Sharp Objects
Aug. 19th, 2019 04:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alobearThe other podcast that is prompting me to consume particular media is Ink To Film, in which two friends read and review books and their film adaptations. While they do heavily recap the events of both book and film, it's obviously more interesting to listen if I'm familiar with the material. So, this week, I read Sharp Objects by Gillian Flynn.
I haven't read Gone Girl, but I did watch the film when it came out and pretty much hated it - not because it was bad, but just because it was horrible. So, I was a bit wary going in to Sharp Objects.
My review isn't going to give away actual plot twists, but discussion of the structure might ruin the arc of the story.
The book is well-written and compelling, though I was a bit surprised by a long section of back story exposition, after 75 pages of tautly written direct action with clever drip-feeding of background hints. The main character, Camille, who goes back to her hometown as a reporter to look into the murders of two young girls, is layered, deeply flawed and very interesting. I like the exploration of how her childhood and mental illness impact on her later life.
The case was less interesting to me, and I figured out who did it and likely why quite early on. I thought for a while that I was going to turn out to be wrong and the real story was going to be much more hackneyed, but then there was a very late switcheroo and my theory was proved correct. This did mean, however, that the main explanation of the plot and aftermath were summarised very briefly in the last ten pages, so it wouldn't be too obvious that the previous (false) explanation had come too early.
So, while the book kept me reading throughout, and the characters were well-drawn, I did feel it had some structural flaws that diminished its impact and made the whole thing a bit forced.
Also, while I'm intrigued as to how certain aspects would be portrayed in a TV show, and while I think Amy Adams is always worth watching, I'm not sure I actually want to see the events of the book played out on screen, so I don't think I'm going to watch the TV show in the end.
I haven't read Gone Girl, but I did watch the film when it came out and pretty much hated it - not because it was bad, but just because it was horrible. So, I was a bit wary going in to Sharp Objects.
My review isn't going to give away actual plot twists, but discussion of the structure might ruin the arc of the story.
The book is well-written and compelling, though I was a bit surprised by a long section of back story exposition, after 75 pages of tautly written direct action with clever drip-feeding of background hints. The main character, Camille, who goes back to her hometown as a reporter to look into the murders of two young girls, is layered, deeply flawed and very interesting. I like the exploration of how her childhood and mental illness impact on her later life.
The case was less interesting to me, and I figured out who did it and likely why quite early on. I thought for a while that I was going to turn out to be wrong and the real story was going to be much more hackneyed, but then there was a very late switcheroo and my theory was proved correct. This did mean, however, that the main explanation of the plot and aftermath were summarised very briefly in the last ten pages, so it wouldn't be too obvious that the previous (false) explanation had come too early.
So, while the book kept me reading throughout, and the characters were well-drawn, I did feel it had some structural flaws that diminished its impact and made the whole thing a bit forced.
Also, while I'm intrigued as to how certain aspects would be portrayed in a TV show, and while I think Amy Adams is always worth watching, I'm not sure I actually want to see the events of the book played out on screen, so I don't think I'm going to watch the TV show in the end.
