Rating: 
Summary: Not half bad, but not half-good, either.
Review: This has been my third Ken Follett book, and, in my opinion, the worst. Follett seems to have a knack for historical novels, like The Pillars of the Earth and a Place Called Freedom. But still, something irks me.Why is it that in all of those books, the main characters are all identical phisically, and to some extent, mentally? Maybe Folleit just has a thing for dark, curly-haired women (Jeannie, Aliena, and Lizzie Hallim). It seems that for women to be considered successful they have to be logical, ruthless, and ravenously sensual. Men, with their fair hair and greenish eyes (Tom/Alfred Builder, Malachai McAsh, and Steve Logan) have to fall for the woman first, and somehow save them from a traumatic experience... Does anyoe else see a pattern in this? Getting back to The Third Twin, this would make a reasonable movie, but somehow it was lacking in personable warmth. I agree with one of the previous reveiwers, it was good, it seems, up to the point of the "perfect soldier", and the whole Pentagon thing I just skipped entirely. I'm not saying this was a bad book, but then again, is any book truly bad?
Rating:
Summary: Mind Candy / Airplane material
Review:
The plot is predictable and the characters stereotypes, but it moves fast and keeps you turning the page. If you need something to read on a long flight that won't strain your brain too much, this is it.
However, if you're a Ken Follett fan you'll find that this book is not one of his best. And if you haven't read a lot of Ken Follett try "The Man from St. Petersburg" or "Pillars of the Earth" (if you're up for 1000+ pages) rather than this one.
Rating:
Summary: OK but not more then that
Review: This is my second Ken Follett (my first was "paper money" which was very good). It is a bit like seeing a slick Holywood action movie, the time passes and it is good entertainment and there is ever some insight of some of the characters but on the whole it is pritty empty and manipulative. I enjoyed paper money so much I am not going to give up but if this was the first KF novel I read I am not sure I would want to try another.
Rating: 
Summary: One of my favorite books of all time...
Review: I have read this book 6 times, that's how great I think it is. This book is on the bookshelf with all my other favorite books. It's a page turner, it's well written, I couldn't put it down. I won't give away the secret of the book in my review; I'll let you find out yourself. One thing I would like to know--does anyone know of any other good books about twins/clones? Specifically, identical twins.
Rating: 
Summary: BAD BOOK!!
Review: I've just finished reading a review where the phrases "hated it" and "awful" were repeatedly mentioned. I couldn't agree more. Giving this book even a one star rating is more than it deserves for the following reasons: 1) the very few scientific facts appearing in this book that I DID know prior to reading it were totally wrong in the book - you get a WHOLE chromosome from each parent, not 2 different strands that combine into 2 chromosomes with a strand of each parent in each - this is scientifically impossible from what I've learned in 9th or 10th grade level biology! 2) The book was so full of stereotypes you don't have to read more than a few pages to fill in the rest with guesswork. It seems Ken Follet has left wing opinions, so for him right wing = evil. Or the stereotypic jail description.. 3) The EXTREME chauvinistic attitude of the book - in order for a woman to be strong, she has to be masculine - both physically and though her personality and attitude to life, while a "feminine" woman is portrayed as weak... Please compare Mish or Jeannie to Jeannie's friend Lisa or her sister Patty... The former two are more 'manly' and aggressive , and the later are feminine and soft. The first 2 don't have an harmonious family and are not the type to be raped, while the other 2 are... The former 2 get things accomplished and are exected to do the hard job and decisions, while the later 2 are more dependent on others to do the hard work and decide the tough decisions for them. 4) Too many twists and turns of the plot, especially towards the end! 5) Jeannie's academics are ALL MIXED UP - she did a master's degree in computers, and now is wsorking in the psychology department on genetics research (which is a field in biology?) Why would an assistant in the psychology department have a nurse's or doctor's skill of drawing blood? 6) I've saved the 'best' for last. As a woman reading what I persume is a thriller, I RESENT having to read all about what different underwear the women wore or how they're built. Let's take Jeanie for example. Whoever suffered through this book probably knows that she's tall and that she has an athletic body build with long, flowing dark curly hair, smooth back, smooth and flat tummy, long muscly legs, and small breasts with dark nipples which she thinks are too small, but all the men she'd been with like them just fine. Oh, and she also likes tp have her nipples sucked, and thinks that going without any underwear is sexy just in case 'her man' comes along and wants a quickie. I hope this pasage does not upset anyone, but my point is that all this info has NOTHING to do with the plot, weak as the later might be. So do Lisa's red lace underwear or large bra size. This is not a porn story, so being able to envision Jeannie naked does not enhance the story. I normally don't mind a little sexual stuff in books I read, but this is simply too much and too specific in this context!
Rating:
Summary: Background.
Review: An excellent book. The best I have ever read. By the way is there any information about psychologist(woman) before the book is written, I know it is fiction. Let us think what kind of life she has before.
Rating:
Summary: Awful, awful, awful.
Review: Why is Ken Follett popular? I've never read any of his other novels, but he seems to be an author with a loyal following, both commercially and critically. But THE THIRD TWIN is awful. Horrid. Detestable. I kept screaming at it to get better, but it didn't listen. I hate this novel. Hate it. Hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it. I hate its characters, of which it has none. I hate its style, of which it has none. And I hate how it assumes that a reader will not know the difference between a tightly wound thriller and a hack job. I hate the indifference with which this book was written. I hate its condescending attitude towards the reader. I hate how miserable it made me. I hate how I will never get the hours I spent reading it back. I hate the fact that I cannot do a decent critical evaluation of its innumerable flaws. I hate how its astonishing ineptitude overwhelms my senses. I am heartened, however, that I survived. I have visited the depths of literary hell, that circle where trashy autobiographies, books based on gameshows, novelizations of bad films, and anonymous porn are consigned to linger. I have dwelled in the nadir of English fiction, and have emerged unscathed. A little sadder, perhaps, but a little wiser, too. And with the firm promise to myself never to believe anything a book jacket blurb says ever again.
Rating: 
Summary: Third Time's Not A Charm
Review: This was highly recommended to me. I didn't like it. Different than Follett's other works but I found that I didn't care about the characters fate and I also found it a bit confusing at times.
Rating:
Summary: Been done before, and better
Review: A young scientist studying links in genes to the potential for criminality comes across two men, identical down to their DNA, raised separately and born on different days. As she investigates, becoming more involved with the law abiding twin, Steve, she discovers that there may be a third twin still at large, who may be guilty of raping one of her friends. This starts off well, as an interesting yarn, but rapidly goes downhill, especially when the words 'perfect soldier' leapt out at you. Right after that the story falls flat. Clones and killing machines have been done before, and combining them doesn't make any difference. The text is bogged down in unnecessary details, such as obsessive details about how the female lead dresses, and the ending is decidedly flat. Follett can do amazing thrillers and fascinating historical fiction, but this isn't one of them. Aeroplane reading, but not much more. (It gets three stars for being interesting at the start.)
Rating:
Summary: Passable but not an A
Review: His earlier books are much better. Read "Man from St. Petersburg" or the "Key to Rebecca". This book was a departure from Follett's other espionage books in that he went into all the modern biotechnology. This book was decent, but a lot of it was definitely spoiled for me by the fact that I had seen the X-Files episode "Eve", which predated this book. Concept didn't really didn't seem that ingenious to me then. I have yet to read any of Follett's epics yet, such as "A Place Called Freedom" or "Dangerous Fortunes" but I am willing to give them a try. Hope he tackles those well.
| 
