series quality decreasing?

[Fiat_Lux]

Originally Posted by issybird

When did Kinsey tail off? H or I? Well before Y.

Kinsey lost credibility, when she barged her way into spending the weekend with the Hispanic (Chicano?) gang.

That said, I've seen an alleged Kinsey mystery for Z. Didn't pick it up at the time, and couldn't find it later.

[Fiat_Lux]

Originally Posted by hildea

Yes, that's right, thanks! I've loved other books by her, so it didn't put me off her as an author, but that series disappointed me.

Wasn't The Books of Ash originally one novel, but the American publisher forced it into a series, ruining it in the process?

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Fiat_Lux

Wasn't The Books of Ash originally one novel, but the American publisher forced it into a series, ruining it in the process?

Why would splitting the book ruin it? It didn't seem to hurt Lord of the Rings any.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

I haven't read the books or watched the series yet. Just finished Locke and Key and I'm trying to decide now if I should watch Altered Carbon or Hell On Wheels.

FWIW, I thought the first season of AC was great and the 2nd was ABYSMAL.

Hell on Wheels, liked the first few seasons and ditto, it fell off a cliff.

I hope your experiences of them are much better. ;-)


Hitch

[wildhoney66]

so does the last Kinsey Book end on a cliff-hanger? i've never read any of them but i'd love to know when i decide to read them...

[badgoodDeb]

Originally Posted by wildhoney66

so does the last Kinsey Book end on a cliff-hanger? i've never read any of them but i'd love to know when i decide to read them...

I've only read up to L or so (though I've collected further), but I don't believe any of them ends with a cliff hanger. They are all quite self contained. However, it's nice to read them in order, because they mention past things briefly, plus the character grows. Just my 2 cents.

[wildhoney66]

i have a couple of them, i have A, B, maybe C, i have L i think or is it M i forget which.

i've been reading off and on the 87th precinct novels and i'm reading those in order as for years i've never done that before. and in one of the books a characters love interest is killed & it's mentioned quite a bit in the later books as well. the one i hope to finish tonight i just haven't been in the mood to read tonight just yet is the 6th book "Killer's Payoff' from (1958) the author of course being Ed McBain & thanks

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Fiat_Lux

Kinsey lost credibility, when she barged her way into spending the weekend with the Hispanic (Chicano?) gang.

That said, I've seen an alleged Kinsey mystery for Z. Didn't pick it up at the time, and couldn't find it later.

Y'know, at some point in time, I just stopped being able to read them. The entire "I'm leaving Kinsey in the 80's so that she doesn't have the net and computers worth a damn and smartphones" felt...forced to me, like "oh, it's too hard to write mysteries now that people can immediately call someone, even when trapped in a dumpster with a rabid pitbull" sort of thing.

I thought it was a shame, I kinda liked the series for a while there. My take on it is if Rex Stout and Gardner could bring their sleuths along in time, so too could Kinsey move forward in time. (I do confess that I don't feel the same way about Holmesian pastiches. There's simply something 19th-Century about Holmes & Watson and I've never enjoyed any of the attempts to bring them to this, or the last, century. And no, I wasn't wild about Cumberbund and the wee man,either.)

Hitch

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Y'know, at some point in time, I just stopped being able to read them. The entire "I'm leaving Kinsey in the 80's so that she doesn't have the net and computers worth a damn and smartphones" felt...forced to me, like "oh, it's too hard to write mysteries now that people can immediately call someone, even when trapped in a dumpster with a rabid pitbull" sort of thing.

I thought it was lazy, too; Grafton couldn’t be bothered to keep up with law enforcement technology or work out new plots given new capabilities for police, victim and criminal. The result was mysteries that were neither current nor classic/historical, just dated. They were stale.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Y'know, at some point in time, I just stopped being able to read them. The entire "I'm leaving Kinsey in the 80's so that she doesn't have the net and computers worth a damn and smartphones" felt...forced to me, like "oh, it's too hard to write mysteries now that people can immediately call someone, even when trapped in a dumpster with a rabid pitbull" sort of thing.

I thought it was a shame, I kinda liked the series for a while there. My take on it is if Rex Stout and Gardner could bring their sleuths along in time, so too could Kinsey move forward in time. (I do confess that I don't feel the same way about Holmesian pastiches. There's simply something 19th-Century about Holmes & Watson and I've never enjoyed any of the attempts to bring them to this, or the last, century. And no, I wasn't wild about Cumberbund and the wee man,either.)

Hitch

I thought the Cumberbund and the wee man Holmes update were fairly clever. I liked the fact that they took some of the core concepts and then went off in a rather different direction. I also enjoyed the two Downey movies as well, though they went off in a rather different direction and weren't very faithful to the original. Different strokes, as they say.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Y'know, at some point in time, I just stopped being able to read them. The entire "I'm leaving Kinsey in the 80's so that she doesn't have the net and computers worth a damn and smartphones" felt...forced to me, like "oh, it's too hard to write mysteries now that people can immediately call someone, even when trapped in a dumpster with a rabid pitbull" sort of thing.

I thought it was a shame, I kinda liked the series for a while there. My take on it is if Rex Stout and Gardner could bring their sleuths along in time, so too could Kinsey move forward in time. (I do confess that I don't feel the same way about Holmesian pastiches. There's simply something 19th-Century about Holmes & Watson and I've never enjoyed any of the attempts to bring them to this, or the last, century. And no, I wasn't wild about Cumberbund and the wee man,either.)

Hitch

I rathe liked the show Elementary. I thoiught they did a good job bringing Holmes into now. I also liked the updated Watson. I was not bothered at all that Watson is now female.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I rathe liked the show Elementary. I thoiught they did a good job bringing Holmes into now. I also liked the updated Watson. I was not bothered at all that Watson is now female.

I liked Elementary okay--but to me, they simply had a coincidence of names. I never really thought of them as "Holmes and Watson," per se.

I liked the Downey movies okay and I thought the hat tip to the Granada show at the beginning was touching.

The Cumberbund was just too twee for me, too much social media, yadda. Not my cuppa.

Hitch

[leebase]

Count me in as loving both Elementary and the Cumberbund takes on Holmes...and the Downey movies as well.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by leebase

Count me in as loving both Elementary and the Cumberbund takes on Holmes...and the Downey movies as well.

I wasn't much of a fan of the first Downey movie. Is the second one better then the first?

I do like the to TV series.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I wasn't much of a fan of the first Downey movie. Is the second one better then the first?

Not in my very humble opinion, not by a long shot.

Unrelated rantiness:

Spoiler:

It too, like almost everything else, all of a sudden, had Noomi Rapace. Talk about woefully miscast, for this role and woefully overused, in pretty much everything else....

I do like the to TV series.

You meant both, I take it?

Hitch