Good to see you too, TIS! I'd never heard the trivia about DiCaprio potentially being the lead role.. that would've been really interesting to see! I've watched enough of Bale in other stuff now to have hopefully forgotten how great he was at being scary in this one. haha

And DNM, you're stronger than I to have survived both!

Hi, Gina!! Happy New Year! Have you read King's "11/22/63" yet?? I highly recommend it (see Stephen King thread). The main character even visits Derry and meets Bev and Richie!

American Psycho was a pretty full on book. For the first few chapters you're all "This doesn't seem so bad" and then BAM, stabbity stab homeless faces, slicing up hookers and biting people. And ridiculously graphic sex. I mean, ridiculously graphic.

SB, I saw the new King book on the stand at the local book shop. Looks pretty interesting. I really love how King managed to tie together his 'universe'. Im going straight over to the Stephen King thread after this to check out your thoughts on it.

After reading A Dance With Dragons (the last book so far in the awesomely awesomely awesome A Song of Ice and Fire series) Im actually getting into fiction again in a way I haven't for many years. Mrs Meatballs keeps trying to get me to read work by Patricia Cornwell and Kathy Reichs; she's convinced that since I "like all that gory shit", Ill get into their respective series (Scarpetta and Brennan)

Does anyone have any thoughts on their works? Honestly, Ive always thought of the majority of these forensic/crime-fic. books as a little trashy.

Speaking of trashy...I am looking forward to reading the latest Dexter novel.

Just read GEORGE W BUSH,s book, DESICION POINTS.

I don't know why i read it, i just saw it in the library. It was an interesting read shall we say

SB, I saw that one at the store, stood and stared, then reminded myself of the many other books on my to-read list before I had a chance to convince myself to buy it! But I definitely want to get to it one of these days, especially after reading your review.

So true! This should be quoted on the book cover as a warning for the unsuspecting reader.

If your point concerns critical/scholarly acclaim, I think Woolf has been given her due. Perhaps her talents as an essayist and literary critic are still undervalued, but her fiction has the respect it deserves. A little late in coming, but nowadays anyone even remotely au fait with 20th century literature has Woolf pegged as a key figure: a seminal modernist and one of the most inventive, lyrical and evocative prose stylists of her generation, or indeed of any other.

If your point concerns popularity, I agree without really sharing your grievance. Her work is demanding to read (especially for novices), and moreover her work is incredibly difficult to adapt to more popular mediums like television and film. Hers is a style that is almost impossible to translate to the screen. It is telling that only a few intrepid souls have tried, and perhaps even more telling that none of their efforts achieved any kind of commercial/popular success. So it seems entirely to be expected that Woolf does not occupy the pride of place in the popular-cultural imagination that someone like Jane Austen does.

All that said, it now strikes me that you wrote ‘legacy’ and not ‘reputation’, so perhaps you intended another point entirely. Apologies if that is so.

The Altman/Woolf comparison is interesting. I’m a huge fan of both but a connection has never occurred to me before, nor have I heard one made by anyone else. It’s perhaps something I should ponder more before commenting, but my first thought is to disagree. Altman and Woolf are very different in a key respect: Altman trusts so much to the intuition or inference of the viewer. Woolf’s style almost drowns the reader in detail. The dramatic power in Altman’s best films depends so much on what he doesn’t make explicitly clear. Woolf’s best work does the opposite of this; it puts you inside the head of its characters in a way that leaves little to the imagination. The art is in how incredibly poetic, sensitive and vivid the prose is. There are maybe a few similarities - the focus on character over story; the sensitivity to quiet suffering; the effortless shifts in focus - but, for me, the aforementioned difference trumps all that. Put another way, I don’t think fans of one would necessarily enjoy the other. Still, food for thought...

Just read NATURE GIRL by Carl Hiaasen. This fella makes me laugh so much, his books are a riot

Yogi, if you like that style of writing you might want to give Tim Dorsey or Bill Fitzhugh a look see.

Cheers Lilo, i will!

Holy crap, Lilo. I just returned your pm and I mentioned Tim Dorsey, before I read this post. And I didn't even know you were a fan!

I've read the entire "Florida Roadkill" series at least twice, and I have January 24th circled on my calendar as the release date for "Pineapple Grenade." I know that the stories have gotten progressively more slapstick over the years, but in my opinion Dorsey is still funnier and edgier than any of his peers. He's very web friendly too, which is something that I admire in a successful author. I must have exchanged twenty or thirty emails with the guy over the years.

Yogi,

Read Dorsey. You'll love him. But be sure to start the series from the beginning. Read "Florida Roadkill" first. I still think that Hiaaasen is a superior writer overall, but Dorsey is a riot who will have you rooting for a serial killer!

The Talented Mr. Ripley - Good book ..Just finished ..film aint bad either.. like ripleys game (movie) john malkovich what a guy

I know that most of you are probably not into reading the dry material that is usually associated with books about the Constitution, etc. However, given that the Constitution's application and interpretation is such a big deal so far in the Presidential election and will continue to be, I encourage you to read a book or two about it. One that is a really good read is Plain, Honest Men by Richard Beeman. Actually, it's kind of an exciting read.

Just ordered it online from the New York Public Library. I'll pm you after I pick it up and read it.

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING

It's been years since I had read these books and with receiving the movies on Blu-Ray for Christmas, I decided to give them another shot. After reading the first one, I remember I was more excited to read it the first time around than I am now. Not a big fan of all the singing and some of the early chapters were somewhat dull (just a lot of walking around by Frodo and Sam). However, the book did quickly pick up soon after. I thought the film followed the book closer but as I said, it's been years since I'd read them. Between the first film and the book, I favor the film. We'll see how the rest of the trilogy plays out.

After reading it, try The Summer of 1787 by David Stewart. It's not as in-depth as Beeman's, but it provides some additional info.

Just read BURY MY HEART AT WOUNDED KNEE by Dee Brown. Very sad account of the demise of the Indians/ sorry Native Americans!!

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS

Surprisingly I enjoyed this more than the film. The TWO TOWERS has always been my least favorite film of the series since I became a fan. However, this was the most I've enjoyed the story. At first I wasn't a big fan of the book being split up. Book 3 dealt with the company while book 4 focused on Sam, Frodo and Gollum. However, after reading a few chapters like this, I soon discovered how I preferred it. A lot of book 4 was pushed into RETURN OF THE KING in the film version. I liked the cliffhangers in both the books better than the films too.

Great books by Mr. Tolkien i have to say, although it a lot of years since i read them!

Me too. I'm starting THE RETURN OF THE KING today. You should pick them up again sometime Yogi

great book. it's just sad reading of the demise of the native americans, who were here in the first place.

and, whats really sad is that hitler learned about concentration camps from our past actions.

The Heroes by Joe Abercrombie.
Abercrombie, much like Martin, has taken a buzzsaw to the normal conventions of heroic fantasy. Even more than Martin, Abercrombie is a DEEPLY cynical writer who seems to be quite interested in the evil that people do. Few of his characters are good and those that try to be good usually wind up in a bad spot. He dialed this up to 11 in his last book, Best Served Cold, and it was a bit too much. Too ugly.

He backs off his trademark cynicism just a tad in his book The Heroes, which is set in the same universe as Best Served Cold and The First Law trilogy.

The Heroes is about a three day battle between the forces of the North (think 10th century Vikings, Scots and Celts) and the Union (think 16th century England/France/Holy Roman Empire) at a hill known as , what else The Heroes.

Who started the war is not important. The fact that both sides are being manipulated by shadowy wizards isn't important. What is important is Abercrombie's meditations on the nature of violence, the randomness of war, his examinations of what it means to be a good man, and his questions about whether man can really change.

After a particularly brutal day of fighting one person asks the wizard on their side why he doesn't use magic to bring the battle to a conclusion. The wizard contemptuously responds that magic is the art of making something act against its nature but that there is nothing more natural than men killing each other so why should he lift a finger.

It was a good read-long but moved quickly.

Nearly finished THE PRINCE OF PROVIDENCE by Mike Stanton.

All about ex mayor and all round dodgy chap Buddy Cianci!

A fascinating tale!

family secrets - frank calabrese sr, fucking great man..can't get enough, frankie breeze is one mean guy ...

Wish they would make a movie on this.

Stephen Ambrose: "Undaunted Courage"

Anyone know if Capo still pops by? Just I'd be interested to see his reply...

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING

A GREAT end to the trilogy. Not as much story about Sam, Frodo and Gollum which I enjoy more than the story about the company. However, I definitely enjoyed the ending of the book rather than the film. I would have LOVED to have seen The Scourging of the Shire on the big screen. Between the two mediums, it's difficult for me to choose a favorite. I enjoyed the books for their depth and the differences in the story compared to the films. I enjoyed the films for their visual effects obviously. If I were forced to choose between the two formats, I would probably lean towards the books - again, just for the depth of the story that you able to realize more so than the film I feel.

Hunger Games. Don't know how I missed it. Reading second volume of trilogy now.

I've heard good things about it dontomasso. You're thoughts thus far?

Angry Moon
by Terrill Lankford

This is a short book that combines noir, a love story and the supernatural in a melange that shouldn't really work. Surprisingly though it does. Imagine The Godfather meets Apocalypse Now with just a dash of Wuthering Heights, The Big Sleep and some Hammer horror films thrown in. Although this sort of thing has become old hat now, back in the late nineties when this book was written it wasn't cliched yet.

Anyway the story concerns a truly professional and deadly hitman known as Ry Caulder. Ry has a soft spot for women and children. He does not torture. He does not kill innocents. He does not mutilate or send messages. He just removes bad people from this world-quickly, painlessly and permanently. Caulder knows he's an evil man but in his environment he's (pun intended) a straight shooter. He has an unblemished reputation for reliability and honesty. You get what you pay for with Caulder. He's on time and thorough. Always. He is the best. He does not miss.

His primary client is the LA Mafia family-which has mostly gone legitimate and underground. It seems however that there are a few loose ends which the Family needs Caulder to tie up. One of these "loose ends" is a man Caulder trained in the line of wetwork. Caulder doesn't like it but business is business and he does the job. Deciding that he's had enough, Caulder talks about retiring but the Family insists Caulder do one last job-that of his mentor, a legendary hitman known as Fredrickson, who was about the closest thing to a father that Caulder had. Fredrickson, always more brutal and savage than Caulder, has killed some people-including innocents-that the Family didn't want killed. It looks like Fredrickson has hooked up with the Colombian cartels to make a move on Family interests. Now the Family wants Caulder to punch Fredrickson's ticket.

Caulder doesn't want to do this but the Family makes him an offer he can't refuse. He does the job but is shocked to find Frederickson still alive the next day. He repeats this but gets the same results. And now Frederickson is coming after Caulder, the Family, and Caulder's sexy but naive next door neighbor, Stephanie, a single mother and would be actress, on whom the cold, ascetic and lonely Caulder has a serious crush.

Although the supernatural elements are hinted at in the prologue they are very slowly revealed throughout the story in a most plausible manner. And if you've ever wondered what really happened to Jimmy Hoffa, this book's theory is as good as any. Caulder can't understand why Frederickson won't stay dead and when he puts it together he doesn't want to believe it. I liked this book. You might as well. It deftly balances the different aspects which I mentioned above.