It is, with very few exceptions, always a pleasure to read Dean Koontz. With this trilogy, the author tries to continue the story about Frankenstein, where Mary Shelley left off. If you expect Koontz to continue the story in Mary Shelley's style, you will be inevitably disappointed. There is nothing left from the classic, dark story of Frankenstein's monster. Although Dean Koontz are referring to the old story in several places, new and probably younger readers can easily get into the story without knowing the old novel in detail.
What experiences awaits the tense reader?
Koontz uses a huge cast of characters, and as usual he throws the reader headlong into the story. Therefore, the story seem pretty messy until you get the hang of who is who. For my part, I had to read quite a bit of the first volume before I understood what was happening. However, if you have the patience to continue, you are rewarded with a really funny story.
I do not know if Koontz had the intention to write a serious thriller or a parody of the genre. My guess is, that he tried to mix the thrill and humor into his story and if that was his intention, he succeeded. It is true that the books has some dark and exciting moments, but even in these passages the humor is dominant .
So, how should we respond to the books?
If you expect a classic thriller in the style of 'Twilight Eyes', you will be disappointed. But on the other hand, if you are looking for black humor and clever lines, some really enjoyable hours awaits you.
Dean Koontz has a true sense of humor, and it shows very clearly in these three volumes, where he allows himself to express it without restraint. Frankenstein Volume 1 to 3 is definitely worth reading. A word of caution: Do not read the books before going to sleep. You might have ruined a good night's sleep, because the books are extremely hard to put down once you have started to read.
Stieg Larsson was a brilliant writer. And his Millennium trilogy is nothing but a masterpiece.
As I write these words, there is hardly a single bookworm who have not heard about, or read these books. Should you happen to be one of the few who hasn't read the books, I can just say one thing: The Millennium trilogy is one of the most important happenings in the crime genre, written in recent times.
The writing style is definitely not dazzling, bad choice of word, weak formulations which sometimes seems childish and a hopeless sentence structures marring the books. My review goes for the Danish version of the books, so of course it might be possible that we are just talking about a poor translation from the original language, unfortunately I think this is not very likely.
What remains, is the ingeniously conceived plot that is so eminent that it outshines Stieg Larsson's literary shortcomings. Another strong side is his choice of characters and the description of them.
After reading the last pages of 'The girl that kicked the hornet's nest', I was almost left with a panicky realization that there would be no more reunion with Michael, Erika and last but not least, Lisbeth Salander. It was almost unbearable. Those strong personalities deserves to live on, but would they be able to do that without Stieg Larsson? Hardly. Therefore, unfortunately the conclusion has to be that the characters are better off, leaving this world with their Creator.
Here is the plot in brief description: The journalist, Mikael Blomkvist, are hired by an old man named Henrik Vanger who want to clear up an unsolved murder mystery. Detours are Mikael Blomkvist introduced to Lisbeth Salander - a highly controversial researcher.
What begins as a simple task, where skeletons from the past are let loose, suddenly turns out to be Pandora's box, where all the horrors of the world are hidden. And once you have let them out of the box, you have to capture and kill them all - or perish.
My best recommendation. This trilogy will haunt you for a long time. And that's what reading is all about, right?
It's hard to find a more fascinating character than Dr. Hannibal Lecter. Thomas Harris are able to unite the sympathetic with the vile.
Is dr. Lecter criminal? Of course. Cannibalism, no matter how sophisticated it is performed, is definitely illegal. But Dr. Lecter's complex nature makes it impossible for you to see him as the real enemy. There arises a peculiar understanding between the reader and Dr. Lecter.
Some chooses to catch criminals and putting them in jail or let the state execute them. Hannibal prepares delicious meals of them. As Barney, a supervisor who took care of dr. Lecter in six years while he was imprisoned, once said: "He (Hannibal) once told me, that if it was possible, he'd prefer to eat rude people. 'Free ranging uncivilized', he called them." - Hannibal P. 85.
Are we really able to hate a man, seeking perfectionism while defending himself and the high culture in the world? Can you really hate a man who admittedly kills, but only in self-defense or to curb corruption and decadence?
Thomas Harris does a wonderful job, portraying a complex man that really appreciate and love the beauty of music, architecture and food and at the same time cultivate his dark tendencies, should the opportunity arise - and in some strange way, at the same time, are able to unite these diametrically opposite sides of his personality.
Read 'Hannibal' if you want a deep insight into culture and extravagance mixed with cynicism and merciless revenge. And... by the way...Enjoy your meal.
