What do you think?
Rate this book
Thirst
A vampire stalks present-day New York City by night, striking sometimes in the form of a bat, sometimes in the form of a bloodthirsty man who savors the taste of death. Original.
256 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published August 1, 1995
2 people are currently reading
71 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 - 9 of 9 reviews
September 18, 2018
(warning for mentions of rape and incest)
when you buy a book called THIRST, with its scarlet-red letters emblazoned across the front and a ferocious (if poorly drawn) bat roaring on the cover, you think you're probably in for some kind of gory b-movie vampire fluff.
the back of it reads:
"BEYOND THE GRAVE...
He has lived - undead in time and space, master of darkness, servant to none.
A soulless being cursed by sunlight, exalted by the night's embrace, he stalks his human prey with little danger of retribution.
As old as evil, as wicked as sin, he has the power to strike as a bloodthirsty man or a vampire bat. And he will attack again and again, hoping to quench his boundless... THIRST."
sounds whack but entertaining! you open this book and think, i bet this is gonna be raunchy and corny and i will enjoy myself.
you are wrong, because this is not raunchy or corny or enjoyable.
whatever assumptions you have about this book are completely wrong: in reality, it is a real estate drama with vague mobster movie elements that happens to star a vampire as the lead protagonist.
william van dieman is a 218 year old vampire living in a castle in riverdale, NY. descended from dutch bankers, van dieman was turned in 1799 by a beautiful eastern european woman and came home to amsterdam a newly changed man. sent to america by his father to visit a dying relative, van dieman promptly inherits the ENTIRE estate of jacobus van dieman, and he has lived in reclusive splendor ever since, spending his days holed up in his library admiring his paintings while sitting in his gucci slip-ons.
but all is not peaceful in Vampiretopia: a shady lawyer named jack landau (contemptuously noted to be jewish, because antisemitism is fun for the whole family i guess?) wants to get his hands on van dieman's historic castle by any means necessary, teaming up with a colombian drug lord and an italian mob family to get things done.
only van dieman can stop landau, the simonellis and hector benitez from getting their hands on his castle! and he does that by doing absolutely freaking nothing for the whole book. well, he complains a lot, but not much else.
indeed, there are literal chapters where nothing moves the plot forward, because van dieman stays home in his castle's library to write his super dull autobiography. now you may be wondering, how does a vampire write about his life in a way that makes it boring? easily: because van dieman is a loser that has zero redeeming traits and does nothing worthwhile.
i mean it. he literally has no redeeming traits. a self-described necrophile, sadist, murderer and serial rapist, van dieman exemplifies the worst traits a character can have, yet - shockingly - is not even remotely compelling even in the sense of villainy. against all odds, though he's a tried-and-true monster (independent of his vampirism), he is incapable of inspiring any emotion in the reader that can't also be inspired by looking at beige paint.
OK, hold on - van dieman's most definitive trait is his rampant hypocrisy: he condemns the greed of 90% of the other characters in the book despite being a penny-pinching miser that dreads helping the poor and the destitute; he describes everyone else as an alcoholic when he is constantly chugging champagne and vodka (and sometimes taking it alongside ritalin - despite claiming that he doesn't DO drugs); he even calls his own lawyer a blackguard for not lamenting the death of his wife... when van dieman is, again, sadistic, raping and murderous. he also owns 2 indentured servants, so he's basically a slaveowner as well.
were this a parody of the total edgelords vampires are usually depicted as being, it would be funny, but van dieman is played completely straight. the entire book is played straight.
yes, even the part where van dieman - multiple times in the book - prepares for physical altercations with ordinary mortals by loading up a glock and putting TWO HAND GRENADES into the pockets of his smoking jacket. while he brags relentlessly about his intellect and his inability to be stopped or taken down, he feels the need to carry TWO HAND GRENADES into any kind of fight. the book makes no freaking sense. TWO HAND GRENADES!!!
frankly, van dieman's characterization - what little there is - is all over the place. he is literally described as NOT being a sociopath... though he loathes the simpering brought on by his lawyer's heartbreak after he murders the lawyer's mistress. he can't stand the sound of music in any way shape or form. he claims to have never fallen in love, ever. he wagers he's murdered about 75,000 victims over his lifetime, and given that he routinely rapes people as well, his rape count is likely in a similar ballpark.
but he's not a sociopath! because i suppose kurtinski thinks sociopaths are more along the lines of, i dunno, hitler i guess. i would love to know what kurtinski thinks a bad person looks like.
not to imply any of the other characters are given a more well-rounded treatment, especially the women. 4 women exist in the book: drina, one of 2 hungarian slaves owned by van dieman; tracy lee dembroder, the mistress of van dieman's lawyer; draculina, an "elvira" ripoff who impersonates a vampire, and maggie connors, a rugged photographer who goes toe to toe with van dieman only to fall in love with him out of nowhere.
drina gets no lines. the most you know about her is that she can't speak english well and her family has been OWNED by van dieman for generations. van dieman also tried to force her and her brother, sandor, to have babies so that he would have MORE SLAVES, but they'd already been apparently having incestuous sex with no offspring produced from their couplings.
tracy lee dembroder sold out van dieman's lawyer, bradford c. wilcox, in a plot by landau to get to van dieman. somehow. not really sure where landau was going with it, and you don't ever get to know either. when confronted by van dieman, he promptly rapes and murders her, though she tells him how well-endowed he is and how good sex with him is right before she dies. so that's nice.
draculina, after meeting van dieman at a performance event lead by dorky artists obsessed with blood and faux-vampirism, is kidnapped by him and taken to a shed where he... rapes and murders her. if you think she's anything more than just rape scene fodder, you are wrong.
maggie connors meets van dieman when he finds her at the bronx zoo during some kind of photography trip. it's not really specified. he attacks her, but she takes his photo and scares him off with the flash, leading van dieman to minorly obsess over her for the duration of the book. though described as hardy and tough, maggie is quick to fall in love with van dieman after he... tries to rape and murder her. she subdues him with a hot poker and then, confusingly, professes her love for him and swoons and sighs in his general direction for the rest of the story.
(as a note, the reason maggie is so taken with van dieman is because he's a vampire. she's done so many crazy things that to sleep with a vampire would be a novelty. she lists the crazy things she's done: drugs, booze, every kind of man, lesbianism, bestiality, sadism, etc.... you may have noticed that one of these things is NOT LIKE THE OTHERS.)
the strange thing is that every time van dieman is about to rape a woman, the woman does not fight back. she literally submits to it and says as much, each one espousing the same logic: "you're going to do it anyway, so i might as well let you." which is wildly sexist and honestly straight up bizarre. one would not be wrong to assume kurtinski has never met a woman, nor would they be wrong to assume that kurtinski may have gotten all his ideas on how humans function through similar dollar store garbage like he has written.
but hey, real equality is the fact that the male characters are no better!
jack landau, the main antagonist, only gets lines in the final chapter of the book - right before van dieman blows him up with dynamite. (NOT joking). whatever he intends to do with van dieman's castle - the plot of the entire BOOK is him trying to buy this dang castle - is never made clear. you'll get through the whole book never knowing what jack landau wanted with the castle so bad. he is implied to be greedy, but never actually displays any other trait.
van dieman's lawyer, bradford c. wilcox, also doesn't have great characterization, but it's the most consistent, being competent yet unfaithful to the wife he hates. he comes from a long line of lawyers that have handled van dieman's estate, and that's about all you ever really learn about him. oh, he also likes yachting. yeah, that about covers it. oh, and he's kinda greedy, according to van dieman.
landau hires a private detective to investigate wilcox and dembroder's relationship to gain an advantage. this P.I. is vincent mara, a former military man turned gumshoe turned... vampire, after van dieman catches him trying to get dirt on him too. he is described as alcoholic and greedy, even though it's obvious he lives paycheck to paycheck - can you really call it greed if someone needs money to live in freaking new york city?
though the simonellis and hector benitez are linked closely with landau, they are never given any characterization. how do you have several major characters that never get any screentime? kurtinski's writing workshop is full of empty seats - grab yours now to pull off literary stunts like these!
despite this large cast, van dieman barely interacts with any of them. he sits around drinking and drugging while thinking about how cool he is and how formidable and well endowed he is. yes, he really does sit around egotistically fondling himself. he literally writes in his autobiography about what a genius he is.
a brooding yet masterful writing style might have given the book some kind of redeeming quality, but you ask too much of kurtinski: the book is littered with typos. maggie connors had her name mangled constantly; sometimes she was maggie connor and other times she was maggie connorses, likely because the editor probably didn't care that much to pay close attention. there's also dropped quotation marks left right and center and very blatant errors such as "not all all" instead of "not at all." i know i just said something about there being an editor, but it wouldn't surprise me if a trained chimp was actually responsible for overseeing everything.
(poorly trained, i think. hopefully that chimp was given a stern tongue-lashing.)
i know this is an incendiary review, but i would have to say that it wasn't all bad. one of my favorite parts was that every time van dieman turned into a bat, not only could he fly faster than 300MPH, but he also had a beak.
a beak.
A BEAK.
in my reading of the book, i have googled countless times whether bats have beaks, with no luck. if anyone can find me a bat with a beak, i'll eat my hat. but until then, this hat remains uneaten.
i honestly have so much more i could say about this, but the review has gotten really long already. this is just genuinely one of the worst books i ever read. i laughed, i cringed, i blinked in bewilderment the way you would if you saw someone openly pooping on a table in front of you at whataburger at 1:57AM.
to commemorate finishing this book, i'm going to pour one out in the honor of the trees that died only to have their remains wasted upon a tale so terrible.
if you want to slog through a real estate drama about a reprehensible yet dweeby little vampire bastard, by all means, pick up a copy of this. i'll even let you take mine!
if you can manage to dig it out from the bottom of my garbage can, of course.
when you buy a book called THIRST, with its scarlet-red letters emblazoned across the front and a ferocious (if poorly drawn) bat roaring on the cover, you think you're probably in for some kind of gory b-movie vampire fluff.
the back of it reads:
"BEYOND THE GRAVE...
He has lived - undead in time and space, master of darkness, servant to none.
A soulless being cursed by sunlight, exalted by the night's embrace, he stalks his human prey with little danger of retribution.
As old as evil, as wicked as sin, he has the power to strike as a bloodthirsty man or a vampire bat. And he will attack again and again, hoping to quench his boundless... THIRST."
sounds whack but entertaining! you open this book and think, i bet this is gonna be raunchy and corny and i will enjoy myself.
you are wrong, because this is not raunchy or corny or enjoyable.
whatever assumptions you have about this book are completely wrong: in reality, it is a real estate drama with vague mobster movie elements that happens to star a vampire as the lead protagonist.
william van dieman is a 218 year old vampire living in a castle in riverdale, NY. descended from dutch bankers, van dieman was turned in 1799 by a beautiful eastern european woman and came home to amsterdam a newly changed man. sent to america by his father to visit a dying relative, van dieman promptly inherits the ENTIRE estate of jacobus van dieman, and he has lived in reclusive splendor ever since, spending his days holed up in his library admiring his paintings while sitting in his gucci slip-ons.
but all is not peaceful in Vampiretopia: a shady lawyer named jack landau (contemptuously noted to be jewish, because antisemitism is fun for the whole family i guess?) wants to get his hands on van dieman's historic castle by any means necessary, teaming up with a colombian drug lord and an italian mob family to get things done.
only van dieman can stop landau, the simonellis and hector benitez from getting their hands on his castle! and he does that by doing absolutely freaking nothing for the whole book. well, he complains a lot, but not much else.
indeed, there are literal chapters where nothing moves the plot forward, because van dieman stays home in his castle's library to write his super dull autobiography. now you may be wondering, how does a vampire write about his life in a way that makes it boring? easily: because van dieman is a loser that has zero redeeming traits and does nothing worthwhile.
i mean it. he literally has no redeeming traits. a self-described necrophile, sadist, murderer and serial rapist, van dieman exemplifies the worst traits a character can have, yet - shockingly - is not even remotely compelling even in the sense of villainy. against all odds, though he's a tried-and-true monster (independent of his vampirism), he is incapable of inspiring any emotion in the reader that can't also be inspired by looking at beige paint.
OK, hold on - van dieman's most definitive trait is his rampant hypocrisy: he condemns the greed of 90% of the other characters in the book despite being a penny-pinching miser that dreads helping the poor and the destitute; he describes everyone else as an alcoholic when he is constantly chugging champagne and vodka (and sometimes taking it alongside ritalin - despite claiming that he doesn't DO drugs); he even calls his own lawyer a blackguard for not lamenting the death of his wife... when van dieman is, again, sadistic, raping and murderous. he also owns 2 indentured servants, so he's basically a slaveowner as well.
were this a parody of the total edgelords vampires are usually depicted as being, it would be funny, but van dieman is played completely straight. the entire book is played straight.
yes, even the part where van dieman - multiple times in the book - prepares for physical altercations with ordinary mortals by loading up a glock and putting TWO HAND GRENADES into the pockets of his smoking jacket. while he brags relentlessly about his intellect and his inability to be stopped or taken down, he feels the need to carry TWO HAND GRENADES into any kind of fight. the book makes no freaking sense. TWO HAND GRENADES!!!
frankly, van dieman's characterization - what little there is - is all over the place. he is literally described as NOT being a sociopath... though he loathes the simpering brought on by his lawyer's heartbreak after he murders the lawyer's mistress. he can't stand the sound of music in any way shape or form. he claims to have never fallen in love, ever. he wagers he's murdered about 75,000 victims over his lifetime, and given that he routinely rapes people as well, his rape count is likely in a similar ballpark.
but he's not a sociopath! because i suppose kurtinski thinks sociopaths are more along the lines of, i dunno, hitler i guess. i would love to know what kurtinski thinks a bad person looks like.
not to imply any of the other characters are given a more well-rounded treatment, especially the women. 4 women exist in the book: drina, one of 2 hungarian slaves owned by van dieman; tracy lee dembroder, the mistress of van dieman's lawyer; draculina, an "elvira" ripoff who impersonates a vampire, and maggie connors, a rugged photographer who goes toe to toe with van dieman only to fall in love with him out of nowhere.
drina gets no lines. the most you know about her is that she can't speak english well and her family has been OWNED by van dieman for generations. van dieman also tried to force her and her brother, sandor, to have babies so that he would have MORE SLAVES, but they'd already been apparently having incestuous sex with no offspring produced from their couplings.
tracy lee dembroder sold out van dieman's lawyer, bradford c. wilcox, in a plot by landau to get to van dieman. somehow. not really sure where landau was going with it, and you don't ever get to know either. when confronted by van dieman, he promptly rapes and murders her, though she tells him how well-endowed he is and how good sex with him is right before she dies. so that's nice.
draculina, after meeting van dieman at a performance event lead by dorky artists obsessed with blood and faux-vampirism, is kidnapped by him and taken to a shed where he... rapes and murders her. if you think she's anything more than just rape scene fodder, you are wrong.
maggie connors meets van dieman when he finds her at the bronx zoo during some kind of photography trip. it's not really specified. he attacks her, but she takes his photo and scares him off with the flash, leading van dieman to minorly obsess over her for the duration of the book. though described as hardy and tough, maggie is quick to fall in love with van dieman after he... tries to rape and murder her. she subdues him with a hot poker and then, confusingly, professes her love for him and swoons and sighs in his general direction for the rest of the story.
(as a note, the reason maggie is so taken with van dieman is because he's a vampire. she's done so many crazy things that to sleep with a vampire would be a novelty. she lists the crazy things she's done: drugs, booze, every kind of man, lesbianism, bestiality, sadism, etc.... you may have noticed that one of these things is NOT LIKE THE OTHERS.)
the strange thing is that every time van dieman is about to rape a woman, the woman does not fight back. she literally submits to it and says as much, each one espousing the same logic: "you're going to do it anyway, so i might as well let you." which is wildly sexist and honestly straight up bizarre. one would not be wrong to assume kurtinski has never met a woman, nor would they be wrong to assume that kurtinski may have gotten all his ideas on how humans function through similar dollar store garbage like he has written.
but hey, real equality is the fact that the male characters are no better!
jack landau, the main antagonist, only gets lines in the final chapter of the book - right before van dieman blows him up with dynamite. (NOT joking). whatever he intends to do with van dieman's castle - the plot of the entire BOOK is him trying to buy this dang castle - is never made clear. you'll get through the whole book never knowing what jack landau wanted with the castle so bad. he is implied to be greedy, but never actually displays any other trait.
van dieman's lawyer, bradford c. wilcox, also doesn't have great characterization, but it's the most consistent, being competent yet unfaithful to the wife he hates. he comes from a long line of lawyers that have handled van dieman's estate, and that's about all you ever really learn about him. oh, he also likes yachting. yeah, that about covers it. oh, and he's kinda greedy, according to van dieman.
landau hires a private detective to investigate wilcox and dembroder's relationship to gain an advantage. this P.I. is vincent mara, a former military man turned gumshoe turned... vampire, after van dieman catches him trying to get dirt on him too. he is described as alcoholic and greedy, even though it's obvious he lives paycheck to paycheck - can you really call it greed if someone needs money to live in freaking new york city?
though the simonellis and hector benitez are linked closely with landau, they are never given any characterization. how do you have several major characters that never get any screentime? kurtinski's writing workshop is full of empty seats - grab yours now to pull off literary stunts like these!
despite this large cast, van dieman barely interacts with any of them. he sits around drinking and drugging while thinking about how cool he is and how formidable and well endowed he is. yes, he really does sit around egotistically fondling himself. he literally writes in his autobiography about what a genius he is.
a brooding yet masterful writing style might have given the book some kind of redeeming quality, but you ask too much of kurtinski: the book is littered with typos. maggie connors had her name mangled constantly; sometimes she was maggie connor and other times she was maggie connorses, likely because the editor probably didn't care that much to pay close attention. there's also dropped quotation marks left right and center and very blatant errors such as "not all all" instead of "not at all." i know i just said something about there being an editor, but it wouldn't surprise me if a trained chimp was actually responsible for overseeing everything.
(poorly trained, i think. hopefully that chimp was given a stern tongue-lashing.)
i know this is an incendiary review, but i would have to say that it wasn't all bad. one of my favorite parts was that every time van dieman turned into a bat, not only could he fly faster than 300MPH, but he also had a beak.
a beak.
A BEAK.
in my reading of the book, i have googled countless times whether bats have beaks, with no luck. if anyone can find me a bat with a beak, i'll eat my hat. but until then, this hat remains uneaten.
i honestly have so much more i could say about this, but the review has gotten really long already. this is just genuinely one of the worst books i ever read. i laughed, i cringed, i blinked in bewilderment the way you would if you saw someone openly pooping on a table in front of you at whataburger at 1:57AM.
to commemorate finishing this book, i'm going to pour one out in the honor of the trees that died only to have their remains wasted upon a tale so terrible.
if you want to slog through a real estate drama about a reprehensible yet dweeby little vampire bastard, by all means, pick up a copy of this. i'll even let you take mine!
if you can manage to dig it out from the bottom of my garbage can, of course.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 2, 2021
Pretty average; a 200 hundred year old vampire fights the mob who want to take over his castle - that’s pretty much it. Not much by way of character development (despite the vampire writing his memoir intermittently throughout the book) or plot. The story moves along at a steady pace but it’s really a snooze-fest.
March 17, 2014
I was hoping for a solid vampire novel or at the very least a cheesy b-rate but Thirst really pissed me off because it isn't it really a horror novel and it does nothing to add or detract from the legacy of the vampire mythos.
Turns out the story revolves around a castle and the mob wants it. The title character is boring as hell and the plot seems as if it were randomly picked out of a hat. What little we actually do have in terms of a vampire is pretty boring. He broods and sleeps and that's it. Van Diemen is not a good title character at all.
Why did I finish this if it was so boring? I wanted to give it a chance and hoped that it would get better yet it never did. Vampire vs mob and other random ideas do not make a good book.
Turns out the story revolves around a castle and the mob wants it. The title character is boring as hell and the plot seems as if it were randomly picked out of a hat. What little we actually do have in terms of a vampire is pretty boring. He broods and sleeps and that's it. Van Diemen is not a good title character at all.
Why did I finish this if it was so boring? I wanted to give it a chance and hoped that it would get better yet it never did. Vampire vs mob and other random ideas do not make a good book.
October 11, 2024
Wow. that was terrible. The only reason that it's not getting 1 star is that I did actually finish this horrific dog. The vampire protagonist isn't a hero; he's not a tragic tortured soul; he's not even a monster - he's just an immortal asshole. Dialogue is terrible. I didn't like ANY of the characters, and the sex manages to be both creepy and clinically dull at the same time. Also for some reason, the author thinks that bats have beaks (not a typo, as he mentions the giant bat's "cruel beak" over a dozen times.). Lowest possible 2 stars.
October 25, 2023
I kept reading Thirst and I kept asking myself "how can the next page be stupider than the last?" But yet it always found a way. From the section where MC William Van Diemen declares himself a "horny vampire," to every character he comes in contact with being an alcoholic (and then Van Deimen realising this fact, almost as if the writer had the same realisation), to a castle being built and remaining in a major metropolitan city for more than a century. Thirst continues to ratchet up its stupidity.
The author would have you believe that William Van Diemen is the most cool, collected, capable, and downright bad ass son-of-a-gun in the world. But what it translates to is a character who is never really challenged. There's only one moment where he shows a little vulnerability, but it's towards the end and it's over within a couple of pages. Thirst is the book equivalent of a Steven Segal movie: yeah you'll get some action, but there's no struggle, no arc, all because Steven Segal/William Van Diemen kick ass, and only wusses get hit.
And regrettably Van Diemen just flat out admits to r*ping so many women, and he commits these acts throughout the book, and I'm supposed to cheer for this man as he wins? If this were written 20 years later I would say the author probably had incel tendencies.
Finally, I will say Thirst does have 2 things going for it:
1. The big-print meant the book went by really quick.
2. It has inspired me, because if this thing can get published then maybe there's still hope for my shitty manuscript to get noticed.
The author would have you believe that William Van Diemen is the most cool, collected, capable, and downright bad ass son-of-a-gun in the world. But what it translates to is a character who is never really challenged. There's only one moment where he shows a little vulnerability, but it's towards the end and it's over within a couple of pages. Thirst is the book equivalent of a Steven Segal movie: yeah you'll get some action, but there's no struggle, no arc, all because Steven Segal/William Van Diemen kick ass, and only wusses get hit.
And regrettably Van Diemen just flat out admits to r*ping so many women, and he commits these acts throughout the book, and I'm supposed to cheer for this man as he wins? If this were written 20 years later I would say the author probably had incel tendencies.
Finally, I will say Thirst does have 2 things going for it:
1. The big-print meant the book went by really quick.
2. It has inspired me, because if this thing can get published then maybe there's still hope for my shitty manuscript to get noticed.
May 23, 2022
Legitimately the worst book I've ever read.
The moment I read that the main character's giant vampire bat form could fly at 300mph and had a beak, I knew this was going to be a rough ride. I thought for a chapter or so maybe this was taking the piss ... but no. This book is completely serious, which makes it even worse.
The main character is racist, egotistical, greedy, and a murderer and rapist (but this is written as though it's a super cool thing). And yet he's the most boring person in the world. He literally sits around for whole scenes drinking and taking Ritalin, and thinking about how great he is and how not-racist he is, while fondly thinking about his much he loves sex and raping women. We're told he's murdered 75000 people (one a day) and he rapes women almost as often - but he has a huge penis and the women actually really want to have sex with him and be raped. So it's okay. Did I mention how boring he is?
The main female character initially scares him off with a FLASHBULB - and he then obsesses over murdering her because he didn't get to rape and kill her. But don't worry guys - she later falls in love with him after he tries to murder and rape her AGAIN. Turns out she's a thrill seeker and drugs, drinking, sadism, lesbianism and beastiality (yes, you read right) aren't working anymore. She wants a vampire to get her off, so she follows him around simpering and making heart eyes while begging for sex.
The main plot is that gangsters want to buy his castle (in America) but we never find out why and he blows up the main antagonistic with dynamite. So you know, hooray? The book ends with him having a bubble bath and reflecting on how great he is.
The best thing about this book is the cover.
0 stars.
In fact ... -1 star.
The moment I read that the main character's giant vampire bat form could fly at 300mph and had a beak, I knew this was going to be a rough ride. I thought for a chapter or so maybe this was taking the piss ... but no. This book is completely serious, which makes it even worse.
The main character is racist, egotistical, greedy, and a murderer and rapist (but this is written as though it's a super cool thing). And yet he's the most boring person in the world. He literally sits around for whole scenes drinking and taking Ritalin, and thinking about how great he is and how not-racist he is, while fondly thinking about his much he loves sex and raping women. We're told he's murdered 75000 people (one a day) and he rapes women almost as often - but he has a huge penis and the women actually really want to have sex with him and be raped. So it's okay. Did I mention how boring he is?
The main female character initially scares him off with a FLASHBULB - and he then obsesses over murdering her because he didn't get to rape and kill her. But don't worry guys - she later falls in love with him after he tries to murder and rape her AGAIN. Turns out she's a thrill seeker and drugs, drinking, sadism, lesbianism and beastiality (yes, you read right) aren't working anymore. She wants a vampire to get her off, so she follows him around simpering and making heart eyes while begging for sex.
The main plot is that gangsters want to buy his castle (in America) but we never find out why and he blows up the main antagonistic with dynamite. So you know, hooray? The book ends with him having a bubble bath and reflecting on how great he is.
The best thing about this book is the cover.
0 stars.
In fact ... -1 star.
September 18, 2023
I found a used copy of this at my dad's apartment complex.(They have like a little free library) and looked it up here on Goodreads....man does it have some terrible reviews. I decided I had to read it to see if it was that bad....
For me, it was not that bad....
But it is not the story the cover or the blurb on the back say it is....
William Van Diemen is a 200 year old vampire living in Riverdale New York, in his castle he built years ago...
Someone is trying very hard to buy it from him and they won't take no for an answer....
That's pretty much the plot....with William writing his autobiography in-between...
I see where people would have issues with this....but I did enjoy it.
His vampire powers are not exactly like we expect. He's not Super Strong. But he does turn into a bat. A lot.
He's also not a nice guy, and he does whine and complain a lot.
But the story moves fast, even though not a lot happens. He's never in any real danger. More like he's inconvenienced a few times.
There is a love interest, but it takes forever to get that story going....and her love for him is kind of unbelievable.
But again I did like this one.
For me, it was not that bad....
But it is not the story the cover or the blurb on the back say it is....
William Van Diemen is a 200 year old vampire living in Riverdale New York, in his castle he built years ago...
Someone is trying very hard to buy it from him and they won't take no for an answer....
That's pretty much the plot....with William writing his autobiography in-between...
I see where people would have issues with this....but I did enjoy it.
His vampire powers are not exactly like we expect. He's not Super Strong. But he does turn into a bat. A lot.
He's also not a nice guy, and he does whine and complain a lot.
But the story moves fast, even though not a lot happens. He's never in any real danger. More like he's inconvenienced a few times.
There is a love interest, but it takes forever to get that story going....and her love for him is kind of unbelievable.
But again I did like this one.
February 2, 2020
Yuck, a waste.
October 24, 2024
Junior high school level of writing. How in the name of all that’s unholy did this ever get published!!??
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews