<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Not as good as the first Fantastic Voyage
Review: As the previous reviewer points out, the first Fantastic Voyage was not Asimov's story, but merely his novelization of the movie plot. So Asimov decided to write his own story on the same theme. Unfortunately, his was not as good as the original.Asimov had an enormous ego (if he was called "The Great Explainer", as the previous reviewer notes, I wouldn't be surprised if I were to learn that Asimov gave himself the title. He often bragged about the huge volume of output from his typewriter. The problem is that quantity does not equal quality, and much of his writing wasn't worth much. This book falls into that category.
Rating: 
Summary: Not worth your time
Review: I could not believe that this is indeed a book by Asimov and double-checked a couple of times. It is barely scientific, totally lacking logic and the finale is very predictable. I figured out the "surprise" ending in the first half of the book. The characters get developed during the book only to be completely shattered at the end. I really feel that I've waisted my time reading it.
Rating:
Summary: Not worth your time
Review: I could not believe that this is indeed a book by Asimov and double-checked a couple of times. It is barely scientific, totally lacking logic and the finale is very predictable. I figured out the "surprise" ending in the first half of the book. The characters get developed during the book only to be completely shattered at the end. I really feel that I've waisted my time reading it.
Rating:
Summary: Not as good as the first Fantastic Voyage
Review: To what pressure did Asimov bow in writing this book other than his own? And, incidentally, this is no sequel to the first Fantastic Voyage. There is no mention of anything from the first novel here. Asimov's first Fantastic Voyage was not his own: he merely novelized a movie, and was never satisfied with the end result for all of its scientific and otherwise flaws. II is a much better example of Asimovian sicence fiction: totally cerebral, and I like that at the end of the plot, there was no "getting the girl," as one sees all to often, even in Asimov's novels. The victory here involved no sexual liason of any sort-- it was merely that of a scientist having his views validated by grueling experience. There is too strong a tendency in many novels, especially in science fiction novels, to present the attaining of a woman's affections as the "prize" toward which the male hero works and eventually succeeds in getting. Here there is the setup of that, but in the end no actualization. Asimov presents enough scientific notions throughout this book to spin any reader's head, and more than one is are presented a little too didactically. But Asimov could not help it. In the end he was the disseminator of scientific knowledge that earned him the distinction "Great Explainer."
Rating: 
Summary: Who says 'marginal?'
Review: To what pressure did Asimov bow in writing this book other than his own? And, incidentally, this is no sequel to the first Fantastic Voyage. There is no mention of anything from the first novel here. Asimov's first Fantastic Voyage was not his own: he merely novelized a movie, and was never satisfied with the end result for all of its scientific and otherwise flaws. II is a much better example of Asimovian sicence fiction: totally cerebral, and I like that at the end of the plot, there was no "getting the girl," as one sees all to often, even in Asimov's novels. The victory here involved no sexual liason of any sort-- it was merely that of a scientist having his views validated by grueling experience. There is too strong a tendency in many novels, especially in science fiction novels, to present the attaining of a woman's affections as the "prize" toward which the male hero works and eventually succeeds in getting. Here there is the setup of that, but in the end no actualization. Asimov presents enough scientific notions throughout this book to spin any reader's head, and more than one is are presented a little too didactically. But Asimov could not help it. In the end he was the disseminator of scientific knowledge that earned him the distinction "Great Explainer."
<< 1 >>
| 
