Rating: 
Summary: anachronism
Review: Code to Zero would have been a great science fiction novel -- in 1958, the year this story is alleged to occur. Claude Lucas, a rocket engineer suffering global amnesia, struggles to determine who he is, why people are trying to kill him, and what secret threatens the success of America's first artificial satellite which is to be launched within two days. Dr. Lucas' confusion may be compounded because he also finds himself in a world that did not exist in 1958. His mystery focusses on the location and meaning of "xeroxed" rocket blueprints which are missing along with his memory. But blueprints were still "blue" in 1958 because photocopying was still rare and expensive. And the first "xerox" machines would not be marketed for another year, nor would "xeroxing" become a verb for another decade. Other anomalies (the FBI building is built 15 years early, and passenger trains are again running on time despite being well into their final decline)abound, adding to the surrealism. Lucas also fails to recognize that virtually every scene in his life replays one redrafted Hitchcock movie after another. Although two Union Station scenes, one Pullman car scene, and a kidnapping by a national monument would not be filmed until 1959 (North by Northwest), the entire plot is a watered down version of The Man Who Knew Too Much, 39 Steps and other films with which Lucas would have been familiar. This derivative plot unfortunately flouts the rules which enabled successful Hitchcock thrillers. The content of the "McGuffin" (the missing blueprints) is important, and the chases and unsuccessful efforts to kill the hero are pedantically described and ultimately silly. The author compensates for bad Hitchcok by adding bad LeCarre. Read LeCarre, substitute "Harvard" for "Cambridge", and you know the reasons for every bad political decision by characters in this book. And the book will give you a shorter explanation than does this paragraph. The writer treats the readers as suffering short term memory loss and needlessly repeats details. For instance, Dr. Lucas' wife is described as a woman who likes "modern" furniture -- even after we have "seen" her furniture twice over two decades in the story. The book has a great description of the Jupiter C rocket system, and this description is broken into compelling prologues to each chapter. Unfortunately, these technical descriptions of an engineering triumph underscore the uninspired prose of this artistic failure.
Rating: 
Summary: An excellent mystery
Review: This is a wonderful book, a real page turner. I just couldn't put it down, and if I didn't need any sleep at all, I could have read it all at once. I know some readers have mentioned some discrepancies and while all that may be true, don't let it deter you from trying this book! I am looking for more books by Mr. Follett, now that I have discovered him.
Rating: 
Summary: Liked it
Review: Good standard thriller, though Follet's done better. Nor as good as better thrillers in recent years (Michael Crichton's AIRFRAME, Craig Furrnas' THE SHAPE). But a good piece of work by a master of the genre.
Rating: 
Summary: Gee, you mean that's why the launch was delayed??
Review: As a "Baby Boomer", I can recall the race to keep up with the Soviets in the inital forays into outer space. I can remember Sputnik, "Mutnik" (the one with the dog) and all the other "-utniks". I recall that Explorer was a real turning point for the American space program. One in which we really crossed the Rubicon in the space race. The pressure on the U.S. was enormous. The launch of Explorer was delayed a couple of times. This latest effort by Ken Follett gives a "what if" scenario to what might have been. "Code to Zero" is maybe a little short on depth of plot, but leave it to Follett to pack in the suspense and keep it moving. The flashbacks, as Luke works on regaining his memory, tell a nice tale in themselves. They show the idealism of college kids in the early 1940s and how that changes into bloodthirstiness in the early 1960s. It seemed like "spook" became the occupation du jour for these folks. And maybe that was a bit of a reach. One strong point, to my mind however, was the characterization. Anthony is completely Machiavellian as the villan. I especially enjoyed - and rooted for - the relationship between Bille and Luke. Maybe it was that naivete that the good guys should always win and nice guys will always get the girl - neither of which is necessarily true. Still, I think their relationship was touching the way it was told in flashback and, in the present, it was the hinge that the book turned on. As a scientist, I also have to tell you that I found the little snippets about the rocket, that Follett stuck at the begining of each chapter, down right fascinating. Still, there were, shall we say, some inconsistencies. For example, I live in Northern Virginia and I can honestly say that I have never heard of the local police force in the Nation's Capital referred to as the Washington Police (It's the D.C. Police). Also, and this was more grevious to me, I can remember sitting up in July 1969 and watching the adventure that was Apollo 11 - not 1968 as Follett sets it in his epilogue. In July 1968, the Nation was mourning RFK and Dr. King. Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins weren't even known. Still, while this was not Follett's best, it wasn't his worst either, and I think it would make a good beach read.
Rating:
Summary: This was just bad
Review: This was my first Follet novel and likely my last. This was just bad. That's the best way to describe it. The character interactions were strained. The mood and nuance of the book took very small and unsure steps. But mostly, there was zero creativity in getting from one situation to another. My problem there is that Anthony, the main protagonist, pretty much gets everything he needs to happen. If he were to suddenly need a can of Coke, you can bet that there would be one, on ice, wherever he was standing. I'm not going to go into the factual erros that others have explored other than to say they were there. Finally, the book just wouldn't end. It was as if the author needed to say, "Oh...and," over and over again. The lesser protagonist, who I will not mention by name, and the way that character left the book was just sophomoric to say the least.
Rating: 
Summary: Quick read, Quick write
Review: Ken Follett's tale of a rocket scientist that stumbles into a web of international espionage has a great premise, and great promise. The plot is interesting, the writing descriptive, the characters have some depth. While it took very little time to read this book, I found myself thinking it probably took Mr. Follett equally little time to write it. There are some logistical details that just don't match up. Several other reviewers have mentioned these; the Central Time vs. Eastern Time thing, the date of Armstrongs moon-walk, etc. There were several other discrepencies in the story. One that really caught me that is rather incidental, but still shows a lack of attention to detail is when Dr. Lucas "checks his watch", even though he is wearing a suit of stolen clothing. Where did the watch come from? I am a fan of escapist fiction. However Mr. Follett in this work has underestimated his reader. When creating a parallel existince for the reader to immerse his/herself in, take time to do your homework. This is not so much Mr. Follett's faux pas as it is his editor's. If Mr. Follett were a football player, it would be time to look for a new strength and conditioning coach. Again, this book is certainly entertaining, if inconsistent. The premise is good, but the end was transparent by halfway through. For a quick read, this was certainly a quick write. Mr. Follett, your readers and fans expect more.
Rating:
Summary: Nicely told but flawed premise and facts
Review: The spy story was told well and could have been a nice read if one could forget the absurd premise, overlook glaring historical inacuracies, and unbelievable happenstance. I guess, time to move on to another author. Too bad.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Suspense Story
Review: This is one of the best books I've read in a long time. It was so intense that it was hard to put down. I told myself that I would stop at the end of a certain chapter. The end of the chapter came, and then I had to go right to the next. Read the book in two sittings. It was so good, it was exciting and most important it was well written. Author! Author!
Rating:
Summary: An intriguing spy mystery.
Review: A pretty good story about a Federal Agent who loses his memory just at a point in time where he was on the edge of an important breakthrough. As the story progresses, the "amnesia" becomes suspect, as does our Federal Agent Luke. There's more, though, and the twists and turns will keep you wondering. I was left, though, with a feeling that the entire reason for the plot of the story could have been more meaningful somehow. Ken Follett is a good author, and I enjoyed the book, but I couldn't give it more than three stars. There was a depth of some sort that seemed to be missing, and it just didn't entice me the way other Follett books have in the past.
Rating:
Summary: GENUINE BESTSELLER
Review: Ken Follett pulls it off again with 'Code to Zero'. A story that has something of a favourite black and white movie feel to it. If you haven't read Follett before you're in for a treat - like his cousin bestselling English author John Templeton Smith - Ken Follett is a master crafstman.
| 
