This book is a flopped.
588488
This book bites. Instructions and steps are vague.
2095274
The book's information is nothing I had not already figured out. It is a bit lame and I consider the purchase of this book a waste of time. The man who wrote it tries to be funny, but fails a lot, and the chapters are not as enlightening as one would hope
1658654
I am amazed to see all the positive reviews of this book.  It is poorly written and its thesis is not well supported.

First of all, the book is so poorly written that I found it difficult to even get through a chapter.  The grammatical mistakes, run-on sentences, and overuse of cliches, contractions, and parenthetical phrases not only make the book clumsy and choppy to read, but seriously distract from the content of the book.  I am surprised that one of the authors is actually a journalist, since no professional historian would actually end a list with "et al" in a published book.  It reads more like an essay written by one of my high school students, which would no doubt be covered in red marks.

The book contains more analysis and grand conclusions than specific details and facts, which leaves a learned reader with more questions than answers.  The following sentence demonstrates some of the problems with this book:  "Though the idea that Stalin liked Roosevelt in any personal sense may be questioned, he undoubtedly did like having, as a leader of the powerful United States, someone prepared to give him unlimited favors, while America sought nothing in return from Russia" (24).  Not only is this sentence choppy, but it also makes a grandiose conclusive statement that ignores the nuances of history and diplomacy.  America sought nothing in return?  How about an ally who was necessary in defeating Nazi Germany??  Furthermore, biographers of FDR and historians of WWII diplomacy have long conceded that the President, nicknamed the "Chameleon in Plaid," was maybe too deft at negotiating with Stalin and perhaps gave up a lot at Yalta.  These are well-known facts.  But one must also realize that FDR not a hard cold-warrior; only in the Cold War and post-Cold War era did the Soviet Union become the enemy to stand up to.

Although it has become popular recently, revisionist history does not always equal real history.  Just because a book claims to "finally reveal the shocking truth that has been hidden for decades by the government" or some similar nonsense does not mean it is a well-researched work.  The lack of any counterarguments also detracts from the credibility of the authors' arguments.  Finally, the authors' overuse of terms like "Soviet henchmen" make the book sound like something written in the 1980s by a right-wing Cold Warring Reaganite (which Herbert Romerstein most likely is), not in 2012 by a serious historian.  There is nothing wrong with right-wing Cold Warring Reaganites, except when they try to write history about FDR.

If you are looking for a serious history of Cold-War era Soviet infiltration of the United States government, I fear you will be disappointed by this thin volume.  However, if you don't mind terrible grammar and like reading short books that skip the details and go straight to poorly supported conspiracy theory-like conclusions, or if you know little about the diplomacy of WWII, then this is the book for you.
1737523
When I saw this book, I was really excited to get it. Well, that excitement didn't last.

The plot is pretty simple, and that's not a bad thing. Some women are forced to get together and start a book club. Some time passes, and then they find a body, and feel it's up to them to see who killed the owner of the local diner.

This really is a bad read. Honestly, I couldn't finish it.  Right from page one, it was very hard to follow. Several times I had to reread parts to see if I could follow it, and I couldn't. One of the problems is that there were far too many characters right from the start.  Another issues I had is with the writing style, it was pretty bad. It was as if a 5th grader wrote it. On one page, Logan actually wrote "Side note here:" Who does that? It's very amateurish writing. Then she used parenthesis when she wrote, and that grated on my nerves. What grates my nerves is that when an author does that, they don't have any useful information in the parenthesis, it useless information. Any author that uses parenthesis is a rank amateur.  The characters were a main problem as well. All of them were mean and nasty to each other. There was just too much meanness in the book, the characters aren't likable.  I also had an issues with the profanity in the book.  I don't mind profanity, if it fits the book, and it doesn't here. Logan used it to be shocking. Finally, there was far too much useless fluff to this book. There were about 8 pages devoted on how a meal would be planned, 8 pages!

I'm really surprised on all of the high ranking reviews. This book is a turkey, don't even bother getting it from the library.
2761270
I mostly read sci-fi and I have noticed that more than one author has turned out a lame novel late in their career. That is what happened here. It is really a pathetic excuse for a novel and not worthy of even a second year lit major. And the publisher stretches out the torture by using preposterously large print and you really cannot get even a short thought onto one line, it is annoying to attempt to read.

The plot and the plot devices are childish. The premise of some spontaneous worldwide animal revolt is idiotic and not well presented. The attempt at gratuitous sexuality is on a middle school level. Thong undies bought at a dollar store, right. This book is two grade levels below the Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew.

Do not waste your time on this book.
2556101
I bought this book based on the large number of glowing reviews. After the first few chapters, disillusionment set in - both with the book and with the reviewing system on Amazon. This book reads like the plot for for a C movie written by someone with a poor understanding of how any military service works. Combined with a poor treatment of the science involved plus inconsistent character development/treatment this makes for a monumental waste of time and money.

Not only am I going to steer clear of this author - I'm rather leery of purchasing another book based on reviews. I think the trick is to identify good reviewers and judge a book based on their feedback. The current mechanism of assigning each reviewer equal weight is flawed and makes it fairly easy to game the reviewing system.

P.S. if you are unhappy with a purchase - Amazon offers refunds on purchases. Make use of it and return it.
2355415
I thought I would give this book a try since it appeared to get good reviews.  Unfortunately, I would not recommend this book to anyone.
3785504
I am sorry to give this book a poor review.  I LOVED the previous three books, five stars each, but this book does not live up to expectation.

The many criticisms you've heard about the book's disjointed nature are true.  I keenly felt the absence of prior characters.  In addition, the author's difficulty in writing the book comes through.

It took Martin more than five years to write this book, and it's obvious to me.  He doesn't know where he wants to take us. I was often struck by how I had to press on - which was a sharp contrast with the prior volumes where sleep was a nuisance since it kept me from reading.

The kindest thing that I can say about many of the chapters of this volume is that they may be necessary to get to where the author ultimately wants to take us, and though tedious, are a necessary evil.  The worst that I can say is that the author may be milking the story for money.

By way of explanation for the redacted version of the story, Martin writes, "I felt that the readers would be better served by a book that told all the story for half the characters, rather than half the story for all the characters."  He further consoles that "there's more to come. [We can expect a]nother book as big as this one."  That's cold comfort to me since this was the shortest of the four books.  Furthermore, the idea that book HAD to be split is preposterous.  Lengthy books are published all of the time.  The idea that it is being done for our, the readers, benefit is insulting to our intellect. This book is a money grab.

The author and publishers made the conscious decision to double their profits, by splitting the book in two.  I was prepared to give this a pass, but the story suffers for it and the difficulty Martin faces of where to take the story next is exasperated by it.

Also, the only characters that appear from the previous history are Arya, Jamie, Sam and Sansa. The rest are new perspectives (though they may not be new characters, e.g., Cersei).  The new perspectives, in large part, are necessary to give the reader an understanding of what is happening in different parts of the realm, but it has the unfortunate effect of bloating a once-concise and riveting series into a meandering mess.  This is not to say that whole series is ruined by FEAST, but that with this addition the series has taken a noticeable departure from what preceded it.

All told, this book falls far short of the greatness of the previous three.  I recommend - since you will certainly read it at this point - that you wait for paperback.

P.S. - Please Mr. Martin, let's have no more comparisons between how long it took you and how long it took Tolkien to finish his work.  Tolkien's work at least delivered the goods after the wait.  You have compromised your "art" for money.  Classy.
1421816
Given the number of positive reviews, I was expecting more from this book.  The descriptions used through out the book are junior high school at best.  The author attempts to bring in a mystic quality that is so shallow that it made me groan.  The shame is that this book had potential as I did finish it.
3320077
I really gave it my best effort to read this book, but ultimately it's boring, short sighted and amateurish. This is a book the vast majority of readers will probably never actually finish. Save your money, look around on Amazon for better books on race relations, because this one is not worth reading.
353243
I cannot believe this book was a bestseller! Or maybe I can. The latest trend in publishing seems to be, to be as lazy as possible and just jump on whatever plot or genre that last made it to a Bestsellers list and clone it until it becomes hackneyed. It seems the latest wagon is "Gone Girl". I'm already tired of the very predictable, supposedly new 'female psycho' genre. (In reality, mystery and romance novels have had the sociopath female bad guy for years).
I hate to give bad reviews and it's certainly not the authors fault that this is the trend, but although the book was excellently paced, the characters were flat, stereotypes -almost silly.  One of them, the needy, desperate and easily manipulated friend, was directly borrowed from Gone Girl. The others were easily recognizable from other books, TV shows, movies, and, yes, cartoons (think Scooby-Doo, as another reviewer suggested).
This might be a good book for a bit of a thrill if you don't read much and aren't familiar with the usual plots and suspects. Or, if you are such a huge Gillian Flynn fan, any book that has the slightest resemblance to Gone Girl will tickle your fancy. If you are wondering, I do like Flynn but thought Gone Girl was her least well-done book.
However, its promoted as very scary when it isn't the least bit scary. Not a single iota of scary in it. So if you are looking for frightening you will have to look elsewhere.
And what is up with the endorsement from Reese Witherspoon on the cover? This book was a gift. If I had seen it in the store with that strange endorsement on it, alarm bells would have started going off and I would have given it a miss.
The worst part of this honestly, was that NPR lauded this book. I cant imagine why NPR named this a Best Book of the Year. In the future, I will be highly suspicious of books they recommend. I can understand why this book might be popular, but well-regarded and recommended: no.
3290920
How did this book get to be a bestseller?  It is replete with cliches.  Its plot is weak.  There is no substance.  The characters are pathetic.  And I have never seen so many typographical errors in one book.  Was there no editor?  Spell check can't catch everything, as even my 7th-grade students know.  I have continued reading, as other readers have, thinking that something positive is bound to come of the sunk cost of time.  Kim Edwards has no editor, but she must have geniuses working overtime in her marketing department.
3632885
Thank the maker this was a free book or I would have really been upset. Sophomoric dribble. A weak love story with time travel and a vampire tossed in to sucker people into buying into the idea of a good read. It's so poorly written and the characters so weakly developed you are able to fast forward through the pages and still know what is going on. That's a good thing though, it's the only way I was able to get through it. Just a really stupid book and not worth the effort.
2086930
This book is a joke. I got it as a library book and expected to see reasons why lightning won't strike twice if you own a feather bed. Instead, I got a book that most of the items defined (More than half) Referred me to a different page. The book is written so poorly that It could have been reduced to a few pages instead of 259 pages of Refferals to other pages. Beyond that, the reasoning behind many of the supersticions have been left out. Actually, I should say all of the supersticions. Other than that, some of them aren't even supersticions many of them are poems or rhymes with no reasoning. Poorly written book.
271165
You know why books that are not published from major houses fail, because they were not any good from the start. Such is the case with this book.

The writing is mediocre at best, the story is flat and the language is childish. I felt like I lost 25 IQ points just by opening this up.

Let me save you some time, girl problems, blame somebody else. Social problems, blame everybody else. Problems with life, blame God. I have a better name for this book than it's title. It should have been called the Blame Game.

Just read the first page, "F" this, "F" that and "F" God. Well Mr. Szekely, "F" you.
2259639
I enjoyed this book, until I reached page 350, and realized that there were 800 pages to go and I knew exactly where the book would end up.  I'm taking a class on the politics of Feudal Japan, and we discuss this book at length.
Leaving Clavell's gross inaccuracies aside, we still have the fact that this is a rather poorly written work.  One can tell that Clavell is trying to throw underlying themes and messages into the mix, but they're thinly veiled.
If you're interested in good historical fiction, I urge you to invest your time into a better-written title, such as "Carter Beats the Devil."
Leave this one on the shelf, save the 8 bucks.
2873918
This could have been a great book, but unfortunately the author descended into clumsy execution and a chase of shock value.

I felt like he was chasing Game of Thrones, except if we had was going to, he should have started with the fist book.

A large portion of this book is spent on character development of minor characters in order to sacrifice them at the very end.

Meanwhile Jardir and Arlen make an appearance at the beginning and the end of the book. Just to keep the story alive.

He gets rid of one major character, but that without proper ceremony again only creating a shallow plot line in this book.

Very disappointing.  I almost feel it's better if he rewrites from book 2 onwards.