What do you think?
Rate this book
Guest Shot
"I'm going to kill some people..."At first, he was just a voice on the other end of the line. Just another crank caller."Your audience will hear me talk about it..."Now, they know he's not kidding. He has a definite plan he intends to execute."Then I'll go out and do it..."He is ready. The television cameras are rolling. And America is about to meet a real-life killer. Face to face. Right in their living rooms."But that's not the best part. After the first one,I'll come back, talk about what it was like.And again after the second..."
Mass Market Paperback
First published December 1, 2001
1 person is currently reading
29 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
April 17, 2020
Held my interest, which a lot of books don't. A pretty wild plot and quite good writing, except when the author or his editor(s) demonstrated that he/they had no idea that it's is not a possessive pronoun, so you'd see sentences like: "John liked it's flavor." But not all the time, so it's and its were a grab bag of right and wrong. Incomprehensible in a novel like this. But I'm not really reviewing the grammar, so five stars for a unique story. Yeah, it's a bit over the top, but it's fiction.
February 21, 2023
scary but good reading
February 28, 2012
The premise is unique and engaging: a serial killer proposes to talk about his business on an exploitive day-time talk show (The show, Stoner!, is meant to exemplify the worst of the types exemplified by Jerry Springer and his ilk). I was immediately drawn to the idea.
Unfortunately, the book reads as if the author wrote it in fits and starts and with half-hearted resolve. The same way you'll end up reading it. By the way, the listed author, David Locke, is really just a pseudonym for best-selling author Robert Rosenblum. Robert, I know exactly why you chose to remain anonymous.
Aside from the intriguing idea and a few clever crime scenes, this book is lacking all of the things that make even your typical summer schlock at least diverting and readable. The characters have personalities that are thinly drawn. The story itself devolves into way too much extraneous exposition. And the emotional arc of the tale is less of an arc and more of an irregular wave.
I'm all for flaunting typical literary traditions (such as solid emotional arcs), but it can be done with more finesse and less utilitarian bluntness. This book reads as if it were written by a short-sighted historian who chose to fill in the plotholes with laboring details about how golden the sun is or how pretty spring looks. Just when you get used to the newstyle-writing, Locke tries to get literary. It makes for uneven and unfullfilling writing.
I will say this: the villian (if you can call him that) is well-dressed by Locke's narrative, and although the author takes (obvious) pains to make him a loathesome man, he still comes across as the most likeable person. I found myself engaged by him, just when I was ready to put the book down for good. If only the bad guy had shown his face in the first third of the book, instead of the last third.
And finally, and perhaps most deadly, the ending is, in fact, a cop-out. Instead of devising a conclusion that jives with the psychological questions posed by the plot, instead of struggling with the slippy morality of the book (by the end you may be wondering how you want the book to end, too), Locke seems to throw in the towel.
In other words: this book, without exagerration, has no ending.
Which is bad news, no matter how good a writer you are.
Unfortunately, the book reads as if the author wrote it in fits and starts and with half-hearted resolve. The same way you'll end up reading it. By the way, the listed author, David Locke, is really just a pseudonym for best-selling author Robert Rosenblum. Robert, I know exactly why you chose to remain anonymous.
Aside from the intriguing idea and a few clever crime scenes, this book is lacking all of the things that make even your typical summer schlock at least diverting and readable. The characters have personalities that are thinly drawn. The story itself devolves into way too much extraneous exposition. And the emotional arc of the tale is less of an arc and more of an irregular wave.
I'm all for flaunting typical literary traditions (such as solid emotional arcs), but it can be done with more finesse and less utilitarian bluntness. This book reads as if it were written by a short-sighted historian who chose to fill in the plotholes with laboring details about how golden the sun is or how pretty spring looks. Just when you get used to the newstyle-writing, Locke tries to get literary. It makes for uneven and unfullfilling writing.
I will say this: the villian (if you can call him that) is well-dressed by Locke's narrative, and although the author takes (obvious) pains to make him a loathesome man, he still comes across as the most likeable person. I found myself engaged by him, just when I was ready to put the book down for good. If only the bad guy had shown his face in the first third of the book, instead of the last third.
And finally, and perhaps most deadly, the ending is, in fact, a cop-out. Instead of devising a conclusion that jives with the psychological questions posed by the plot, instead of struggling with the slippy morality of the book (by the end you may be wondering how you want the book to end, too), Locke seems to throw in the towel.
In other words: this book, without exagerration, has no ending.
Which is bad news, no matter how good a writer you are.
July 31, 2007
I paid too much for this book. I bought it used at the Book Corner, where books are marked half off the cover price. The cover price was $6.99, so I paid $3.50 (tree-fiddy). But while reading it, I noticed it had a much larger $1 sticker from Dollar General. Hey, Book Corner, I want my $3 back!
I didn't bother to read the author's name, so since the book's protag is a female, I assumed the author was, too. I was wrong. But now the (mis)handling of the romantic subplot(s) make more sense.
This book is best summed up by a review on Amazon:
"Good writing. Bad editing. Good idea. Bad execution.
Reviewer: Jeffrey A. Fielder
For 421 pages, despite the horrible editing, I enjoyed myself. I was never swept away in the story, the way a good book should pull you in. It was easy to put down at 10 p.m. and go to sleep. No late nights. No bathtubs. Just spare-time reading.
I was disappointed in DZ because of the stupid mistakes she made. Her character, at least the one we're introduced to early on, wouldn't be caught dead sleeping with a suspect. I won't tell you who, but suffice to say DZ lands in bed with someone we're supposed to believe might have something more to do with the crimes taking place. DZ is too smart of a detective and too sure of her self to fall into bed with someone in the case.
The other romantic sub-plot can disappear too. It adds nothing to the story other than to make DZ into an even bigger female-cop-trying-to-make-it-in-a-man's-world cliche.
Above all, I'm disappointed in the ending. I invested too much time and energy for that ending. It's horrible and unfair. David Locke, who proports to be a best-selling author by another name, should know better than to cheat his audience."
Oh, and doesn't the character name Barry Stoner, the TV talk show guy sound like he means Jerry Springer?
I didn't bother to read the author's name, so since the book's protag is a female, I assumed the author was, too. I was wrong. But now the (mis)handling of the romantic subplot(s) make more sense.
This book is best summed up by a review on Amazon:
"Good writing. Bad editing. Good idea. Bad execution.
Reviewer: Jeffrey A. Fielder
For 421 pages, despite the horrible editing, I enjoyed myself. I was never swept away in the story, the way a good book should pull you in. It was easy to put down at 10 p.m. and go to sleep. No late nights. No bathtubs. Just spare-time reading.
I was disappointed in DZ because of the stupid mistakes she made. Her character, at least the one we're introduced to early on, wouldn't be caught dead sleeping with a suspect. I won't tell you who, but suffice to say DZ lands in bed with someone we're supposed to believe might have something more to do with the crimes taking place. DZ is too smart of a detective and too sure of her self to fall into bed with someone in the case.
The other romantic sub-plot can disappear too. It adds nothing to the story other than to make DZ into an even bigger female-cop-trying-to-make-it-in-a-man's-world cliche.
Above all, I'm disappointed in the ending. I invested too much time and energy for that ending. It's horrible and unfair. David Locke, who proports to be a best-selling author by another name, should know better than to cheat his audience."
Oh, and doesn't the character name Barry Stoner, the TV talk show guy sound like he means Jerry Springer?
February 11, 2015
The book is just OK. The writing is not consistent. I read it while visiting my son and d-i-l. He would laugh because I would read 2 to 4 pages and fall asleep. In one session I read 20 pages in 4 hours. All that occurred in the first half of the book. The last half of the book I could not put down. Exciting and spell-binding. The end I either hate or love: I have not decided yet.
I think he wrote in fits and starts in the first half. Then i the last half reads like one unit written with purpose.
I think he wrote in fits and starts in the first half. Then i the last half reads like one unit written with purpose.
Read
October 28, 2012Awesome !! Nice one
January 17, 2017
good story line
November 14, 2008
As much as I liked it I wasn't crazy about the ending
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews