Book Reviews

From the sublime to the ridiculous.

I've been on a reading kick lately, and since I'm a blogger I know you're all dying to know what I think about whatever.  So here are some (very) short reviews:

Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea - Jules Verne

A fascinating story by the father of science fiction.  Part nature documentary, part high-seas adventure, it's kind of like a 19th-century underwater Star Trek.  Highly recommended.

Bartleby The Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street - Herman Melville

Funny short story about the passive-aggressive office worker that won't be pushed around, and the power of behavioral precedent.  It has a poignant touch to it, too.  Good story.

A Christmas Carol - Charles Dickens

A popular classic is both for good reasons, one of those stories where you can call it "heartwarming" without being just an over-used cliche.  Read it.

Daemon - Daniel Suarez

It's about a dying brilliant computer game programmer that takes revenge on the world by writing what is both the ultimate virus and the ultimate computer game.  What's really scary is that all of the technology in the story exists.  It's totally possible!  I do believe this will get made into a movie, and there is a sequel on the way.  Highly recommended for nerds, geeks, other techies, or paranoid conspiracy theorists.

The Zombie Survival Guide - Max Brooks

The son of Mel Brooks writes the ultimate survival guide on how to survive the coming zombie apocalypse.  Hint: be prepared, and aim for the head.  Great dry humor.

A Brief History of Time - Stephen Hawking

A summary of physics from the Greeks to string theory, this book is basically a recap of how man has tried to understand the workings of the universe.  It's well-written and easy to understand, although it's a little frustrating for someone like me who knows enough about the topics to have serious questions, which to answer would require detail well beyond the scope of this book.  Oh, and he repeats the usual nonsense about Gallileo (Church vs. Science!).  I have the original 1988 edition, so I don't know if this was corrected along with the changes made in later editions.  Still, everybody should read this book.

Orphans/Fugitives/Titans of Chaos - John C. Wright

Sort of Harry Potter meets Star Wars meets The Box of Delights, it's one of the most imaginative stories I've read, it's hard to figure out exactly which genre it's in.  Maybe fantasy, maybe sci-fi?  The characters are interesting, and it's just impossible to tell where the story is going to go.  One of the characters can move and see in four dimensions, which presented some difficulty for me since I visualize everything I read.  It also has the most ominous line I've read lately: "Prepare the thousand-dimensional object!"  Recommended.

Watchmen - Alan Moore/Dave Gibbons

Who reads the Watchmen?  I did, and it was actually pretty good.  I had read the whole debate about the book vs. the movie, and I already knew most of the plot (including the ending), but it was still very interesting.  What you get out of the story depends on your world view.  The point of view of the story is very nihilistic and cynical, although the characters are quite deep and draw you in.  I thought the ending was disappointing, in part because I don't see the universe in the way the author portrays it in this story, although as a whole I enjoyed reading the book.  Although I haven't seen the movie, from what I've heard it's much much more violent than the comic.  The worst violence in the comic is described or implied, and not depicted.  And Nixon isn't portrayed as evil (he's hardly portrayed at all).  Recommended for those who are interested.

Currently reading:

The Night Land - William Hope Hodgson

Set one million years in the future when the sun has burnt out (written in 1910, they didn't how long it would actually last back then), one of the last survivors of the human race sets out across a land of perpetual darkness to rescue his beloved.  It's very atmospheric, early sci-fi, and I'm only halfway through it, so don't tell me how it comes out.

Ender's Game - Orson Scott Card

A fellow geek chastised me for not having read Ender's Game, so I just started that one today.  I don't have anything to say about it yet.  Don't spoil it!

Who Watches "Watchmen"?

I consider myself fairly "up" on topics of geekitude, even when it's something that I don't use or doesn't interest me. For instance, I know that the mascot for the next release of Ubuntu is Karmic Koala, even though I've never used that OS. I know that Vodaphone's new Google Android phone is the first that won't have a keyboard. I know the premises of Dr. Who, the X-Files, Red Dwarf, and other geek TV shows, even though I didn't ever really follow any of them.

So you can imagine my surprise when last year, when the Watchmen trailer debuted, every geek on the interwebs simultaneously had a nerdgasm. "omfg teh Watchmen movee looks soooooo good!" the interweb trolls cried out. News and opinions on whether it was going to be any good have been flying through the 'tubes ever since. Lamentations that they might "mess it up" have probably been the internets' greatest fear. Verily, every single geek website I read has had some mention or post or comment on the movie, about when the author is going to see it, or if he thinks they'll stay faithful to the graphic novel.

Which makes me wonder, who are these Watchmen and why have I never heard of them?

It's bizarre. Every other geek on the face of the planet is flipping out about this movie, and I had not even heard the name "Watchmen" until I saw the trailer before whatever it was I saw the trailer before (Dark Knight I think?). Granted, there are other items of geekery that had slipped by me and I only discovered in retrospect (Firefly comes to mind here, as I didn't know about that until the movie came out). But typically in those cases, I could tell I wasn't alone, as other geeks would mention just finding out about it, or talk about it in a such a way that it seemed they didn't expect their entire audience to be aware of it, or give the general impression that it wasn't prevalent. But Watchmen, I just can't get away from, and every geek is making it seem like every geek who is some geek has read Watchmen at least twice.

And it get's even more bizarre when, watching the trailer, I think: "this looks really, really lame." Every geek has been talking about how awesome the trailer is, and how it gives them high hopes that Mr. 300 won't mess it up, but honestly? I just looks dumb to me. I mean, you've got the big blue glowy guy who looks like a cross between the Silver Surfer and a smurf. There's Night Owl, who looks like a cheap knock-off of Batman. The "Comedian"? Really? How is this different from "The Joker"? As the Murloc put it, they all seem like riffs of DC or Marvel heroes. And don't get me started on this Silk Spectre chick. That has got to be the most unflattering costume I've seen on a superhero. All the fanboi geeks are raving about hot hawt she looks, but I think the costume just looks uncomfortable and ugly. (Go here if you don't know what I'm talking about.) I mean, there's hot superheroines, hawt superheroines, and there's this, which is neither hot nor hawt. And what's with the "I" and "II" after the names? Did Nite Owl have a son, and become "Nite Owl, Sr."?

It's a good thing I don't have a large audience, because I'm sure I'd get the all the fanbois descending on me like a ton of bricks. "omfg u dont no wutz ur talking about if u red teh novel u would no how awexome it is night owl is nuthing lke batman ur so dum and ghey and dum." But that's a point I concede. Perhaps if knew more about the story, I would know what everything is about and the trailer would be less a ball of suck and more a ball of intrigue. Granted.

However, generally speaking, I like what other geeks like. Rarely have I been disappointed by what other geeks say is cinema classique. I am a geek, ergo I like geeky things, ergo if other geeks like it, so, too, will I, probably. So, despite my shear ignorance on the subject, I was willing to trust the General Will of the geeks of the internet and give the movie a shot.

Until I saw the rating.

"Rated R for strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity and language." Erm, yeah— no. Just... no. And most of the geeks I have read say that's a good thing, and necessary to stay true to the graphic novel. I think I'll pass. I probably won't even try it on DVD. I might watch it when it comes to TV or basic cable. But until then, you can have your Watchpersons.

(Note that I did watch 300 on DVD, despite have a similar rating, but that's because it at least interested me. I hadn't read the graphic novel, but the subject matter, combined with the trailer, at least made me want to see if it was any good. (Conclusion: meh, but I still won't be heading downtown.))

Also, I gather that Richard Nixon is a villain, or something, in the movie which just confirms my theory that the left still isn't done crucifying him, long after he's dead and burried.