You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Horror Review: Inhuman by John Russo (1986, Pocket Books)
This wasn't a waste of time even when you're talking about a wasted story. I like your tone of commentary, brutally honest. I never heard of this story but I'm already convinced it's not worth the read. Judging from the summarized version, that's a lot of stuff going on there without any real focus.
Thanks so much, @adamada! I don't intentionally set out to read awful books, although there's a darn better chance to encounter it with 80's and 90's horror than maybe other genres. I don't want to be "The Angry Video Game Nerd of Horror PBs" or something like that, but I have to be true to myself when I read something, and if I'm going to review it, I do nobody favors if I gloss over the crappy bits.
You're going to KNOW, by golly, what's wrong with these books. :D
I also think it's important to take a lot of what I say with a grain of salt. Horror's very much a "one man's trash is another man's treasure", and I've read plenty of stuff that is utter garbage but I can't help loving anyway. Carnivore by Leigh Clark and Bats by William W. Johnstone are objectively awful novels by any metric, but they come by it so sincerely that I re-read them every few years in spite of this.
I can't picture myself re-reading Inhuman for anything though. It's not great, and it doesn't even have the balls to be so awful it's good (despite a premise screaming just that). Russo's writing is technically competent, it's just...not very fun to read here.