Well, I enjoyed City of Bones. Crisp writing.
On the other hand, The Poet bored me to tears -- and that was as an
--- In email@example.com, "Brian Thornton"
> CITY OF BONES was my first Connelly read, and nearly my last. I like
> everything else of his that I've read infinitely more than I did
> reasons including those laid out by Juri below, and also because he
> off the most interesting character in the book halfway through and in a
> completely laughable manner and for an absolutely ludicrous
> I just didn't buy it, and almost didn't finis the book.
> I've found THE OVERLOOK, LINCOLN LAWYER and several of the Bosch novels
> infinitely better.
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 5:47 AM, Juri Nummelin <juri.nummelin@...>wrote:
> > Mr. T:
> > > I've been waiting for Michael Connelly to get something wrong
> > > might notice), but no luck yet...
> > My dad (who once turned me to Chandler and Ross Macdonald) read
> > Connelly after my several recommendations. He said the narrative
> > very good, but he said he noted some errors or implausibilities. I
> > read City of Bones, which, according to him, is based on the fact
> > place from which the kid's bones are found is very hard to get to.
> > some
> > kids just happen to be there, like they had no trouble at all! My dad
> > thought this took some plausibility off.
> > He also had problems with a bullet getting caught in the barrel of
> > else's gun.
> > Juri
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 11 Dec 2008 EST