Reviews

Pontypool Changes Everything by Tony Burgess

hisghoulfriday's review against another edition

Go to review page

  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? No

2.0

lawacha's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

3.0

moonlit_shelves's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

2.0

melanie_page's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? No

5.0

I just loved it.

raoulgonzo's review

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

2.5

david_agranoff's review

Go to review page

2.0


I discovered this novel from watching the film based loosely on the novel. The film Pontypool was released a few years back and quickly gained a rep for being a well written and composed low budget zombie film. When I saw it I thought it was a creative spin on the tired genre, most interesting at it's core was a original concept of the the zombie virus being transferred not by blood or bites but trhough human language. I was interested in novel because it was written by Burgess who also wrote the screen, and during the commentary track he said the novel had a larger scope.

Probably due to it's thin budget the movie takes place at a small radio station in Ontario, and focuses on the main character an aging former shock jock named Grant Mazzy. Mazzy keeping his career alive by doing weather reports on backwater radio. The film gets a lot of of it's rich tones by Stephen McHattie's performance as Mazzy. Since the setting is confined mostly to the station the actors have to carry a lot of the story. It's a character driven horror film, that manages to transcend it's budget like a lot of great low budget horror films.

So I was excited by the idea of reading the book. This is a rare case where I think the movie is a lot better than the source material. They are very, very different stories and while they share Grant Mazzy as a main character and plot device the novel lacks the vivid strength of character which drove the film.

Burgess is an excellent wordsmith, I can honestly say it's some of the smoothest and interesting prose I have read in a long time. That being said writing pretty paragraphs and telling a good story are two totally different things. I spent a lot of my time reading this novel confused, and according to some of the online reviews I was wasn't alone.

I don't mind being confused if the story is exciting and it's important that the confusion is paid off with answers. There are some intense and powerful moments in this book that's why I kept reading even though I was often frustrated and confused by the lack of clear narrative. Since the zombie outbreak is transferred through the language there are some very well composed moments of suspense that happen inside the mind of the infected. I also enjoyed the moments where some characters tried hard not speak at all.

This novel is clever, perhaps a bit to clever for it's own good. Could the novel itself spiral into maddess of disrupted language like the victims in the story. Maybe, but I didn't really see that either. It's an interesting experiment, one I don't think worked. I'll admit many I didn't get it, but I am a pretty savvy reader, who has personally played with experimental narratives, so if I don't get it then it is a good chance most readers will be lost.

So here is the hard part for me, I respect the well written inventive prose but can't make much sense of the story. This made the book a slog, and I can't say I enjoyed much of it. The movie expressed the idea in a more clearly, and succeded as a story.

jenbee's review against another edition

Go to review page

I can see why this book would have been perceived as clever - in a House of Leaves - way in the 90s; in fact it was very Derrida-meets-zombies in places. But, although I love a good old zomb-horror as much as the next undead shambling chaos fan, I just could not get into the narrative. Further, I got over half way in this audiobook but, like so many other people who listened via audible, found the narrator so monotone that this also added to why I DNF-ed it. I think I understand the reasons for the monotone - it's a book about the disintegration of language as well as the disintegration of a society - but it really really really did grate. Like a zombie chewing my face I just wanted it to end so I ended it for me! NEXT!

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

mznomer's review

Go to review page

3.0

I feel like I should have, in theory, really liked this book. It had elements that I usually love -absurdness, and hint of surreal, playfulness with language, and zombies. Somehow though these elements didn't really come together very well. I enjoyed the second half more than the first, but it was never quite the book I wanted it to be.

misterkyle1901's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

2.0

melihooker's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.25

 I am torn about how to rate this. It is a unique take on zombies, the writing is unique, the prose is beautifully grotesque, but it is often incomprehensible. I have tried 2 or 3 times over the years to read this and always hit a wall around the halfway mark. This time I was determined. It turns out it wasn't quite as difficult as I remembered, but was definitely challenging. That is partly due to the writing style. Early on there are many scenes with inanimate objects described as body parts or living things which is confusing at first.

For example:
"He doesn't see the resemblance between the handset and the tiny coffin of an infant. He squeezes the little dead hand in his, breaking its baby finger, making it cry."

The guy is making a call on his walkie-talkie... why is this shit so confusing? But the description is kinda cool at the same time.

Also, scenes jump from one perspective to the next. Many of the characters suffer from addiction or mental illness so it is difficult to understand if what is happening is real or imagined, metaphor or literal.

I would recommend this to someone looking for an offbeat zombie story that still acknowledges it is a zombie story. You know those zombie stories that never mention the Z word. Not Pontypool, they lean right in. If you want a story that has a unique representation of the virus but still has the hallmarks of zombie stories - gore, guts, violence - this might be for you. It just takes a little patience with the writing style. 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings