imakandiway's review against another edition
funny
informative
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
xumepa's review against another edition
3.0
Прочитала 7\8 книги и вот что я хочу сказать по этому поводу. Я помню Гиперион, я помню Террор. Что это? такое ощущение, что это начинающий писатель, который собрал сборник клише про детективов, про разных людей-русские, мафия КГБ, вьетнамцы и что-то слепил. периодически там какая-то толерантность мелькает навроде : как стрелять по врагу.... он или она...враг есть враг, совершенно неважно какой- при этом гендер. Не стала дочитывать, не шмогла. увы и ах.
sling's review against another edition
2.0
Fairly average with long exposition not integrated into the story. I gather it's one of the author's first novels reprinted but also the first one of his I've read. The characters are thinly drawn but some of the action scenes showed promise. A decent enough airplane read.
vbroes's review against another edition
3.0
Dan Simmons goes early Neal Stephenson, coming up with a pastiche-y, infodump-y thriller that's half comic, half serious. Now, don't get me wrong, Simmons writes fascinating infodumps and spectacular action scenes, but I found balance and pacing across the novel to be a bit off-kilter.
As a long-time Dan Simmons fan, I have to say, plus est en vous, Dan.
As a long-time Dan Simmons fan, I have to say, plus est en vous, Dan.
pharmdad2007's review against another edition
3.0
I was really conflicted about this one. Some parts were definitely 5-star (the parts that sound like Dan Simmons) and some part were 1-star (the parts that sound like James Patterson at his cheesiest). I really liked all of the insurance fraud anecdotes that were thrown in and the insurance investigative mysteries that were central to the plot. Not my favorite Simmons, but not bad.
carriekellenberger's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars.
This is one of my least favorite books by Simmons, but it was enjoyable because he is a great storyteller. He knows his topics inside out. I gave it a slighly higher ranking simply because of his mastery of several topics written into a very convincing detective story.
I liked how he wrote this story even though it includes a lot of gun history - a topic I don't know or care anything about.
Simmons never does what you expect. A+ writer.
I am hoping to finish the rest of his books in 2020.
This is one of my least favorite books by Simmons, but it was enjoyable because he is a great storyteller. He knows his topics inside out. I gave it a slighly higher ranking simply because of his mastery of several topics written into a very convincing detective story.
I liked how he wrote this story even though it includes a lot of gun history - a topic I don't know or care anything about.
Simmons never does what you expect. A+ writer.
I am hoping to finish the rest of his books in 2020.
tome15's review against another edition
4.0
I was surprised at the number of so-so reviews for “Darwin’s Blade.” I suspect that many of them are from fans of the several other genres in which Simmons participates. If you are a fan of Child’s Jack Reacher novels or Sandford’s Prey novels, you will probably like this. There is plenty of well-described action, clever technical detail, and moderately interesting character development.
henryarmitage's review against another edition
1.0
I've enjoyed Dan Simmons' SF and horror, particularly the Hyperion series.
I picked this up thinking it was SF, however it's a crime novel. I read
70-some pages but it wasn't doing anything for me. Did not finish.
I picked this up thinking it was SF, however it's a crime novel. I read
70-some pages but it wasn't doing anything for me. Did not finish.
ericwelch's review against another edition
4.0
Dan Simmons has won numerous awards in several genres. This book is perhaps a bit unusual: the detective as accident investigator. Dr. Darwin Minor, Ph.D. in physics and ex- Marine sniper in Vietnam, reconstructs accidents, and it seems the Los Angeles area has been hit by numerous insurance frauds. Destitute Mexican immigrants are hired to become involved in an accident. They then receive the services of lawyers and doctors to beat the insurance companies out of millions. Darwin (Dar to his friends), who has a horror of grammatical errors and notes them constantly in conversations with others, links up with Sydney (Syd to her friends), an accident investigator, and several other law enforcement agents to bring down a humongous conspiracy to defraud insurance agents. It all gets a bit over the top by the end with Russian snipers attacking Dar' cabin, but of course, the good guys win with that last incredible shot. What saved the book for me were the often humorous, strange and often grotesque descriptions of accidents. Simmons notes in his acknowledgments that all of the accidents detailed in the book really happened or were compilations of accidents, and the book is peppered with seemingly bizarre events that purportedly really happened. I particularly enjoyed some quotes from accident files. " had been driving my car for forty years when I fell asleep at the wheel and had an accident." Or " guy was all over the road. I had to swerve several times before I hit him." Or, " invisible car came out of nowhere, struck my vehicle, and vanished." Another favorite was the Saturn ad that was being filmed. The dealer wanted to show the incredible strength of the Saturn windshield, which was intended to withstand much more substantial impacts than regular safety glass. To impress the audience, the dealer had borrowed an FAA device called a chicken cannon. This device was used to fire chickens into airplane engines -- a dead chicken representing a large to midsize bird in flight -- to test the effect on the engine; presumably, the effect on the chicken, already dead, would be slight. Anyway, the engineers had assured the dealer that the Saturn windshield could easily withstand the impact of the dead chicken fired from the cannon at two hundred miles per hour. When Darwin arrives on the scene, everyone is in a panic — the actress dressed as a nun who was to sit in the driver' seat, in a dead faint — because the chicken had gone right through the windshield, through the driver' seat and out the back of the car. " Saturn lied to us," the dealer asks Darwin. Darwin explains that no, the windshield could easily have withstood a chicken at two hundred miles per hour. " what . . . how did we. . . why. . .how in God' name. . ." said the dealer. Dar decided to be succinct. " time," he said, " the chicken."