James Patterson. This is the one I hate most. All bad things about pulp fictions apply to him most fittingly. No ingenuity. No fun.
David Baldacci. I was reading his "First Family". It's OK. Much better than James Patterson, but much less enjoyable than Dan Brown.
Clive Cussler. Never read his works. Will try.
Michael Connelly. This is the one I really like. Among my personal top 5 of thriller writers alive. He is a real professional. He knows the technical procedure of crime detection and the court. His works are full of interesting details, while maintaining a facinating plot. This is the one I'd recommend to everyone. But frankly speaking, he is still not as enjoyable as Dan Brown.
Steve Berry. Don't know this one.
James Rollins. I read through one of his cave novels.
It's readable. Not as good as Michael Connelly.
Tom Clancy. Techno stuffs. Weak plot. No good.
John Grisham. A mixed bag. I used to like him a lot, not now.
Brad Thor. I was reading "Blowback", but I could not finish it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnemicOak
While it's not fool proof. Often when I'm looking for a new author based on liking another author I go to Fantastic Fiction and look at the 'Visitors to this page also looked at these authors' section of the author's page.
On Dan Brown's page the list would be...
James Patterson
David Baldacci
Clive Cussler
Michael Connelly
Steve Berry
Lee Child
James Rollins
Matthew Reilly
Vince Flynn
Tom Clancy
John Grisham
Harlan Coben
Robert Ludlum
Patricia Cornwell
Brad Thor
http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/b/dan-brown/ |