Quote:
Originally Posted by Baumi
I think it's not as much about accuracy as it is about consistency and believability. (Is that even a word?) I'd be willing to believe that for some reason (over-eager boss, recent inspection, whatever) the police in a small town would be really well-trained. I'd also believe the opposite, since it's more in line with the image of small-town police I'd expect. The trouble starts when the author wants me to believe both concepts at the same time without explaining or even acknowledging the contradiction.
And most of my problems weren't really about bad research but rather about lazy writing and plotting. I may be able to ignore that in TV and movies to a certain extent, but for some reason I can't do it in books. Probably because a book requires me to invest some energy and imagination, whereas TV only requires me to sit still and watch. (*) If I need to bring something to the plate myself, I expect more from the other side, as well.
(*): There are, of course, many really intelligent, well-written and though-provoking TV shows out there, as well. It's just that I find it easier to tolerate bad writing on TV than in a book.
|
I'm just about done with this, and I kind of have the opposite thing in mind. I do believe that this was really well written. I can believe that small town cops can be good and bad in their training because of certain circumstances, they are good at what they do, but not good when extra-ordinary circumstances take place.
But I read these like they are a long movie. I'm already gathering the next few books together to read.
The only time I haven't been able to really forgive something was in MEG
**END OF BOOK SPOILERS**
The end of the book featured the main character getting swallowed hole in a submersive by the megalodon....climbing out of the submersive, and cutting it's heart out from the inside.....really??? The rest of the book was top notch entertainment though.