SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

After seeing all the glowing reviews, you finally caved in and bought that book that everybody was talking about and it just left you.....meh.

So which SF/Fantasy books did you find particularly overrated? I.E. just utterly failed to live up to the hype/expectation?

Recent entries for me are The Passage, Boneshaker and MaddAddam.

(and given the nature of this topic, I fully expect rage and much gnashing of teeth at my choices)...hehe..

I found Narnia overrated. Well, only read the first book.

But, truth be told, it is probably the YA theme that doesn´t do it for me.

As if anyone who knows me knows that I think The Name of the Wind is so overrated. I don't know how any one can like or find the book to the amazing when the main character is a complete jackass that no one in real life want to be around. I read fantasy for great characters doing good deeds, not ones that cheats and lies to get his way, and tries to avoid trouble, but sometimes backfires on him. But I think people might view that as a more realistic character.

I know it is very popular. I know I'm in the minority with this one. But I do not get Dune. The worldbuilding is fantastic. The story was okay. I've seen better, have also seen worse. But I hated the characters. There was nothing about Paul I liked. Not one thing.

I agree with Dune, but the title to the most overrated SF book should go to Stranger in a Strange Land. I am still puzzled by the fact that old man's sexual fantasies are called the classic of science fiction.

From recent fantasy examples: Malazan series. I have yet to read more boring books (I finished the series). The majority of the books were spent on different characters thinking the same miserable thoughts.

Kevin, I've been put off that book by similar views expressed elsewhere.

Evgeny, I read Gardens of the Moon, but no more. I can see why people like it, but for me it was too much ankle and not enough leg. I wanted more clarity and less teasing.

Nienna, not sure I'd go as far as hated, but I also found Dune to be much less than I'd expected.

2001: A Space Odyssey was a let down for me. Maybe it was because I read it when I was 17 years old. It was so crammed with science that it felt like I was reading one of my science textbooks. I actually gave up 20 pages from the end because I found the climax was such an anti-climax. Interestingly, my next book was Contact, which was totally different: a really engaging science-based novel.

I also found that the Codex Alera series by Jim Butcher to be overrated. I don't understand how people like those books when they are filled with troupes and bad characterizations.

I have been hearing about Dresden and Jim Butcher for so many years that you can imagine my disappointment when I finally read Jim Butcher and found the writing to be so very bad.
So many people have recommended it to me and it gets so many high reviews that I really can't understand.

And while we are talking overhyped let me continue to make enemies by saying that A Song of Ice and Fire...not that good. (my opinion) Bad writing, predictable writing, cardboard characters (I could tell 200 pages before things happened because I always knew what each character was going to do). meh

Scott wrote: "I have been hearing about Dresden and Jim Butcher for so many years that you can imagine my disappointment when I finally read Jim Butcher and found the writing to be so very bad."

That's cool. I don't think you should feel you're making enemies. I'm all for diversity of opinion. For every book that a person feels is overrated, I'm sure that there's someone out there saying it's the best thing in the world. If everyone read, liked or believed the same thing, we'd have a pretty boring, homogenous world in which to live.

As long as you're not calling Dresden fans knuckleheads or something like that, because then we're going to have to continue this discussion outside!

Scott wrote: "I have been hearing about Dresden and Jim Butcher for so many years that you can imagine my disappointment when I finally read Jim Butcher and found the writing to be so very bad.
So many people ha..."

I couldn't take the books either, but got a free audiobook and loved it. The guy that played Spike on Buffy James Marsters is the narrator and he really flipped my opinion of that series.

Yea the audiobooks are a diff experience, anyway

I thought The Way of Shadows trilogy was a bit of a letdown, the 1st book was ok, I liked reading most of the 1st book, from there I thought it went downhill & Weeks is a decent author. Still haven't placed exactly why I kept putting it aside, than trying it again & repeating this a bunch of times before giving up on trilogy.

Gordon wrote: "Yea the audiobooks are a diff experience, anyway

I thought The Way of Shadows trilogy was a bit of a letdown, the 1st book was ok, I liked reading most of the 1st book, from there I..."

I agree. I actually really liked the first book, but I was so disappointed in it by the end.

Kevin wrote: "As if anyone who knows me knows that I think The Name of the Wind is so overrated. I don't know how any one can like or find the book to the amazing when the main character is a comp..."
I have not read that one yet, but I've been urged by many of my 'geek' friends to. They absolutely rave about how well it was written. Now my curiosity is piqued. :)

Heath wrote: "Kevin wrote: "As if anyone who knows me knows that I think The Name of the Wind is so overrated. I don't know how any one can like or find the book to the amazing when the main chara..."

I loved The Name of the Wind. But hated the 2nd book.

Some may scream 'HERESY' at me for saying this, but two books by one of the acknowledged masters of sci-fi were big letdowns for me: RENDEZ VOUS WITH RAMA and CHILDHOOD'S END, both by Arthur C. Clark. I found RENDEZ VOUS WITH RAMA to be long-winded and boring, while CHILDHOOD'S END was a depressing, cold-hearted book with an end that was to my mind completely illogical, pointless and devoid of true human emotions. However, I did like 2001, A SPACE ODYSSEY. It is as if Arthur C. Clark increasingly grew distant and recluse with the years passing, as his novels grew increasingly cold in terms of human emotions and feelings.

Another big letdown was TIMELINE, by Michael Crichton. The basic plot was okay, but the writing was very so-so and the characters were nearly cardboard.

Michel wrote: "Another big letdown was TIMELINE, by Michael Crichton. The basic plot was okay, but the writing was very so-so and the characters were nearly cardboard."

Crichton wrote some easy, enjoyable earlier books but he's an author I classify as 'going pop' or a more negative description 'Michael Bay movie sellout author', although for the $$ he probably made I'm not sure I can blame him lol?

I have to echo the sentiments about the sequel to Name of the Wind (Wise Man's Fear). I really enjoyed the first one but the second was fairly disappointing.

Evgeny wrote: "I agree with Dune, but the title to the most overrated SF book should go to Stranger in a Strange Land. I am still puzzled by the fact that old man's sexual fantasies are called the classic of science fiction.

From recent fantasy examples: Malazan series"

Agreed.

I could not get into The Name of the Wind. Gave it two tries.

There has been only one book I've not finished and that was Prince of Thorns. I usually stick it out but I just really didn't like the writing or the character. I also didn't really like Black Sun Rising, but I did at least finish it.

I don't know that "overrated" is really an appropriate term here since it's so highly subjective. There are plenty of popular works that are definitely not my cup of tea though. I was underwhelmed by Dune, and even more heretically, liked the movie better. The first one.

A recent example of a highly hyped book that didn't work for me is The Bone Season. Interesting world but I hated the characters.

Scott wrote: "I have been hearing about Dresden and Jim Butcher for so many years that you can imagine my disappointment when I finally read Jim Butcher and found the writing to be so very bad.
So many people ha..."

I have made many attempts to read Jim Butcher. I found his characters even thinner than cardboard. And while I'm talking about characters lacking in dimension, I wasn't able to make much headway with Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire series for the same reason. Those are only two examples. I am very rarely impressed with writers that are subjects of hype.

Tad wrote: "I don't know that "overrated" is really an appropriate term here since it's so highly subjective. There are plenty of popular works that are definitely not my cup of tea though. I was underwhelme..."

If you can find an objective metric for crappy books, I'm game...

Nienna wrote: "Heath wrote: "Kevin wrote: "As if anyone who knows me knows that I think The Name of the Wind is so overrated. I don't know how any one can like or find the book to the amazing when ..."

As my friend explained to me today, The Name of the Wind is a rages to riches, which can only be done effective only once.

Christopher wrote: If you can find an objective metric for crappy books, I'm game...

That's the point. There isn't one.

The problem with The Dresden Files is that the first two books are the weakest in the series, so a lot of people (me included) read Storm Front and think, "Really?" The only reason I kept going was that I had a friend I trusted who convinced me it was worth it, and by the time I got to the end of Dead Beat, I wanted to have Jim Butcher's snarky little babies.

Like the original poster, I was "meh" on Boneshaker, but nothing else is coming to mind right now.

Peggy wrote: "The problem with The Dresden Files is that the first two books are the weakest in the series, so a lot of people (me included) read Storm Front and think, "Really?" The only reason I ..."

I felt that the second book is the weakest book in the series, since it did not contribute to anything in the overall arcing plot of the whole series.

I almost never give up after a first book. And if I rate it at least a 3 I read the second book before deciding if I want to continue. I just feel like an author is learning still in that first book. Or sometimes the first two books.

I have 2 plus a reason for the 1st posted book above by me
'The Wizards First Rule' or Sword of Truth I believe by Goodkind I just could not finish... It started off alright but than it swerved to a story about mudpeople & the male protagonist (Richard?) was always angry but when the author keeps telling you & repeating the anger of a character IMO it's easier to lose patience &/or see literary storytelling, i.e. when he starts slaughtering mudpeople who he can't even communicate with it's a given he's a bit upset. I'm sure there are authors I love that do this but for reasons unknown the series had zero appeal for me (TG has wrote stories I remember enjoying but not that one)

People will prob wonder why a book is over-rated to others & thread might veer a bit for lovers of listed books to reply. for me it's my love for Butcher/Dresden as parroted already by another. Which reminded me of another OR series - IRON DRUID, I've read every book of, so I guess the degree of dislike is diff. But Atticus is a character with absolutely no development & possessing objects that make a story a bit lame, a sword that makes people tell the truth & cuts thru anything? -eye roll- its like Bond with an invisible car, what's the point now? I think that was a reason I mentioned 'Night Angel' trilogy by Weeks, didn't put in 1st post, I think the invisibility thing really turned me off with an assassin, again, what's the point? It takes away the fun of it no?

The Dresden series kickstarted urban fantasy for me again (Rachel Morgan, Mercy T, Kate D) his character has incredible growth & IMO +3 dimensions (if possible? the never, never), as another said it takes a couple books but the result is fantastic story telling with strong supporting characters. But diff. strokes for everyone eh?

I'm actually the opposite for Dresden. I really liked them in the beginning. They had flaws, yes, but they were fun and also kickstarted the UF thing for me.

But, after several books, I started to find them overly formulaic and wearying. A lot of the humor I liked seem to go by the wayside, the writing seemed too repetitive, and I just got tired of what felt like, essentially, reading the same story over and over again.

I've been told that things really get thrown on their heads in these latest books, but I read Changes and was kinda meh about it. And the thought of there being at least 10 more books fills me with dread.

I haven't given up yet. Mostly because I feel like I've come this far so I should push through. But if Ghost Story doesn't impress me on some level, I might bail.

***

Anyway, the question is obviously 'what books do *you* find over-rated', not, 'what books are objectively over-rated', so I don't see what the problem is. Of course it's subjective. All opinion is.

Colleen wrote: "I'm actually the opposite for Dresden. I really liked them in the beginning. They had flaws, yes, but they were fun and also kickstarted the UF thing for me.

But, after several books, I started to..."

Well, all of Butcher's writing are formulaic. That is just how he writes.

I think I choked on Wizard's First Rule. It hadn't set the stage, and it was telling me that the stage was breaking down. How to convince me that your world is unreal: put it in danger before you give me enough solidity to assure me that there is something there to be endangered. Lesser perils work better in the early parts.

it was a while back, so I'm not sure of it.

Wizard's First Rule (an anything else by Terry Goodkind) is vastly overrated.

The same goes for The Wheel of Time series.

I never got into the Wheel of Time series. Then I was trying it when I had already heard a lot about the intermidable series, so I was predisposed to dislike it.

In my opinion, the Wheel of Time books are one of those series that is enjoyed most by readers who got to experience it first hand. It was one of my first, so its a nostalgia thing for me.

Nienna wrote: "In my opinion, the Wheel of Time books are one of those series that is enjoyed most by readers who got to experience it first hand. It was one of my first, so its a nostalgia thing for me."

I think for many readers it was there first experience with epic fantasy right after the usually big three, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and Narina.

Plus I think it is the biggest and most well know epic fantasy out there, so people want to show their respect, an be nice about it.

The Wheel of Time series has a lot of things going for it, not least that it put Brandon front and centre for more of us to discover :)

Leonie wrote: "The Wheel of Time series has a lot of things going for it, not least that it put Brandon front and centre for more of us to discover :)"

Without the Wheel of Times, he would have never been known or a lot long for the public to discover him.

Brandon Sanderson was already a well known author before he was choosing to finish it. That's how he got chosen.

Mary wrote: "Brandon Sanderson was already a well known author before he was choosing to finish it. That's how he got chosen."

Well I never heard of him before they selected him.

I'm sure it gained Sanderson new fans. But he had fans of his own too. And he also brought new readers to WoT.

I don't think that I have ever read a SF book that I have concluded was over rated....I guess that is because I was quite young, about 10, when I started reading all SF books I could get my hands on, and even as an adult I am rarely guided to read a book because of its popularity.

As a minor poet and SF writer myself, I learn something of philosophy and human understanding from every title I read.
While some titles thrill as vibrantly good adventure stories and others are more pedestrian they all add to my philosophical vocabulary and are worth the read in their own right.

The writings of Arthur C Clarke and von Daniken would appear too pedestrian and documentary to be read as any type of SF adventure, especially as far as YA readers are concerned, yet they have opened new frontiers, new dimensions of speculative yet likely scenarios , in the development of mankind, upon which, the minds of SF readers and authors alike can ultimately feast.

Although it is true that SF fans may be treated to absolute feasts for the mind by some more heralded titles, there have been very few SF titles I have read which do not offer a mind sustaining morsel or two.
Never has the SF fan had such a plethora of mind food, waiting to be discovered, as yet sitting more or less anonymously among thousands of other titles on the web.
Because most are by unknown authors they have nothing to live up to and are mostly all worth the read. Each one will add to the understanding of the reader and be a new and fresh reading experience, un blanched by popular opinion.

Hmm...not going there. Tastes are so subjective.

I am probably one of the only ones that think that both of Sanderson book that came out in the fall of 2010 The Way of Kings and The Alloy of Law were horrible books, but I still bought them when they came out. The problem with Way of Kings I could not get attached to a character being a slave bridges, and The Alloy of Law felt too cliche and trope type of a book.

Micah wrote: "Hmm...not going there. Tastes are so subjective."

Also books are very personal, each reader will like or dislike a book for their own personal reason.

Good thing we're not having this discussion on a website dedicated to *reviewing* books...

Christopher wrote: "Good thing we're not having this discussion on a website dedicated to *reviewing* books..."

The Magicians.

I nearly put the book down and never came back after he graduated, because the story stopped dead