Rating: 
Summary: a great novel, pure entertainment
Review: I love MHC. This book was more predictable then the ones I have read, however I still remain a loyal fan to her. This book kept me on my toes, I was changing my mind every page until the last couple of chapters. I have read all of her books and I love her stories. She taps into something that really maks me think and I just can't put the book down until I know how it's is going to end. I would just like to tell the critics that do not read her book because they are pure works of arts rather I read them because the are entertaining and intreging. I truley love her and think that she is doing a marvolous job. I think that those who believe the story was ill-written and ill-inspireed were not reading it for it's true purpose and that is to entertain.
Rating: 
Summary: Pure fun -- so why the one star??
Review: When I read a MHC book, I do so for pure, absorbing escapism -- when I'm sleepless frettting over problems, when I'm nervous on a long flight. I don't think this lady is endeavoring to write classic literature, and I don't buy her books expecting intellectual stimulation, although I usually pick up some information from them. As other reviewers have pointed out, much that happens in this book is improbable, and some of the heroine's (Susan Chandler's) actions are ill-advised, unlikely and down-right stupid. But if you're able to suspend disbelief, this book presents an engrossing and enjoyable experience. It accomplishes everything MHC probably set out to accomplish, and therefore, I deem it a successful effort. SO, you may wonder, why the one star? I posted this review as one woman's humble attempt at mounting a protest. It seems to me that the writers whom we readers have assisted to phenomenal success owe a debt to society, and ought to do their bit to better the world. This summer was full of examples of this obligation failed --witness the slut-ridden "Summer Sisters" and the unspeakably awful "Hannibal". In this book, MHC had the option of merely presenting the action without passing moral judgment about the various characters. But she chose to do so in many cases. We are encouraged, for example, to despise Susan's stepmother and to like her father, while disapproving of his dumping Susan's mother and making a fool of himself over the Trophy Wife. We are supposed to hope for the moral improvement of Susan's sister, whom we condemn for trying to steal Susan's new swain. Susan takes time on several occasions to reflect upon how her father's and sister's lack of character has caused her, even as an adult, to feel so much hurt and loss. But then there is this passage: "The boys' parents had been divorced when he was two, but they had stayed friendly, and for ten years he had gone comfortably from home to home. But now his mother had been offered a job in San Francisco.... "Corey struggled to blink back tears as he said, 'I know she wants to take the job, but if she does, it means I won't see much of my dad.' "....'What do you think she should do?' Susan asked. "He thought for a moment, 'I guess Mom really should take the job. It's not fair for her to have to pass it up.' "'What a good kid,' Susan thought.(pg.28-29) Super-officious Susan, who barges uninvited into practically everyone else's business, does nothing about this appalling bit of maternal callousness and selfishness, and doesn't even pause for a disapproving thought about a mother who would devastate one of the primary relationships in the life of her adolescent male child merely to seek immediate career advancement for herself. Perhaps MHC included this gratutious and irrelevant passage in an effort to ingratiate herself with those she may perceive to be her target demographic -- non-professional working women, many of them mothers. I hope she has horribly misjudged the morality of her audience. As it is, she validates the most selfish and irresponsible among us. She should be ashamed. The professional reviewer above was correct -- Susan' resemblance to Dr. Laura DOES end with the physical, and that IS fortunate for Dr. Laura!!
Rating: 
Summary: Her best book in years
Review: Very exciting book. I've read all of her books and this one is one of her best.
Rating:
Summary: MHC proves yet again that she is incomparable!!
Review: The third book I've read by MHC and I continue to be a loyal fan. The plot centers around some psycho who preys on single, lonely women on cruise ships. The idea is not original, but the unexpected twists and turns are trademarks of MHC, which compels fans to continue to be so. MHC has a way of enthralling her readers to the point of addiction. And no matter what the ending, you'll almost always find yourself calculating the clues that lead up to its conclusion. The conclusion in this book was a tad bit predictable which was a little disappointing. But readers will enjoy the suspenseful journey, nonetheless.
Rating:
Summary: No real suspense, no real character development
Review: Parts of the book were enjoyable, but all in all it left me feeling like I wish I had spent my time reading something else. Does she really write these books anymore or is it a ghost writer churning out novels under her name because she is so marketable? Quite a disappointment, but par for the course with her latest novels.
Rating:
Summary: I really enjoyed this book
Review: I had a little trouble getting into it at the beginning, but I am glad I followed through. It turned out to be a very suspensful, interesting story. As the story progressed, I found myself going back and forth as to who the murderer was, right up until the very end. I ultimately guessed wrong, but I am not much of a detective anyway!As I said, it was enjoyable and I am glad I took the time to get through the somewhat boring beginning.
Rating:
Summary: Predictable plot but perhaps the start of a serial detective
Review: I bought this book for a plane trip. Being a white-knuckled flier, I like something that will keep me on the edge of my seat. This one didn't. I have to agree with those readers who pinpointed the serial killer from the first scene in which he was introduced. As several have said,Ms. Clark's books are becoming more predictable. Before purchasing one, I always check the copyright date to make sure I haven't read it -- the characters are so interchangeable that it's easy to forget which is which. They even resemble each other physically and wear the same style clothing. I agree also that Susan Chandler and her psychiatrist friend seemed unprofessional. But I can see the Chandler character becoming the start of a detective series of her own, with more Susan Chandler stories spinning off from this novel.
Rating:
Summary: MHC's content for You Belong to Me is an 'eye opener'
Review: It appears that MHC intended this novel to be autobiographical for the character Dr. Susan Chandler. By not disclosing too much information about the actual killer to the readers, MHC mimics how well Susan knows his background. The readers are made privy to about as much information as Susan learns throughout the course of the novel. I think MHC sends a implicit warning to people in vulnerable situations to be more aware and trust your instincts. This is the first MHC book I've read, and I plan to read more of her writing.
Rating:
Summary: MHC - Please buy yourself an editor!
Review: I don't expect great fiction or amazing plots from MHC, but this was beyond preposterous. First of all, why is a lawyer turned psychologist - who by the way doesn't demonstrate one ounce of professional sense as either - running around investigating murders with the COOPERATION of several police departments? Why is she constantly, on the air, inviting individuals with evidence, to expose themselves publicly, making them targets? Why does she show no remorse when everyone gets killed? Her psychiatrist cohort violates the rules of confidentiality without a pause - telling our heroine who he treated privately - what is that all about? The cliches abound, the characters are absurd and one-dimensional, and any decent editor would have prodded MHC about all of these basic improbabilities. Yes, MHC writes trite, formula, suspense novels but at least in the past, they might have been a smidgeon believeable. This one is beyond absurd. Either this author is so rich that noone dares to help her edit her books, or the reading public is so stupid that they are willing to go along with something this ludicrous. Give me a break!
Rating:
Summary: This is a GREAT Book!
Review: I think that the plot of the book was great. I like the way that the author keeps you guessing right untill the end.
|
