hxxgrrrl's review against another edition
dark
funny
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
gothichues's review against another edition
4.0
I did not know what to expect when I started this but this was fun!
synthscore's review against another edition
5.0
oh my god i love 80s horror so much!!! this ticked ALL the boxes for me. creature! body horror! vile antagonist i could hate! science gone wrong! hopeless and depressing! fun! this is everything i hoped and wished the deep by nick cutter was. i had the best time with it and it's going on the favorites list.
bonus: both the title and the cover fucking ROCKS
bonus: both the title and the cover fucking ROCKS
villyidol's review against another edition
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.25
It was hard to settle on a rating. As a creature feature this wasn't bad, even quite good for the most part, but there are some serious issues with this book.
The story is quite simple. A band of smugglers (three couples) accidentally sink their yacht and the book starts with them adrift in a lifeboat and in search for a place to land. The six of them come across an oil rig that seems to be deserted at first, but, as we learn later, isn't. They go about exploring the rig and what they find is that it is a secret research facility. They also find something, well, not very nice. So far, so good.
The monster is a little gross, a little creepy. It worked well for me. Although, I think it didn't have enough tricks up its sleeve to be interesting all the way through. The ending is quite some nonsense anyway. The bogus-science explanations on the other hand were alright for this kind of story.
The book might still have gotten three stars from me. But the characters are a total disaster. It's okay that they are dumb, unlikable and not particularly well-developed. That's all just fine when they're part of a creature feature, which usually means they are effectively monster snacks.
But with one particularly obnoxious, misogynistic dick of a character the authors were going too far for my liking. I felt so much second hand embarrassment reading about this idiot. He could have died horribly on page one, as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately he doesn't, which means that the readers are in for many pages of absolutely atrocious behavior towards women. It was uncomfortable to read.
There are other, more minor, issues. Like characters pointlessly withholding information in the beginning to make the whole situation more mysterious, or the ridiculous ending. But ultimately this one character ruined it for me. And the rest of the book wasn't strong enough to make up for it.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Rape
laurainthevoid's review against another edition
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
tobsi's review
3.0
Slimer is a pulp horror story. The protagonists are couples: Paul and Linda, Alex and Rochelle, Mark and Chris. They are stranded in the ocean after Mark sunk their yacht, which was filled with drugs. After days aimlessly floating in a lifeboat, they've reached an oil rig. But without much inspection they found it deserted, except for one unkillable creature...
I didn't like this book in the beginning, mainly because of the characterizations. Paul and Alex get into a hierarchy fight. It's just plain and boring. Look, it's okay if a book only has unlikeable characters. Everybody hates Dostoevskys' Undergroundman, or his Rodion Raskolnikov. Yet, here I couldn't identify with any character. Paul is the hero, but not as strong as he seems. Linda is his sidekick. Alex is the antiforce of empathy, a sociopath only caring about his own needs. He is the only developed character in the book - and that isn't well done.
But in the end the story is gripping. It gets tense. I had a good time with the second half of the book, and I liked the authors' decision to switch the narrator from person to person. Mark didn't get his fair share, but hey! This book isn't about socialism.
The creature is nice and scary, while the pseudo-science is not that bad. The author used characters that, like we all do, only knows the basics of genetics. So, the short pretentious explanations on what was happening weren't too bad.
The prose distracted me. It's not bad, but average. Sometimes stylistic devices were used too obviously. I really disliked the dream in the end. It's unnecessary and disrupts the flow.
Overall, a fun short read. You wouldn't miss anything by not reading *Slimer* - but you won't regret it either!
I didn't like this book in the beginning, mainly because of the characterizations. Paul and Alex get into a hierarchy fight. It's just plain and boring. Look, it's okay if a book only has unlikeable characters. Everybody hates Dostoevskys' Undergroundman, or his Rodion Raskolnikov. Yet, here I couldn't identify with any character. Paul is the hero, but not as strong as he seems. Linda is his sidekick. Alex is the antiforce of empathy, a sociopath only caring about his own needs. He is the only developed character in the book - and that isn't well done.
But in the end the story is gripping. It gets tense. I had a good time with the second half of the book, and I liked the authors' decision to switch the narrator from person to person. Mark didn't get his fair share, but hey! This book isn't about socialism.
The creature is nice and scary, while the pseudo-science is not that bad. The author used characters that, like we all do, only knows the basics of genetics. So, the short pretentious explanations on what was happening weren't too bad.
The prose distracted me. It's not bad, but average. Sometimes stylistic devices were used too obviously. I really disliked the dream in the end. It's unnecessary and disrupts the flow.
Overall, a fun short read. You wouldn't miss anything by not reading *Slimer* - but you won't regret it either!
verkisto's review
3.0
Valancourt has been doing some great things as a publisher. They reissue books that have been long out of print but still have some public interest, including old Gothic novels, novels of gay interest, and 20th century horror. That last one interests me the most, and it was through Valancourt I discovered Michael McDowell, Ken Greenhall, and Bernard Taylor, so I pay attention when they reissue new books.
Slimer is one of three books they released in October, and I went into it with high expectations. Published in 1983, it's about six friends who are stranded at sea when their boat sinks, and who find their way onto an oil rig to survive. What they find there is mysterious and murderous, and right on par with what one would expect to find in a horror novel published in 1983.
Unfortunately, there's much else one finds in a book from that time, including sexism and misogyny. Knight (a pseudonym for two authors) creates an antagonist straight out of the '80s, complete with a drug habit, an indestructible libido, and enough swagger and banter to fit a Schwarzenegger movie. I get that we're not supposed to like him, but dang, there's no subtlety to this guy.
That fits the story, though, since there's no subtlety there, either. Knight doesn't go into the story hoping to make a point or to make the reader think; Slimer is just a relentless concept taken to its inevitable conclusion. It's a brief novel (less than 200 pages), so there's not much room for character or plot development. It comes across as pretty schlocky, but I get the feeling that was the point.
Slimer isn't a bad read, but it's not something that would appeal to readers outside of the horror genre. Even for me, someone who is a horror reader, I'm reading these mostly out of curiosity. I recognize that most of these books are going to be bad, but the good authors I've discovered through Valancourt have been so good that a book like this doesn't deter me from reading more.
Slimer is one of three books they released in October, and I went into it with high expectations. Published in 1983, it's about six friends who are stranded at sea when their boat sinks, and who find their way onto an oil rig to survive. What they find there is mysterious and murderous, and right on par with what one would expect to find in a horror novel published in 1983.
Unfortunately, there's much else one finds in a book from that time, including sexism and misogyny. Knight (a pseudonym for two authors) creates an antagonist straight out of the '80s, complete with a drug habit, an indestructible libido, and enough swagger and banter to fit a Schwarzenegger movie. I get that we're not supposed to like him, but dang, there's no subtlety to this guy.
That fits the story, though, since there's no subtlety there, either. Knight doesn't go into the story hoping to make a point or to make the reader think; Slimer is just a relentless concept taken to its inevitable conclusion. It's a brief novel (less than 200 pages), so there's not much room for character or plot development. It comes across as pretty schlocky, but I get the feeling that was the point.
Slimer isn't a bad read, but it's not something that would appeal to readers outside of the horror genre. Even for me, someone who is a horror reader, I'm reading these mostly out of curiosity. I recognize that most of these books are going to be bad, but the good authors I've discovered through Valancourt have been so good that a book like this doesn't deter me from reading more.