ABRUPT, AS IN BOOKS SUCH AS 'INSOMNIA' AND 'NEEDFUL THINGS'. 'BAG OF BONES' IS ONE OF KINGS' GREATEST.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Change for King
Review: This book was a great departure for Stephen King. I enjoyed the fast-paced writing style. He draws you in and makes you care for each of the characters. I wondered how some of the plots related, but then they are explained as if he knew what his reader was thinking. I recommend this book for anyone who enjoys a good romantic and horror story.
Rating:
Summary: Best King novel since The Stand
Review: A true sign of a writer compfortable with his position, recommending other novelists and analysis in print. Combined the Sci-Fi of tradition of King with the potential of the legal intrigue of Grisham
Rating: 
Summary: A good read.
Review: The story was a little slow to start, but once it finally did, it kept me turing the pages.
Rating:
Summary: Best King work in a long time
Review: I am probably in a very small minority when I say that Stephen King is at his best when writing non horror or supernatural stories. This book surprised me. The story was engrossing and heartbreaking and keeps you wanting to turn to the next page. I haven't been very thrilled with the last few King novels (excluding Wizard and Glass) but this book gives me faith that one of my favorite authors is still right in the groove.
Rating: 
Summary: VC Andrews with a p----, indeed
Review: I love Stephen King- even his weakest novels are good reads, and only seem sucky when compared to his best. Bag of Bones isn't the best, but it isn't too sucky, either. I found it uneven. It brings us to familiar King territory-- Boondocks, Maine, populated with eccentric old farts (what SK novel would be complete without them?). King still hasn't lost his sense of funny; the self-deprication and the always surprisingly original (and hilarious!) toliet humour is all here. The plot was excellent. I think it's the characters that drag this one down. Not Sara Tildwell; she may be the most fascinating female character SK created. I wish there was more of her in the story. The one I'm thinking of, the really sucky character, is the villian Max Devore. He can be summed up in two words: Mister Burns. I kept expecting him to rub his hands together and purr--'Excellent, Rogette. Eeeeeexcellent. Now RELEASE THE HOUNDS!!!' With it's reverencial bow to Daphne du Maurier and allusions to VC Andrews, this is apparently supposed to be a gothic novel, a genre of horror more subtle than King's usual style, and one that women seem to write better. SK's masculine prose is great for ghost-fests like The Shining, but doesn't quite capture the quiet, whispered, "I think I'm going crazy but i won't tell anyone one because they'll think it's repressed sexual desire or something to do with menopause" feel of a true gothic (For that, read Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House, and Judith Hawks' Julian's House). Good reading, as you'd expect from King, but not great.
Rating:
Summary: Typical Steven King
Review: Like most of his books, it was great until the last 75 pages or so, when he must work overtime to tie up the loose ends, make it somewhat plausible and bring it to conclusion. Rather weak here, but enjoyable for most of the trip.
Rating: 
Summary: One of the most boring I have ever read.
Review: I cannot believe how boring this book is. I suffered through about the first 400 pages over a 2 month period and could not finish it. Many parts are just plain foolish. How did this book generate the press that it did? Whatever happened to books like Pet Semetary and The Shining?
Rating:
Summary: Unreadable and cliched
Review: With Bag of Bones, King brings the word "awful" to new levels of awfulness. With awful characters, an awful, boring, unneccesarily complicated plot, and awful editing, it simply oozes awfulness from every awful page. Well, maybe it wasn't that bad, but it sure wasn't good.
| 
