What do you think?
Rate this book
Jonathan Crowley #1
Under the Overtree
A lonely young man, tormented and bullied by his peers, is transformed into a powerful force that exacts revenge on those who have wronged him, and wreaks havoc on the lives of anyone who stands in the way of his desires. Reprint.
490 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
11 people are currently reading
339 people want to read
About the author
James A. Moore
230 books766 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.
James A. Moore was the award winning author of over forty novels, thrillers, dark fantasy and horror alike, including the critically acclaimed Fireworks, Under The Overtree, Blood Red, the Serenity Falls trilogy (featuring his recurring anti-hero, Jonathan Crowley) and his most recent novels, seven Forges, The Blasted Lands, City of Wonders , The Silent Army and the forthcoming The Gates of The Dead (Book Three in the Tides of War Series) and A Hell Within, co-authored with Charles R. Rutledge.
James A. Moore was the award winning author of over forty novels, thrillers, dark fantasy and horror alike, including the critically acclaimed Fireworks, Under The Overtree, Blood Red, the Serenity Falls trilogy (featuring his recurring anti-hero, Jonathan Crowley) and his most recent novels, seven Forges, The Blasted Lands, City of Wonders , The Silent Army and the forthcoming The Gates of The Dead (Book Three in the Tides of War Series) and A Hell Within, co-authored with Charles R. Rutledge.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
November 12, 2010
First book I ever read by Moore and so far his best. A great coming of age story with horrific elements.
December 14, 2011
this is the first novel by james a. moore and to me is like a novel written by a veteran,
very solid style,very solid writting,very solid characters, very solid plot,very solid
writer.In my opinion this novel is flawless and by the year of publication I would say that
represents the first aparition of the mysterious and interesting Jonathan Crowley.Do you know
this character? Before read the novel me not and I must admit I´m intrigued and want to know
more about him! If you´re curious read it and an advice for free: don´t mess with Jonathan!!
very solid style,very solid writting,very solid characters, very solid plot,very solid
writer.In my opinion this novel is flawless and by the year of publication I would say that
represents the first aparition of the mysterious and interesting Jonathan Crowley.Do you know
this character? Before read the novel me not and I must admit I´m intrigued and want to know
more about him! If you´re curious read it and an advice for free: don´t mess with Jonathan!!
October 9, 2016
A coming-of-age tale of a nerdy type who suddenly transforms into an athlete, with deadly consequences. Written this way sounds a bit mundane but trust Moore to add his own spin on the "Hulk" approach. Impressive narrative plus a few touching moments to spare make this one a winner.
July 22, 2011
a very good
January 16, 2024
Decent classic coming-of-age horror, that seems to run a bit too long, with an intriguing character in Crowley.
May 15, 2011
Disappointing, to say the least, esp. given that some well-known authors gave it such high marks in their cover blurbs. I should know by now not to trust those.
In particular, one review compared it to "vintage Stephen King." I read everything King wrote up to a point (he lost me at Gerald's Game), and his early work (particularly the short fiction) clearly showed the depth of his own reading and how it informed his writing, drawing on classic mythology texts like Sir James Frazer's The Golden Bough to form the background of stories like "The Mangler", "Mrs. Todd's Shortcut", "The Lawnmower Man", and "Sometimes They Come Back", while "Children of the Corn" and "Jerusalem's Lot" are heavily influenced by HP Lovecraft, and "Here There Be Tygers" recalls some of Saki's finest stories. (And "The Jaunt" is a memorable, if surprising, foray into science fiction.)
This guy, James A. Moore, apparently never read anything, or if he did, none of it stuck. There's no substance to his invented "Folk" - although there is plenty of source material available to flesh out the nature spirits Moore inserts into the story as the force behind a series of grisly murders and unexplained occurrences. His spooky demon-hunter has powers that are never explained, a mysterious book of spells pops up and is superficially clothed in elements of "the dark arts", but that's as far as it goes: where King (and many others) would have actually read enough of previous literature featuring such things to give them some weight, Moore just skips over the inconvenient process of including any details.
I finished it. I wish I had given up when his writing first started pissing me off. (Not even going to get into that, but suffice to say if you are a stickler for properly constructed sentences and word usage, save yourself the headache and skip this one.)
In particular, one review compared it to "vintage Stephen King." I read everything King wrote up to a point (he lost me at Gerald's Game), and his early work (particularly the short fiction) clearly showed the depth of his own reading and how it informed his writing, drawing on classic mythology texts like Sir James Frazer's The Golden Bough to form the background of stories like "The Mangler", "Mrs. Todd's Shortcut", "The Lawnmower Man", and "Sometimes They Come Back", while "Children of the Corn" and "Jerusalem's Lot" are heavily influenced by HP Lovecraft, and "Here There Be Tygers" recalls some of Saki's finest stories. (And "The Jaunt" is a memorable, if surprising, foray into science fiction.)
This guy, James A. Moore, apparently never read anything, or if he did, none of it stuck. There's no substance to his invented "Folk" - although there is plenty of source material available to flesh out the nature spirits Moore inserts into the story as the force behind a series of grisly murders and unexplained occurrences. His spooky demon-hunter has powers that are never explained, a mysterious book of spells pops up and is superficially clothed in elements of "the dark arts", but that's as far as it goes: where King (and many others) would have actually read enough of previous literature featuring such things to give them some weight, Moore just skips over the inconvenient process of including any details.
I finished it. I wish I had given up when his writing first started pissing me off. (Not even going to get into that, but suffice to say if you are a stickler for properly constructed sentences and word usage, save yourself the headache and skip this one.)
June 3, 2008
It’s been a while since I read a true horror novel, so it took me a bit to talk myself into suspending disbelief. However, once I got into the book, it was pretty good. The story felt original to me, and the way things wove together in the end was interesting. There’s one detail that I don’t quite understand, but I’m not sure it’s truly important to the story. For a horror, this wasn’t particularly scary, but I think it does qualify as creepy.
October 9, 2008
This book took me an unusually long time to read; even at 490 pages, I would normally have blazed through it in no time. I just couldn't get into it, though, much as I tried. I almost gave up just before the middle, in fact, as I realized that reading it was becoming more of a job to finish than the pleasure it should have been. But, having made it that far, I decided to stick it out.
Luckily, it did get a bit more interesting in the second half, but the (distracting) problems still remained: Under the Overtree is peppered with awkward comma placement, apostrophe problems (they exist in a few places they shouldn't, but are missing in a few where they belong), and close repetition of words that reads more like lack of editing than a stylistic choice. Moore also seems to have an annoying tendency to make compound words that have no business being so, while commonly-accepted real compound words are inexplicably separated.
My biggest issue, though, is with style, not mechanics. Most of the core characters of this novel are fifteen or sixteen years old...yet not one of them acts, talks, or thinks like a teenager. This precociousness would be understandable in one or two of the kids...but...all of them? Really? Even the ones we are told aren't very smart? Everyone--adult and teen alike--seems to have the same (or extremely similar) voice, at times making the book's perspective changes only discernible by the start of a new section and mention of other characters' names.
The two "quirky" characters come off as contrived and overly theatrical, provoking more annoyance and discomfort than comic relief or affection. I warmed to them after a while, not coincidentally after the writer toned it down a bit, but they still seemed two-dimensional.
The women, sadly, showed the mark of a male writer who hasn't had a lot of close female friends: the ones you're supposed to like are young and sexy, physically perfect, but not terribly complex, with wandering eyes and changeable loyalties. In at least one case, the reason(s) for the about-face are not adequately explained.
Speaking of things that aren't adequately explained: the character I found most interesting--who doesn't show up until at least halfway through the book--is still just as much an anomoly as he was during the novel. Who is he? What is he? Why is he the way he is? I think I'd rather read a story about him than any of the other throwaway people in Under the Overtree. The only possible exceptions are the two guys Moore killed off in the last few chapters.
There are some good moments here, and many things that could have been much better with some expert editing...and, let's face it, a little more experience. The writer's descriptions are vivid, his town believable, and his idea is an interesting one, with potential unfulfilled. It's a passable first effort, but I find myself a little sad and disappointed that it wasn't as good as it could have been.
This brings me to a different, somewhat related point. I've read a few books from this publisher (Leisure), and I've noticed a common thread: they've all had a lot of proofreading problems. I wonder, is this due to a bad editor working for them, or do they just accept and print manuscripts as-is? If it's the latter, that might be good to know for anyone looking to get published without a lot of re-writes.
Luckily, it did get a bit more interesting in the second half, but the (distracting) problems still remained: Under the Overtree is peppered with awkward comma placement, apostrophe problems (they exist in a few places they shouldn't, but are missing in a few where they belong), and close repetition of words that reads more like lack of editing than a stylistic choice. Moore also seems to have an annoying tendency to make compound words that have no business being so, while commonly-accepted real compound words are inexplicably separated.
My biggest issue, though, is with style, not mechanics. Most of the core characters of this novel are fifteen or sixteen years old...yet not one of them acts, talks, or thinks like a teenager. This precociousness would be understandable in one or two of the kids...but...all of them? Really? Even the ones we are told aren't very smart? Everyone--adult and teen alike--seems to have the same (or extremely similar) voice, at times making the book's perspective changes only discernible by the start of a new section and mention of other characters' names.
The two "quirky" characters come off as contrived and overly theatrical, provoking more annoyance and discomfort than comic relief or affection. I warmed to them after a while, not coincidentally after the writer toned it down a bit, but they still seemed two-dimensional.
The women, sadly, showed the mark of a male writer who hasn't had a lot of close female friends: the ones you're supposed to like are young and sexy, physically perfect, but not terribly complex, with wandering eyes and changeable loyalties. In at least one case, the reason(s) for the about-face are not adequately explained.
Speaking of things that aren't adequately explained: the character I found most interesting--who doesn't show up until at least halfway through the book--is still just as much an anomoly as he was during the novel. Who is he? What is he? Why is he the way he is? I think I'd rather read a story about him than any of the other throwaway people in Under the Overtree. The only possible exceptions are the two guys Moore killed off in the last few chapters.
There are some good moments here, and many things that could have been much better with some expert editing...and, let's face it, a little more experience. The writer's descriptions are vivid, his town believable, and his idea is an interesting one, with potential unfulfilled. It's a passable first effort, but I find myself a little sad and disappointed that it wasn't as good as it could have been.
This brings me to a different, somewhat related point. I've read a few books from this publisher (Leisure), and I've noticed a common thread: they've all had a lot of proofreading problems. I wonder, is this due to a bad editor working for them, or do they just accept and print manuscripts as-is? If it's the latter, that might be good to know for anyone looking to get published without a lot of re-writes.
March 17, 2011
This is my fifth James A. Moore book and the first one I found to be a slight struggle to finish. In plot it's very similar to his Serenity Falls trilogy, so it was a bit boring for me. It's not as good as the trilogy either: for the most part, it reads like an adolescent boy's wish fulfillment excercise. There's never enough tension or things going wrong, even if some people -are- gruesomely murdered every now and again. At the end it also feels like a lot of loose threads have been left hanging and nothing has been brought together or explained in sufficient depth. Neither do the characters really seem to suffer from what they have gone through, they haven't grown as people by the end. I was going to give it 2 stars, but it did have the character Johnathan Crowley in and I'm quite fond of him (he's also in the Serenity Falls trilogy), so I've knocked it up a star just for him.
June 28, 2011
This is my first experience with James Moore and after reading, "Under the Overtree", it won't be my last. Although the book is a little long, Moore somehow keeps things quite engaging with his detail of characters and his skill of quickly moving scenes. I found a lot of spelling errors throughout this book -- which unfortunately seems fairly common in Leisure's titles these days. Moore's writing is mostly smooth, but I found a few times where his sentence structure confused me and I had to re-read sections numerous times to figure out what was going on. Another issue I had with the book was the scare factor... there really wasn't any. James A. Moore is a solid writer, but his scenes of horror are still a little conservative.
March 10, 2013
This is a very good book with an unusual idea, and it is definitely worth your time. That said, Moore cheats a little bit with this one by introducing a major character in the late middle of the book named Jonathan Crowley. He's a very interesting guy, if a bit John Constantine-ish, but you can't just throw a guy like that into the story so late. Not only that, but Moore reveals another character has a supernatural past long after something like that should have been mentioned. A bit of exposition about these matters earlier in the book would have made more sense.
November 23, 2017
James Moore's first novel got lost on Amazon's cloud, but I was sure happy to find it! It introduces anti-hero Johnathan Crowley and answered a whole lotta questions for me. It's not without it's problems, it needed editing, but I couldn't have cared less. It detracted points from the now bankrupt publisher for not helping Moore edit. Moore's storyline was completely compelling and showed how the brilliant author he became started out.
In spite of it's flaws, I loved it.
In spite of it's flaws, I loved it.
December 27, 2017
Something summoned by a group of kids reading a spell from an old notebook found in an attic makes its presence known decades later when 15 year old Mark Howell and his parents arrive in town. This is the excellent first novel of James Moore. It's also the first appearance of Jonathan Crowley, the grinning magical hitman often called in to put down manifestations of supernatural evil. I wholeheartedly recommend this coming of age gem of horror.
November 23, 2010
Good read... but.. maybe I'm too old to read about teenagers in trouble? Or have I read too many horror books that I found a lot of it familiar.
November 6, 2011
More like 3.5. This is a good book. I read it a while ago. It kinda dragged on tho.
November 9, 2020
older book but wow was it good!
July 10, 2015
Bad. Just simply bad.
I had to skim the last 100 pages to finish it and find out how it ended... not that I really cared but what the hell.
I had to skim the last 100 pages to finish it and find out how it ended... not that I really cared but what the hell.
November 5, 2021
This book had a great premise. The writing was good, but it did drift into "purple prose" on occasion. What is purple prose? Sentences that are over-written and awkward.
The were a lot of typos and I'm sorry, but this was a professionally published book and not a self publish. Shame on whoever missed them.
The cover blurb declared that this book is "A creepy novel recalling vintage Stephen King." Nope. Nothing like Stephen King, and I'm tired of every horror writer being compared to King. I see this on a book and I sometimes skip it just becomes it's a tired cliche these days. Not every horror writer is a mini version of Stephen King.
Like I said, this book had a clever plot and it held my attention. At 490 pages, it could have been tightened up some. And not to be nasty, since I see James Moore has been published several times--it really wouldn't hurt to take a few writing classes.
The were a lot of typos and I'm sorry, but this was a professionally published book and not a self publish. Shame on whoever missed them.
The cover blurb declared that this book is "A creepy novel recalling vintage Stephen King." Nope. Nothing like Stephen King, and I'm tired of every horror writer being compared to King. I see this on a book and I sometimes skip it just becomes it's a tired cliche these days. Not every horror writer is a mini version of Stephen King.
Like I said, this book had a clever plot and it held my attention. At 490 pages, it could have been tightened up some. And not to be nasty, since I see James Moore has been published several times--it really wouldn't hurt to take a few writing classes.
November 15, 2019
DNF; I couldn't get into this story. There was details that you didn't know at the beginning about characters that magically pop up in the middle of the book. There was overloads of useless information about background characters. It was long and hard to get through. I tried sticking with it, but it's not my cup of tea.
March 16, 2025
This was my second reading of this excellent novel and it was just as good, or maybe even better than I remember it.
March 6, 2017
Excellent creepy and more information about Jonathan Crowley
January 29, 2016
Alright, this book has been sitting on my shelf for years waiting for me to get around to reading it. A very large part of me wishes that it had remained there. It was one of those random pick ups at a library sale or some such thing. I wish it had stayed there.
Don't get me wrong, at heart this is a fairly interesting concept for a horror coming of age novel. Mostly telling the tale of Mark, the eternal new kid in town who moves to a small town where everything goes wrong until the day after a beating by the local bullies where they start to go right. Because of supernatural elements obviously. There are kernels of potential here and more than anything it feels like it was written by a mostly inexperienced writer.
I just couldn't get past certain things, whether they were valid complaints or pet peeves. Here's a list of a few of them:
1. I don't know if the publisher has a copy editor, but if they do they're not very good at their job. So many grammar errors it's kind of ridiculous. This one isn't even on the author altogether, because let me tell you when you're caught up writing something and then rereading and editing it five times, you can miss things. So, that's really on the publishing house.
2. The author had this weird habit of always referring to characters in the book by their full names. He jumps back and forth, but this happened multiple times in the same paragraph sometimes. It's weird and makes for a wall of formality that made sympathizing with the characters difficult.
3. I have no issues with male writers writing from a female point of view. I do have issues with male writers who write from a female point of view and make every single female vapid and borderline stupid. (Note: Find readers that are of the opposite sex. Have them read your opposite sex characters and take notes on their honest feedback. Every author should do this for the sake of making it seem like maybe you don't secretly hate women.)
4. There's this weird incestuous vein throughout every family relationship with a male and a female. It doesn't do anything for the story except make you feel vaguely icky. Twins do not secretly check each other out and wish they could bang each other (I assume). Mothers don't wake up one day and go "my how my son has grown into a bangable man". Seriously. There's more than that, but it's just icky.
I'm just going to stop there with my top issues with this. There's more. Again, it mostly feels like inexperience more than inability. The writing shows promise in places where it's not cliche. I wouldn't say that I'd recommend it. I also wouldn't necessarily write off other books by the author. I would just tread very, very carefully, because we all know there are authors that never grow past their flaws enough to make enjoyable books.
Don't get me wrong, at heart this is a fairly interesting concept for a horror coming of age novel. Mostly telling the tale of Mark, the eternal new kid in town who moves to a small town where everything goes wrong until the day after a beating by the local bullies where they start to go right. Because of supernatural elements obviously. There are kernels of potential here and more than anything it feels like it was written by a mostly inexperienced writer.
I just couldn't get past certain things, whether they were valid complaints or pet peeves. Here's a list of a few of them:
1. I don't know if the publisher has a copy editor, but if they do they're not very good at their job. So many grammar errors it's kind of ridiculous. This one isn't even on the author altogether, because let me tell you when you're caught up writing something and then rereading and editing it five times, you can miss things. So, that's really on the publishing house.
2. The author had this weird habit of always referring to characters in the book by their full names. He jumps back and forth, but this happened multiple times in the same paragraph sometimes. It's weird and makes for a wall of formality that made sympathizing with the characters difficult.
3. I have no issues with male writers writing from a female point of view. I do have issues with male writers who write from a female point of view and make every single female vapid and borderline stupid. (Note: Find readers that are of the opposite sex. Have them read your opposite sex characters and take notes on their honest feedback. Every author should do this for the sake of making it seem like maybe you don't secretly hate women.)
4. There's this weird incestuous vein throughout every family relationship with a male and a female. It doesn't do anything for the story except make you feel vaguely icky. Twins do not secretly check each other out and wish they could bang each other (I assume). Mothers don't wake up one day and go "my how my son has grown into a bangable man". Seriously. There's more than that, but it's just icky.
I'm just going to stop there with my top issues with this. There's more. Again, it mostly feels like inexperience more than inability. The writing shows promise in places where it's not cliche. I wouldn't say that I'd recommend it. I also wouldn't necessarily write off other books by the author. I would just tread very, very carefully, because we all know there are authors that never grow past their flaws enough to make enjoyable books.
September 10, 2015
James A. Moore's UNDER THE OVERTREE is an odd book, but in a very good way. At 490 pages it's a longer read and, admittedly, I started feeling it was a novella that had grown as Moore introduces so many characters and events within the first 200 pages. However, the tale of a small Colorado town, the evil that lurks just below the surface and its fight for the soul of a newcomer is finely crafted and features enough twists, turns and surprises to keep readers' interest not only piqued but - in the end - paid off.
One complaint: the book is riddled with errors. From punctuation to misspelled words to misnumbered chapters it's an odd problem to find in a Leisure edition, that publisher who served as such a great gateway into horror before it suffered a premature death.
One complaint: the book is riddled with errors. From punctuation to misspelled words to misnumbered chapters it's an odd problem to find in a Leisure edition, that publisher who served as such a great gateway into horror before it suffered a premature death.
October 16, 2014
This was a very impressive first novel and the perfect autumn read. I was pointed to this book by favorable reviews by some freaks in the Horror Aficionados group and am glad I followed the leaf strewn, blood splattered trail to it. Most first horror novels are all blood/no heart, pure plot/poor (if any) characterizaiton, but Under the Overtree was filled with well-drawn characters and had more on its mind than the usual thrills and grue. This first novel showed more than enough quality to make this reader interested in checking out more books by Mr. Moore. So I will. You can't stop me.
July 12, 2016
I loved this story. It was excellent and compelling. My biggest complaint would be that the editing was brutal. It is filled with grammatical errors and at times sentences just stop in the middle with no punctuation or idea where it would have gone.
I read this book years ago, when it first came out, so hopefully it was reprinted with fixed errors. If you can get past the errors, this story is a great experience.
I read this book years ago, when it first came out, so hopefully it was reprinted with fixed errors. If you can get past the errors, this story is a great experience.
Read
April 14, 2008Horror
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews