Reply
AlanNJ
Posts: 3,722
Topics: 64
Kudos: 1,528
Registered: ‎03-09-2010
0 Kudos

Re: Mister Nobody Recommends Stuart Woods - UPDATED

 


bklvr896 wrote:

 


AlanNJ wrote:

 


bklvr896 wrote:

 


AlanNJ wrote:

Stuart Woods has been relegated as one of my go-to authors when I'm looking for fluff to read when I'm not feeling well and need something to not concentrate on.  It seems he's becoming a more modern Sidney Sheldon (except Sidney Sheldon always wrote the way he did).  Stuart Woods' quality has gone down in my opinion.


True, true.  The earlier books certainly had more depth to them.  As a aside, Stone's a slut, a lovable one, but still, he sleeps with every women he comes in contact with except Elaine.  And sometimes with days of each other.:smileywink:

 


Actually in one of the recent books he slept with two women at the same time.  I think that was a first for the series.

 


I'm not sure I remember that, or maybe I do, vague recollection.:smileyvery-happy:

 


You would remember it if you had read it... :smileywink:

 

►Without order there is chaos◄
Contributor
Mister_Nobody
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎12-06-2010
0 Kudos

Re: Mister Nobody Recommends Stuart Woods - UPDATED

WOW! I am always amazed at the comments I see.  I will agree Stuart Woods books are formulaic, but this is true of so many authors - whether they write thrillers or even literary novels.  James Patterson is #1 in my book, but also look at Jodi Picoult or Maeve Binchy.  I asked a friend to try out an experiment for me and I found the results interesting.  I had him watch a James Bond film and then read a Stuart Woods novel and I asked him "What is the difference between a bond film or a Woods thriller"? 

 

He is a James Bond fanatic much like I am, but said the same as many readers here, that he went on to read several Woods books and thought they were formulaic.  How can you love Bond films, but don't see the similarity with Woods' work?  I love Stuart Woods' formula and love going back and rereading them for the thrills.  To me there is no difference between the two genres or why is formualic writing so frowned upon? 

When you are at the end of your rope, come find me.
AlanNJ
Posts: 3,722
Topics: 64
Kudos: 1,528
Registered: ‎03-09-2010
0 Kudos

Re: Mister Nobody Recommends Stuart Woods - UPDATED

Enjoy him.  Obviously many people do.  My problem with Stuart Woods is that he used to be much better than he currently is in my opinion.  I read everything he wrote for many years and completely enjoyed it.  Now he's just writing formula books.  He seems to be trying to be another James Patterson who writes a product to be sold rather than a book using creativity.

►Without order there is chaos◄
Bibliophile
bklvr896
Posts: 4,781
Registered: ‎12-31-2009
0 Kudos

Re: Mister Nobody Recommends Stuart Woods - UPDATED

 


Mister_Nobody wrote:

WOW! I am always amazed at the comments I see.  I will agree Stuart Woods books are formulaic, but this is true of so many authors - whether they write thrillers or even literary novels.  James Patterson is #1 in my book, but also look at Jodi Picoult or Maeve Binchy.  I asked a friend to try out an experiment for me and I found the results interesting.  I had him watch a James Bond film and then read a Stuart Woods novel and I asked him "What is the difference between a bond film or a Woods thriller"? 

 

He is a James Bond fanatic much like I am, but said the same as many readers here, that he went on to read several Woods books and thought they were formulaic.  How can you love Bond films, but don't see the similarity with Woods' work?  I love Stuart Woods' formula and love going back and rereading them for the thrills.  To me there is no difference between the two genres or why is formualic writing so frowned upon? 


I'm not frowning upon, I'm just commenting that I think his earlier books had more substance and depth.  It's not that I don't enjoy the newer books, but they're a much easier and faster read for me.