Rating: 
Summary: Not a Classic but it's a Fun Popcorn Fantasy Read
Review: Like some of the other reviewers for this book, I hit a crossroads in the beginning. I wasn't sure the story was going anywhere and the characters weren't exciting enough to keep me reading. I drudged on and pretty soon, the book started getting better, especially when the author began to introduce more characters. A lot of reviewers are giving this book a bad rap when it doesn't sound like they ever got past page one hundred. Terry Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule is by no means on the same level of J.R.R. Tolkien's classics or even contemporary fantasy authors such as Robert Jordan and George R.R. Martin. If I could compare him to anyone it would be the better Dungeons & Dragons authors like R.A. Salvatore. Sometimes, the story even feels like a pen and paper D&D adventure gone awry with confusing character motivations, predictable outcomes and bland writing. While there aren't a lot of original ideas in Goodkind's fantasy world, I think some people have gone too far accusing him of stealing everything from other authors. The one blatant rip off in Wizard's First Rule is that he steals the idea for a side character (Samuel) directly from Tolkien's Gollum character. Luckily, that character doesn't play a critical enough role in the book to ruin the story. If you'd like to read popular fantasy novels that steal HUGE plot ideas from Tolkien, check out Terry Brooks' Sword of Shannara instead. I've spent so much time talking about the negatives let me give you a few positives about Goodkind's first novel in The Sword of Truth Series. The man can write action! In exciting moments, I was just as riveted with Wizard's First Rule as I was with other fantasy novels. In particular, I loved his writing about fights (and horrors) in the underworld and the barriers. I also enjoyed how his characters thought about the implications of death and murder a little more than some fantasy novels. His philosophies on life and death and good and evil in the book were sometimes too black and white but there's nothing wrong with that. Sometimes all I want to read about are good guys winning the day. Enough bad guys win in real life so it's nice to have a fun popcorn fantasy read to take me away for a few days. Also, if you have no desire to read the many novels in the series, you don't need to worry because book one has a satisfying ending which alludes to possible sequels but it's not as sudden as Tolkien's first Lord of the Rings novel which ends mid-adventure. I think I'll buy the second novel in The Sword of Truth series. I've become attached to the characters and would like to see what happens to them in the next book. It doesn't seem like the type of series though that will hold a reader's interest more than three books. Robert Jordan was a much better writer and I couldn't endure his classic Wheel of Time series past book five. Sometimes, you need to plan your "epic" series with a definite ending in mind and judging by the reviews of Goodkind's later novels in this series, it seems he's fallen into the same trap other popular authors enter when their franchise becomes a cash cow.
Rating:
Summary: A Creative, fresh breakthrough
Review: Goodkind's first book in the sword of truth series sets the standard. His novel ideas set in Richard Cypher's world of fantasy keep the reader turning pages. Amongst its peers in the world of Science Fiction and Fantasy literature, Wizard's First Rule is a cut above the rest.
Rating: 
Summary: Give me a break
Review: i really can't understand how some people can be so ignorant. i am of course refering to those of you out there who think you know so much, but only prove your stupidity to all of us who actually have more than half a brain. i don't understand how you can compare this book to tolkiens workings while neglecting to realize the truth. tolkiens writings were what started the entire genre of fantasy. just about every good fantasy book that is out there today copies a little from tolkien, thats because he had it right way back then, what most authors are doing today is adding to what he started. what is exceptionaly annoying is that you say that this book butchers tolkiens workings. it just adds to it. ya know makes it diffrent, they way you talk you make it seem like there are no good fantasy books any more because they all add to tolkiens books and ideas. look at the majority of great fantasy books that are out know and you can see evidence of tolkien. just open your eyes and imagine that you had a fully developed brain.
the other thing that is annoying is lots of you morons have fully develped opions about this book, but haven't even read all of it, i have and i can tell you it is great. just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's now there. give the entire book a chance before you start saying the entire thing sucks.
and never insult Zedd because he is the coolest character in any book.
Rating: 
Summary: Do you really want to know if Goodkind is good? Then read on
Review: This, the second best of Goodkinds books(8 as of now) is ok. The writing is mediocre, the plot is mediocre, the character interaction, also, is mediocre. But the action is good, and if thats what your into then its an ok book. So is Mr. Goodkind worth reading? Well, I can give you a free look. Here's what he said at his OFFICAL website, terrygoodkind.com. "What I have done with my work has irrevocably changed the face of fantasy. In so doing I've raised the standards. I have not only injected thought into a tired empty genre, but, more importantly, I've transcended it showing what more it can be-and is so doing spread my readship to completely new groups who dont like and wont ready typical fantasy. Agents and editors are screaming for more books like mine." Looking at his book sales and ratings, he isn't as good as Terry Brooks. Brooks is a fine writer, but nothing special, and the way Goodkind puts it, Goodkind is the best writer since Tolkien, who he HASN'T even read. Yes, a fantasy writer that says he hasn't EVER read fantasy. SURE! ;) Heres a little more for you. Question: Lately I've found myself in many arguments defending your books against 'fans' who say they used to like your books but no longer do to the extent that they used to. Would you mind settling some debates by answering the question: What, if anything do you have to say to the people that voice the opinion that you're latest four books haven't been as good as the previous four and call them "too preachy"? Answer: Don't be fooled. The assertion made by these detractors is a note wrapped around a brick thrown through the window. These people are not fans. There are hundreds if not thousands of fantasy books that fulfill their professed taste in books. Why would they continue to read books they claim are bad? Because they hate that my novels exists. Values arouse hatred in these people. Their goal is not to enjoy life, but to destroy COME ON MAN! If someone thinks your first books were GOOD and the later books were too preachy then they ARE fans, they just don't like the direction your taking. They admit to being fans. How can you say that your fans are the type of fanatics that throw bricks through windows? How could you say that about your own fans, people that pay YOUR bills. Mr. Goodkind, you are pathetic. On second thought, maybe this was his WORST book. I mean, if he hadn't written it, then I wouldn't have read any more of his books on the suggestions of others that thought I would like them. If your into a book with cliches like the "kid who just wants to live his normal life is actually somehow related in some way to a powerful person in the world and because of this decides that he must save the world" then maybe this is for you. If you for some reason like a book that logically makes no sense, like when the main character(richard) in the first book jumps out and kills TRAINED assasins with a sword that he doesn't even know how to use, then maybe this is for you. If you like books with mindless torture for pages upon pages then this is for you. If you like books where women don't have any power then this series is for you. Don't give me the crap about Kahlan being a powerful confessor, or the Mord Sith of the Sorceresses. Kahlan, and all confessors were made by MALES, wizards at that. Mord Sith were trained by MEN, and wizards are more powerful than sorcerecess. He copies so many ideas from Robert Jordan that its grotesque. And you know what? I think Robert Jordan is a good author, but as of lately, he SUCKS A$$. Yes, right now I don't even like Jordan, and yet Jordan has my respect. He is a good writer that DOESN'T steal from others, and he treats his fans with respect. Goodkind isn't a good writer, and even though he thinks he is the best thing to happen to writing sense Ayn Rand, he sucks. If you want a good writer I have a good list for you. George R.R. Martin: A Song of Ice and Fire Series
China Mieville: Perdido Street Station, The Scar, and King Rat
Mathew Woodring Stover: Heros Die and Blade of Tyshalle
Steven Erikson: Malazan series(if you decide to order, use amazon.co.uk for faster shipping and cheaper rates)
Neil Gaiman: American Gods, and Neverwhere And for some older authors Tad Williams
Terry Brooks(first book is basically the LotR trilogy, the rest are good though)
Guy Gavriel Kay As far as I know, all of these authors treat their fans great. And many work directly with them. For example, George RR Martin answers fan e-mails at his website, georgerrmartin.com. And Steven Erikson has done many Q&A's with his fans, like Brooks.
Rating:
Summary: A great book!
Review: I was recommended this book by a few friends. I was weary at first about this book because I wasnt big on fantasy. I had read the "Lord of the Rings" book series by Tolkien and thought it was really good. I started reading "Wizards First Rule" and found that I could not put it down. The characters are very well drawn out and the story is well written. I was kept in suspense throughout most of the book. I recommend this book to anyone who has a interest in the realm of fantasy. Since reading this book I have went on and read the others in the series and other fantasy type books.
Rating: 
Summary: Wizards First Read, and not a pleasent one.
Review: It's as if he's slain the works of Tolkien, and placed them high upon a hill side, crucified, for all the average fantasy based consumers to feast upon. I'm about two hundred and fifty pages into the first installment of the Sword of Truth series, and I must declare, this is by far one of the more cliche, used and abused fantasy titles I've ever come across. It has, in fact, put a smile on my face, throughout numerous occasions, and I do believe the world he created around the characters is a beautiful, outset, and imaginative place. The characters, however, are standard, boring, and suprisingly stupid. I couldn't believe how dull, and one sided each of the heros seemed to be, with absolutley no character development, or constructive behavior that builds personality, or attributes regarding the thickess of the plate they each hold. It's as if they hardly even realize what they're doing, and why they're doing it, the weight of the world seems to float on the finger tip of a confused boy named Richard, who fell clumsily into the posistion of the Seeker of Truth, now, it's on his shoulders, and the shoulders of a forever naive, and obnoxious girl who follows, not to mention an over-zealous and arrogant Wizard, that lacks cunning, and isn't very wise at all, but claims that he is the wisest of them all. Everything is so extreme with the characters, hot or cold, very good, or very evil. And the main character, is a bit of a push over, with his mean vixen Kahlan doing the majority of the dirty work. This reminds me of a fantasy game, the dialogue, the story, the characters. Pity. .....I have three hundred and fifty pages to go. If it gets any better, or if I even finish it, I'll come back and write another little review. Don't hold your breath, chances are I'm only going to become more annoyed with his writings. Sad, I was really looking forward to a good fantasy novel. I suppose I'll stick with Robert Jordan from now on.
Rating:
Summary: puh-leeze
Review: Instead of repeating what everyone else is saying about how tedious and unoriginal this is, let me just add one thing. There's a hideous creature, servant to a witch/sorceress, whatever, that attacks Richard in an attempt to steal the (dah-Dummmmb!) Sword of Truth. Turns out the creature used to be a man who owned the Sword but the power of the Sword crippled him and now all he wants is to regain possession of it. (His precious?) When bested by Richard the creature/man becomes a sniveling coward but will just as likely slit Richard's throat at the earliest opportunity to get the Sword. Give me a big, fat, bloody break!! It's been done, Terry, by a brilliant author. You may have heard of him? Tolkien. Were we, as unsuspecting readers and adoring fans, not supposed to notice this blatant rip-off?? Puh-leeze.
Rating:
Summary: short and sweet
Review: I will make this short and sweet, I really enjoyed the book, yes the characters can be predictable, but the storie was very good, the charactures likable, and I was very much taken with the book. I would recomend it to anyone that enjoys a good fantasy book.
Rating:
Summary: Blah
Review: I was curious to see what others thought of this book so I came here, and after reading a few, had to add my own thoughts. I'm getting back into reading and picked up this book on a recommendation of a friend. Now, it has taken me over a year to get halfway through this book and I'm not even finished. I thought it was me losing interest in fantasy, but I had just wheezed through the latest Harry Potter within a few days, I realized it wasn't me. To be honest, I knew this book was going to be horrible, even through the first few chapters. (And despite my hiatus from literature, I used to be pretty well read in the fantasy genre). The characters are very uninteresting to me. They're not only typical, they're just boring and what others have said about not caring what happens to them, is the same as how I feel. The writing is alright, but there is nothing about the characters, the environment, the history that makes it interesting as a fantasy epic in the very least. Like one reviewer said, the good guys are Angelic and the the bad guys are purely demonic. I was actually amazed (and appalled) that one of baddies turned out to be a homosexual pederast. Haha! I mean, you know he's a bad guy when (*rolls eyes*)... Anyway, why am I bothering? Because there are 7 more installments in these series and I'm really morbidly curious as to what's keeping it rolling, though I really doubt I'll get to the second one anytime soon, even if I get to the end of this one. The best way to manage going through this is imagining this as a bad T.V. fantasy series casting Zedd as Patrick Stewart.
Rating:
Summary: I read, I puked.
Review: These novels have so many fans it is difficult for the fantasy fictioneer to ignore the thick spines and heavenly page numbers that temp from the bookracks. But beware! Despite having all the trappings of the wonderful novels by the likes of George R. R. Martin and Robert Jordan, these stories induce more dry heaves than moments of reading enjoyment. The plots are slow-witted, the characters flat, the imagery cliched, the descriptions rich, --Huh!? Well, ok I let one slip in there, the world is lavishly described, but that doesn't a good novel make. Just a long one. Even though the descriptions are laudable that doesn't make them interesting, or believable. I understand the plight of the fantasy fiction reader addicted to a series and in need of reading material to fill the space between releases, but unless you've read all the other fantasy fiction novels out there, I wouldn't recommend you pick up this book.
In summary, this book is a cheesy cartoon version of what other authors have accomplished so well. It gives the amateur writer hope to see such a sophomoric work (works!) in publication. If you want a good read however, try Martin or Hobb, and leave the flat filler in fluffy guises on the shelf.
|
