Rating: 
Summary: Some good, some bad
Review: This is the first time I've read this, unlike apparently a lot of other reviewers who seem to have revisited this one. I have to say, my initial reaction wasn't very favorable. The first part of this book is so like Lord of the Rings, as has been stated before, that I almost put it down. However, as far as the story goes, it improves as the book progresses. Nonetheless, it is a fairly standard plot (i.e. our hero Shea is given a quest to find a powerful sword. He journeys across the lands, encountering dreadful beasts and perils of all sorts.) The good thing is, when there is action, it's pretty good stuff. The bad thing about this book, aside from the lack of originality, is how very bad some of the writing is. With a good editor, this book could be 200-300 pages shorter, and probably be improved by it. Some examples: The industrious author's frustating overuse of modifying, redundant, and unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. This obnoxious tendency can quickly become irritating, as the patient review reader will readily determine by closely reading this silly paragraph. Seriously, you could remove every other adjective and adverb in this book, just at random, and it would be a much better book. The author uses the phrase "burning fire." Twice. In the same paragraph. What other kind of fire is there? I thought all fires were burning. He also says something like "It left an indelible mark, which couldn't be removed." I thought that's what "indelible" meant. And every stinkin' time he refers to a character, he has to put an adjective in front of the character. Menion is always "the lean Highlander" and Shea is always "the little Valeman." Since he went to the trouble to describe these characters in the beginning of the book, by page 700, I got a little tired of rereading descriptions of them. Oh, one last thing about descriptions, he always describes what the sunlight, the land and the trees look like. Always. Do we really always need to know that the sunlight passed through the soft green leaves, dappling the rock-strewn turf? That gets old. I think that all these descriptions, in addition to being boring, tend to confuse the reader, or at least me. It seemed important to the author to point out that the sun was casting great looming shadows to the west, and then the characters would be getting up in the morning, eating a small tasteless breakfast, not heated by fire, for they were afraid that a fire would signal their presence to enemies. Hey! I thought it was dusk. I just think it's distracting to always know where the sun is, what the shadows look like, how breakfast was, what folks are wearing, how the sky looks to the north, how the trees appear as they cling to the slopes of distant hills, etc. Just tell us the stinkin' story, fer cryin' out loud. Okay, I've complained a lot, maybe even more than it deserves. A quick conclusion: It starts off pretty bad, but gets considerably better (probably finishes as a three-star book). Especially irritating to those (like me) who have read a lot of fantasy. Many of the things that seem hackneyed to us would probably not bother those that don't read a lot of fantasy. And I can hardly wait to read the next one!
Rating:
Summary: Reminds me of another book...
Review: Well, Terry should be thankful that Tolkien published that famous trilogy. Ironically, I think when 'The Sword of Shannara' came out so did the animated movie of 'Lord of the Rings'. Basically, many people wished Tolkien had made his book a lot bigger and I think Terry capitalized on that.
I was just hoping that this book would be unique and not a copy.
Flick and Shea - Frodo and Sam...Skull Creature - Ringwraiths...
That's just the tip of the iceburg[...]. It seemed like it was written by some 20 year old who read 'Lord of the Rings' a dozen times. However, I did like his character Creed who was a thief. That made me read on.
Anyways, I hope the rest of his books are better. [...]. The book could have been 500 pages instead of 700 plus.
Rating: 
Summary: There is more to fantasy than Tolkien!!
Review: This is by far one of the best books in the area of fantasy i have ever read. The charecters are great. it was one of those books where i found myself under the covers with a flashlight reading it way after my bed time just like in t.v and movies. I have noticed that people constantly referance this book to tolkien. Get over it. the characters are much more imaginative than people give credit to. Allanon the druid was much more intresting than Gandalf. this was what gave me inspiration to start writting, tolkien made me hate fantasy, then when my dad FORCED me to read this i was hooked again. The people that complain about the refrences obvoisly dont venture far out into the reading world. plus sequals are still coming out, thats an obvious sign that it is cool.
Rating:
Summary: The original and best
Review: The Sword of Shannara, besides being the beginning of a fabulous series, is simply a wonderful read. I'm not a fan of fantasy or science fiction, but for some reason I became hooked on this book when I was a kid. In the years since then, I've read it several more times, and each time I like it more. Brooks has a fascinating way of creating three dimensional characters. He allows you to picture them as they enter the story, both their appearance and mannerisms - which is no small feat, given that he writes of elves, dwarfs, trolls and other creatures never seen on this earth. The story also contains such compelling characters, and Brooks has always maintained the undercurrent of the terrible wars that basically ended life as we know it, without ever really sharing the detail. It's an unusual and entertaining read.
Rating: 
Summary: O.K. if he wouldn't have kept (...)on and on.........
Review: O.K. by now the world of wonderful fantisey is starting to crumble. People are starting to rate O.K. books as if they were great! I mean really! I wasen't that good! It was a complete copy of Tolken's the lord of the rings, have some sense people! If you want real fantisey, read the lord of the rings, if you already have read it again. It was to long also, like over 700 pages!! And for what? so he can kill some evil master at the end and be done with it? It was like only a two page fight and they didn't even fight, he just touched the sword and poof! He's Dead! Books over, gee.
Rating:
Summary: An overrated fantasy
Review: Okay, this is a mildly interesting read, and there is just enough to merit reading one more book, but this is not a great novel. Back in the days when this book first came out, there wasn't a whole lot of post-Tolkien fantasy...primarily the Shannara books and Donaldson's far more imaginative Thomas Covenant books. Perhaps to a fantasy-hungry audience, this may have been what the doctor ordered, but this is not a classic by any means. The first problem with this book is it is an obvious Tolkien ripoff. Not only do many of the characters have direct Lord of the Rings parallels (Shea equals Frodo, Flick equals Sam, Allanon equals Gandalf, etc.), but there are many story events that mirror LOTR events as well. This indicates that either Brooks was incapable of originality or more likely was merely capitalizing on people who wanted more Tolkien and would settle for a cheap imitation. Even to a reader unfamiliar with Tolkien, however, there are numerous problems. Most obviously, Brooks is not a great wordsmith; neither his dialogue nor descriptions are particularly good. Plotwise, there are far too many last-minute rescues and coincidences. There is also far too much going on; no character appears in more than a third of a novel, not even the principal protagonist, Shea. This makes the story lose focus. And Shea himself is a weak character, rarely acting, almost always reacting. His triumphs are more accidental than anything else. This was Brooks's first novel, and given that he continues to be published, I assume that he matures over time. This book may be good for a talented beginner, but it is by no means one of the great works of fantasy.
Rating:
Summary: Wow
Review: The back of the book makes it sound like another pointless quest to kill the big fat evil guy like half the cRPGs and 99% of the StarCraft RPGs. It is not. The characters are all great, and the development of the characters is wonderful too. The battle scenes were great, the chase sequences were great, everything was spectacular. You shall regret it if you don't read this.
Rating: 
Summary: Amateur Hour at the Fantasy Club
Review: I'd heard many good things about this book, which probably made the actual reading even harder to stomach because it was such a letdown. Even a highly derivative book such as this can be a good read if it is engaging and written well, but there are several things that made this novel a chore to read:
1) Too much Deus ex Machina.
2) Unengaging characters that tend to have wild mood swings within conversations for no apparent reason. Angry then not angry, etc.
3) Lots of indirect dialogue. i.e. "Flick said he thought they should take the left path. Shea then replied that he thought the mountains would be too steep." Its as if it was too much trouble to come up with real words for the characters to say. In retrospect, this is probably what made it difficult for me to connect with the characters. Without actual dialogue to express the personalities of the characters, the tone of the text was very distancing. It was like reading a book-report on the conversations. The plot itself was mildly interesting, I forced myself to slog through just to see how the loose ends would wrap up, but there is better stuff out there.
Rating:
Summary: A blatant ... of LotR, but not bad.
Review: I read this book when it first came out in the 1970's in trade size, prior to reading Lord of the Rings. Other than Robert E. Howard's Conan stories, this was my introduction to fantasy. I must admit that I never read a book faster than this up to that time. It made me an instant fantasy fan. After i did read LotR, it became quite obvious that this book wasn't derivitive of Tolkein, it was an all out re-telling with the names changed. Frodo becomes Shea, Gandalf becomes Allanon, Sauron becomes the Warlock Lord, etc.... Still, if you go into this book knowing that, and it doesn't bother you, then this is a fun read. And afterall, what's the phrase? Immitation is the best form of flattery? We see it in TV shows, movies, music, so what the hell. Tolkien fans need not be so pompous...
Rating:
Summary: copy copy copy
Review: While the book was mildly entertaining Brooks in many parts shows a total lack of origanality. Many scenes and even a name (Durin) are copied from tolkien's Lord of the rings like the part were Allanon fights a skull creature (Who incedently is much like a wringraith) in the heating furnace over a bridge,they both fall and since I have read tolkien extensively I new That Allonon was alright and guess what? he even yells to the others to get away calling them "fools" his general personality is much like that of Gandalf from Lord of The Rings Also the City wich is the key to all freedom and protector of the border is besieged and only just saved by the arrival of guess what? reinfocements from neighboring nations. In one of the counsels Shea gets up during a dispute and says he will go though he does'nt know the way. If brooks had shown more origanallity he might have put together a decent book.
|
