Disappointing Mysteries

Nothing is more disappointing to me than a promising beginning and disappointing finish. I read one fairly recently that started out with an interesting story. It began to fall apart somewhere in the last third. All these other characters suddenly began appearing and huge amounts of flashbacks and backstory were dumped in. It just turned into a mess. The ending didn't even make sense. Worst of all, the author suddenly switched points of view abruptly. It was dreadful and I felt so cheated. I had read this author before and liked her books, but this one turned me off enough I haven't read any more by her.

never finished a book that did satisfy. If it didn't keep me from the first few pages, I'm not the type to soldier through, thinking that it'll get better. If somewhere in the later chapters, that beginning incident hadn't been made mentioned, then it was a red herring, or something the author got bored with and left it there for filler, concentrating on the main plot and hoping you wouldn't notice.

Shutter Island by Dennis Lehane, although I enjoyed Mystic River by the same author.

Many people give Shutter Island high marks for being clever and love the ending; to me the author didn't "play fair" with the reader and the ending was more like a "dull thud". After I finished it, I gave it the worse "thumbs down" that someone can: I wished I hadn't even read it.

Not a mystery, but a crime thriller. It had an intriguing story about a murder in Washington DC with all the promise of the politics and scandals that come with it. The author spent the whole book building up on these scandals, hinting at different motives, setting all the suspects in place--and it turned out to be a random killing motivated by coincidence.

Oh, I hate the "somebody unrelated to the plot did it" twist! What a cop out.

A high school english teach once told the class we weren't allowed to kill any characters off in the last page. It was a cop out - something you did when you just didn't know what else to do.

Now, I don't agree with this as an absolute guideline. Some very good stories make this work. But whenever I get to the end and someone dies, I do a mental check - did they need to die? I really hate it when the answer is no. The author just didn't know how else to finish it up.

Sometimes, the death does seem inevitable and makes sense (Hamlet), but a lot of times it's just for Pathos, and I hate the cheap tear.

I am disappointed by most mysteries I try to read - sigh. I have a 50 page rule and if it hasn't grabbed me by then, I go on to the next book. One book I read I hated SO much that I refuse to pick up any more of her books (boy was that convoluted). THe entire book was about a child being kidnapped, very intreguing, a real page turner for about 400 pages. Then, on the last page, a doorbell rings and there is the kid standing on the front stoop - no solution, no explanation! AAAGGGGHHHH. The author then nicely said, if you want to find out whodunit, read ..... the next book! I don't bloody think so.

Carlene

This was one of Uncle Jim's assignments:
Pick a genre and read award winning novels for the last 10 years. I picked the Edgar Award. I have only really enjoyed 1 book (The Chatham School Affair by Thomas H. Cook) of the ten and was ready to throw Resurrection Men by Ian Rankin against the wall - Yawn!

Since this is an assignment, I plowed through (took 2 weeks).

I picked up the next one Silent Joe by T. Jefferson Parker, read the first chapter and thought - no way am I doing plow through another boring mystery, no matter if Uncle Jim says so or not.

Kate - I don't know what it is. Maybe I was so put off by the last book that my attitude affected my judgment of it. As I said, I read the first chapter (after reading Resurrection Men - YAWN) and nothing caught my interest until the old man was killed. BUT, even that didn't make me want to turn the page.

Now The Chatham School Affair I read the first chapter while at work. Put it down and thought, I am gonna need quiet time to read this. Then worked my way slowly through that book and savored it. It was wonderful!!

And Bones was excellent too in a different way. I thought it was more of a horror/thriller than a mystery/thriller. I felt very little mystery about what was going on, knew the accomplise (sp?) as soon as they mentioned there was one, but boy was I nervous and goosebumped, etc.

And, I read all the time - SF, fantasy, cozy mysteries, regular mysteries, horror. I love to read! I will have to put Elmore Leonard and Carl Hiassen on my reading list.

I will also add In the Electric Mist With Confederate Dead by James Lee Burke, but Burke's Cimarron Rose threw me out of the story over and over again with all the obsure metaphors and similies. The ending left me very confused.

Well, T. Jefferson Parker is usually pretty good - what is it about the mysteries you find boring? What do you usually read? Maybe you need some Elmore Leonard or Carl Hiassen to pop it up a notch?

Click to expand...

I actually find mysteries boring, too. I read some occasionally, but they tend to more intellectual and talky than exciting. That was one of the reasons I moved away from reading mysteries to thrillers. Very different type of story.

The things that bother me about mysteries are the same things that bother me in other books - an unlikeable protagonist (if I think everyone in the book is a dull moron why should I care about what happens) or actions that dont' match character motivation.

I recently read one where a lifelong federal agent parachuted into a KKK camp, violently beat up one of the gang, kidnapped and interrogated him, drove him out to a "poor black neighborhood" and threw him out on the street where he was murdered. Then he felt guilty about it.

Everything written about that character's motivation and belief system (for two books) was thrown out the window for an improbable "macho" ending.

I need to believe that the character motivation makes sense. Otherwise it just feels like drivel.

MFM

MyFirstMystery said:

The things that bother me about mysteries are the same things that bother me in other books - an unlikeable protagonist (if I think everyone in the book is a dull moron why should I care about what happens) or actions that dont' match character motivation.

I recently read one where a lifelong federal agent parachuted into a KKK camp, violently beat up one of the gang, kidnapped and interrogated him, drove him out to a "poor black neighborhood" and threw him out on the street where he was murdered. Then he felt guilty about it.

Everything written about that character's motivation and belief system (for two books) was thrown out the window for an improbable "macho" ending.

I need to believe that the character motivation makes sense. Otherwise it just feels like drivel.

MFM

Click to expand...

ooh, what book was that? Sounds like an interesting read.

seriously.

It sounds like an action oriented book. If so, it really didn't need to stick to conventions.

Like watching Die Hard and seeing Bruce Willis really not wanting to kill the guy who's brother he fights later on.

MACHO!

I totally disagree, omenspirit. Just because a book is an action book doesnt mean the author can just throw characterization out the window. I read a lot of action (I'm writing one, too) and i hate the ones where the characters do things that are totally out of character just because it makes cool action scenes. It's unbelievable and annoying.

Just because they do that stupid stuff in movies, doesnt mean you can just do that in a novel. And when they do it in movies it totally annoys me too. For example, Tears of the Sun (since you mentioned Bruce Willis. lol) Bad movie because the motivation wasnt there, the situation was created for the sole purpose of action and that annoyed me. A good writer shouldnt have to force the situation. Even if it is action/adventure.

A couple of months ago I read The Second Time Around by Mary Higgins Clark, and I was extremely disappointed. The plot was ok, but her writing style was just really unsatisfactory. It was the first Clark book I've read, and will probably be the last. I was amazed, because she is so incredibly successful and yet I thought her style was really, well, below so many other authors I've read, as far as flat characters, filler scenes, and things like that.

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to vent:

Unbelievable violence in the last two Nevada Barr books has really hacked me off. I was drawn to the series because of the locations, characterizations, plotting and the way that the main character was able to use her knowledge and physical skill to get out of dangerous and difficult situations (Blind Descent is one of the scariest mystery/thrillers I have ever read - but then again, it takes place mostly in a cave and I am claustrophobic.) Now the main character is suffering broken bones, torture, gun shot wounds and somehow comes out of alive and well ... sort of.

As for mysteries I enjoy, I've been reading PD James' Adam Daiglish (sp?) series lately and love the way she sets up the situation long before the crime occurs with lots of suspects and reasons for murder. The solution makes sense when I think back over the plot and her red herrings are plausible.

nevada said:

I totally disagree, omenspirit. Just because a book is an action book doesnt mean the author can just throw characterization out the window. I read a lot of action (I'm writing one, too) and i hate the ones where the characters do things that are totally out of character just because it makes cool action scenes. It's unbelievable and annoying.

Just because they do that stupid stuff in movies, doesnt mean you can just do that in a novel. And when they do it in movies it totally annoys me too. For example, Tears of the Sun (since you mentioned Bruce Willis. lol) Bad movie because the motivation wasnt there, the situation was created for the sole purpose of action and that annoyed me. A good writer shouldnt have to force the situation. Even if it is action/adventure.

Click to expand...

depends on your era of choice for action, drama, thrills, etc.

I read pulp. My reading choices are from about 5 or 6 decades ago.

Some books aren't about characterization, some are just wild rides. Grab ahold, let'er rip!

And out of character? for an action flick? You may have read a little too much into it.

A-C-T-I-O-N. they're not writing war & peace.

If you walk into a film with a certain expectation, & suspend belief, then your anger at it wouldn't be.

When do you see some of the things you see in action flicks in reality?

You don't. Suspension of belief.

Not Again!

KatRiley said:

A high school english teach once told the class we weren't allowed to kill any characters off in the last page. It was a cop out - something you did when you just didn't know what else to do.

Now, I don't agree with this as an absolute guideline. Some very good stories make this work. But whenever I get to the end and someone dies, I do a mental check - did they need to die? I really hate it when the answer is no. The author just didn't know how else to finish it up.

Click to expand...

Maybe that was why they were a highschool english teacher! But really, it is a good rule. It must be something every english teacher is taught, since I had a favorite teacher tell me the same exact thing.

S'Fool said:

Unbelievable violence in the last two Nevada Barr books has really hacked me off.

Click to expand...

The publisher is probably encouraging her to turn it in the direction of thriller. From what I understand, that's happening to a lot of mystery writers because mystery doesn't sell as well as thriller. Thriller is more likely to get a writer best seller status than mystery.

OmenSpirits.com said:

And out of character? for an action flick? You may have read a little troo much into it.

Click to expand...

I've seen it myself. It particularly rears its head in the thrillers written by women with women heroines. The heroine will be very competent during the entire story and turn into a compete idiot during the action scene.

That's as bad as when the women are complete Mary Sues and absolutely brilliant at everything with the requisite bitter ex cop partner serving only as assistant and love interest. *groan*