Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I cannot believe this book got so many good reviews. I’m so glad I didn’t pay for it. I’d rather read the book of “Sharknado,” if there is one. The first two chapters were decent enough that I kept reading, but by about the halfway point I just got annoyed and reverted to skimming in order to hurry up and get to the point. Like other reviewers, I didn't know this was going to be a cheap sci-fi novel until I was about 70% into the story. So many problems, where do I begin? 1) The main character is unlikeable. The author poorly applied the “federal agent with a history of military combat and prisoner of war” veneer in an attempt to force the reader to like him, but really, he’s just an ass. I kept waiting for some redeeming qualities, but they never came. 2) The writing is very basic with multiple fragments, unnecessary and repetitive descriptions, and incomplete sentences. It’s definitely not a challenging read, but at one point I felt like I was back in high school reading short stories in my 9th grade English class. In this case, shorter would have been better as the pain would have ended sooner. 3) The “thriller” portion of the story comes from the unnecessary and inexplicable violence and agonizingly long chase sequence. There is an attempt to explain it at the end, but it is incredibly weak and reminds me of listening to self-aggrandizing college freshmen arguing during a philosophy 101 class. 4) The science is bad. ***SPOILER WARNING*** I can’t go into the details without giving away the ending, not that there was much of an ending to begin with… - We find that the “mastermind” of Wayward Pines is a “genius” geneticist who was able to somehow look into his genetic crystal ball in the 70’s and see how the human species would evolve over time – and it wasn’t pretty. - The reason for why humans evolve into these sinewy beast-like primal hairless creatures with talons? Because humans trashed the planet to the point that the earth became “toxic,” so human DNA becomes "corrupted" leading to the evolution of a new race in order to be able to survive in the "toxic" environment. (It’s no wonder this book has been picked up for a TV series – it’s the same trite, self-loathing, we-are-such-horrible-creatures attitude that the celebrities have adopted as the newest trend in cinema.) Interestingly, however, the toxic environment is described as simply a world taken over by forestation. Not to mention, no one seems to be having any trouble breathing in the environment, there are no new animals or toxic species introduced, no exotic creative creatures who have also had to adapt to the toxic environment except for these poorly described humanoid creatures that remind me of the zombies from I am Legend. - So our story actually takes place 1800 years in the future. We are told that the genius geneticist threw his massive personal fortune (because all the scientists I know are also billionaires) into research and development and long-story-short, creates Wayward Pines into the last secure town on earth, with a giant bunker, and a monitoring station, and a small city where all the unsuspecting people live like they’re in Mayberry Days - akin to The Truman Show. So how is everyone here still alive? Suspended animation of course – with a one-sentence explanation as to how that was possible. The theory is that he is “saving the pure human race” by having abducted over 600 hundred people during the 1980s-2030s and putting them in suspended animation in order to ride out the storm of evolution, so to speak. The only problem is, no one knows how or why they got to Wayward Pines, so they live their lives in fear and confusion with intermittent displays of brutal savagery that just doesn't gel. So what’s wrong with this story? If humans are so terrible, which is demonstrated in the horrific display of grotesqueries that occur to those who don’t assimilate, then what is the purpose of saving the “pure” human race in the first place? Wouldn't it have been better to just let us all be slowly wiped out - I mean we're such pathetic creatures anyway... The scientist comes off as sociopathic, not heroic, and the effort at scientific explanations for all of this leaves much to be desired. I doubt our author has touched foot in a biology class since high school, and if his writing is at all reminiscent of his understanding of federal agents, then I can only assume he has spent most of his life watching tv and playing video games rather than actually interacting in the real world. Summary: It’s like someone tried to throw Twin Peaks, Island of Dr. Moreau, and The Cabin in the Woods into a blender and came out with something completely inedible. There is a quote from one of Michael Crichton’s books in the back of the book, which felt reminiscent of the Stolen Valor Act. I actually felt shame and sadness that Crichton’s name would even be mentioned alongside this poor attempt at science-fiction drivel. This book and Crichton's book should never be mentioned in the same sentence again.