Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

First, I applaud any author with the talent and discipline to publish a blockbuster novel (in two languages, nonetheless). Second, I very much wanted to like this book. It's rooted in traditional folk horror -- a genre I feel is sadly under-represented in today's literary landscape. It's also a clear nod to both the legendary W.W. Jacobs short "The Monkey's Paw," and Stephen King's "Pet Sematary" -- which is, itself, a masterful tribute to that earlier tale. In fairness, too, the core "HEX" concept and associated visuals are pretty darn terrifying. So let me try to articulate why this story didn't work for me at all: 1. Too Much Exposition Celebrated ghost story writer M.R. James once noted that "nicely managed crescendo" is essential to any horror tale. "Into a calm environment," he said, "let the ominous thing put out its head, unobtrusively at first and then more insistently, until it holds the stage.” In "HEX," the "ominous thing" is with us from page one -- and then for numerous pages, before we get any clarification that explains what's going on. Unfortunately, once that exposition arrives, it floods the story so it almost feels we're listening to a rambling documentary about the ominous thing. Which makes the thing feel a LOT less ominous. 2. Technology Too Clever for Its Own Good I get it. This is a modern witch tale, and technology is actually intrinsic to the dynamic that (eventually) makes everything fall apart. But that technology takes such center stage that it practically becomes a main character -- again, greatly distracting from the slow burn of the "ominous thing." Worse, the presence of that same technology leads to plot holes larger than the Lincoln Tunnel. The author asks us to believe that this New York hamlet is utterly disconnected from the outside world -- then force-feeds us every manner of modern media, making us realize (repeatedly) why this dynamic would be impossible in any first world country today. 3. Weirdly (Over-)Similar Narrative Structure This is perhaps the most troubling aspect of "HEX." Flip to Part 2 of "HEX," which begins with Chapter 23. Simultaneously, flip to Part 2 of 1983's "Pet Sematary" (which begins, "It's probably wrong to believe there can be any limit to the horror which the human mind can experience."). Read the succeeding chapters side-by-side. I'm all for creating a tribute to a modern master (and elements of "HEX" are *definitely* based on "Pet Sematary" throughout). But these latter chapters are a little too close for comfort. Entire phrases, cadences, narrative beats, even word choices have been used to craft this newer novel's framework. As a lifelong horror reader, I felt insulted that someone would think this could actually go unnoticed. I also felt confused by the Stephen King review on the cover: "Totally, brilliantly original." Wait, are you kidding??? 4. Off-the-Rails Ending So much for the "ominous thing." The ending of "HEX" -- which I understand was re-written from the original Dutch, for some reason -- is the horror movie equivalent of hurling everything at the camera simultaneously. Please don't tell me over and over "this situation is totally terrifying" -- SHOW me scenes that unnerve me. Don't crank the chaos meter to 14+ -- take a cue from "The Monkey's Paw," which proves understated scares are the most horrifying kind. The ending of this book was over-the-top confusing, inconsistent, frenzied, silly and awful.