Books with too much hype?

What are some books that you think are over-hyped? Besides the oh-so-obvious Twilight.

Eragon by Christopher Paolini. The books have some good parts (*cough*Murtagh*cough*) but mostly they're just borrowed material from many other, better books. As I've said before, I think Paolini's biggest mistake was to rush into publishing instead of waiting to learn more first.

Magda wrote:

Eragon by Christopher Paolini. The books have some good parts (*cough*Murtagh*cough*) but mostly they're just borrowed material from many other, better books. As I've said before, I think Paolini's biggest mistake was to rush into publishing instead of waiting to learn more first.

I agree. I think Paolini had a lot of potential, but he published too soon. Part of the problem is that he wanted to publish a book for himself. I don't believe he cared so much what the readers would think as long as he could say, "I published a book at sixteen."

I love Eragon

It is one of my guilty pleasures. I know the writing isn't the best and the material is not very original but I enjoyed it all the same.

BeautyBlitz wrote:

I love Eragon

It is one of my guilty pleasures. I know the writing isn't the best and the material is not very original but I enjoyed it all the same.

Really?! Maybe I just like Lord of the Rings and Star Wars too much to give it a fair chance. It still makes me mad that he ripped their plots off so badly and got away with it.

Actually, I think that Harry Potter was quite overhyped. I think it deserved some of the hype, but not all of it. It was the obsession of many people years ago and even today.

Zara Sahana 007 wrote:

Actually, I think that Harry Potter was quite overhyped. I think it deserved some of the hype, but not all of it. It was the obsession of many people years ago and even today.

Zara! You think Harry Potter, The Boy Who Lived, was overhyped?!?! I agree. I love the series, but I did think it was overhyped. But the hype has toned down considerably now, I think.

Besides the books already listed, I have nothing else. Oh, wait. Just got one! The Da Vinci Code. I read that book, but didn't get why it'd been so talked about before reading it. I was like "Yeah...it's interesting...what were they talking about, though...?" I thought that book was overhyped.

Paolini does have potential. He was just published too young.

Let's see: Twilight, Harry Potter (like it, but come on now!), and the Inheritance series thingy. I don't like it when books have too much hype in the first place. It ruins their value.

I may be too sensitive, but I felt that "Memoirs of a Geisha" got way too much attention. It is a decent novel, but come on... If you want to know the real stuff, read the autobiography of the woman Golden based his story on, Mineko Iwasaki.

Sola Zara wrote:

Actually, I think that Harry Potter was quite overhyped. I think it deserved some of the hype, but not all of it. It was the obsession of many people years ago and even today.

*dead*


NO!

I'm... I... I admit, I am somewhat obsessed with Harry Potter! I've read each book in the series more than 25 times.... haha!

I agree that Harry Potter doesn't really deserve the amount of attention it's getting. I also thought that Meg Cabot as an author shouldn't be so famous. You already mentioned Twilight.
I saw the movie Eragon, so I didn't bother to touch the books. The acting was terrible, and I didn't see anything unique in the storyline.

Nolofinwe wrote:

I agree that Harry Potter doesn't really deserve the amount of attention it's getting. I also thought that Meg Cabot as an author shouldn't be so famous. You already mentioned Twilight.
I saw the movie Eragon, so I didn't bother to touch the books. The acting was terrible, and I didn't see anything unique in the storyline.

I also feel the same way about Meg Cabot. I don't get why she's so famous. I liked the movie "Princess Diaries" but I don't think I"d ever touch the books. I'm not much a fan of the kind of books she writes, and only because I like my books to have a deeper meaning. My sister has read her books, so I've discussed this with her. My sister enjoys light, fluffy books.

I don't.

Hey, there's an audience for her, though. I always hate it when more talented authors don't get the recognition that other authors--the ones without much talent--get. It saddens me. It reminds me life isn't always fair.

Grr.

I love your avatar, by the way. It's a very nice picture.

Goldfish wrote:

Nolofinwe wrote:

I agree that Harry Potter doesn't really deserve the amount of attention it's getting. I also thought that Meg Cabot as an author shouldn't be so famous. You already mentioned Twilight.
I saw the movie Eragon, so I didn't bother to touch the books. The acting was terrible, and I didn't see anything unique in the storyline.

I also feel the same way about Meg Cabot. I don't get why she's so famous. I liked the movie "Princess Diaries" but I don't think I"d ever touch the books. I'm not much a fan of the kind of books she writes, and only because I like my books to have a deeper meaning. My sister has read her books, so I've discussed this with her. My sister enjoys light, fluffy books.

I don't.

Hey, there's an audience for her, though. I always hate it when more talented authors don't get the recognition that other authors--the ones without much talent--get. It saddens me. It reminds me life isn't always fair.

Grr.

I love your avatar, by the way. It's a very nice picture.

GOLDFISH! Where have you been? It's been ages!

Okay. I will confess, I'm a Meg Cabot fan. But I do agree with both of you in saying that she is overhyped. The books are light fluff and nothing more. Of course, I find them entertaining, but that is it.

By the way, Goldfish, isn't this the first time you are posting in a long time? Nice to see you again!

La Látiga Loca wrote:

Okay. I will confess, I'm a Meg Cabot fan. But I do agree with both of you in saying that she is overhyped. The books are light fluff and nothing more. Of course, I find them entertaining, but that is it.

By the way, Goldfish, isn't this the first time you are posting in a long time? Nice to see you again!

Uh-huh. I actually enjoy chick-lit. I have a collection of them! My favorite chick-lit author is Sophie Kinsella.

I haven't read Meg Cabot's books, though.

Louisa Lynn wrote:

Goldfish wrote:

Nolofinwe wrote:

I agree that Harry Potter doesn't really deserve the amount of attention it's getting. I also thought that Meg Cabot as an author shouldn't be so famous. You already mentioned Twilight.
I saw the movie Eragon, so I didn't bother to touch the books. The acting was terrible, and I didn't see anything unique in the storyline.

I also feel the same way about Meg Cabot. I don't get why she's so famous. I liked the movie "Princess Diaries" but I don't think I"d ever touch the books. I'm not much a fan of the kind of books she writes, and only because I like my books to have a deeper meaning. My sister has read her books, so I've discussed this with her. My sister enjoys light, fluffy books.

I don't.

Hey, there's an audience for her, though. I always hate it when more talented authors don't get the recognition that other authors--the ones without much talent--get. It saddens me. It reminds me life isn't always fair.

Grr.

I love your avatar, by the way. It's a very nice picture.

GOLDFISH! Where have you been? It's been ages!

I've been watching from the shadows, waiting for a moment to pounce back in. Yes, this is my first time posting in a long time.

I've missed all of you. Hopefully I'll be able to post a little more. I'm still in!

GOLDFISH!

WE MISSED YOU!

BeautyBlitz wrote:

GOLDFISH!

WE MISSED YOU!

Yes, we did!! Wow, all people are coming back to us!! Yippie!

La Látiga Loca wrote:

Okay. I will confess, I'm a Meg Cabot fan. But I do agree with both of you in saying that she is overhyped. The books are light fluff and nothing more. Of course, I find them entertaining, but that is it.

By the way, Goldfish, isn't this the first time you are posting in a long time? Nice to see you again!

Yeah, it IS nice to see you, Goldfish, hope to see you on more often!!!

Really? I feel Meg Cabot is a semi-fun author. Her books are fluffy and excellent when you want to just let loose and read something light and 'unprofessional'. But her characters WHINE so much, it's almost unbearable sometimes.

I've read one Meg Cabot book. Jinx. It was cute... almost too cute. It's like candy. I prefer something with more substance.

On a similar note, I think that Sarah Dessen get's a bit more attention that is necessary. She's not a fantastic writer and her plots aren't that original; some books don't seem to really have one, either. I do give some of her books props though-- there are more good ones than bad ones. I liked Dreamland for its honesty.

Eragon is worth reading, but not worth getting excited over if you've read Narnia or Harry Potter (and I'm sure Lord of the Rings, but I've not read those, so I can't talk). Harry Potter is over-hyped in some ways, but it is very good. Twilight is insanely inflated.

I'm hoping I can be here more often. This site is addictive, so I had to just cut off my contact completely. Only temporarily, though.

Quote :

On a similar note, I think that Sarah Dessen get's a bit more attention that is necessary. She's not a fantastic writer and her plots aren't that original; some books don't seem to really have one, either. I do give some of her books props though-- there are more good ones than bad ones. I liked Dreamland for its honesty.

Eragon is worth reading, but not worth getting excited over if you've read Narnia or Harry Potter (and I'm sure Lord of the Rings, but I've not read those, so I can't talk). Harry Potter is over-hyped in some ways, but it is very good. Twilight is insanely inflated.

Oh, I forgot about Sarah Dessen's books. I got one--Silence, or something like that. Speak up. Something. I didn't get very far in it; it just didn't interest me, plus I'd seen a move with the same plot (whether the movie turned into a book or vice versa, I don't know) and it's the reason I wanted to read it. And then I read another book--this one I remember--Lock and Key. Had a nice cover (yeah, I'm shallow) and a nice plot. It was one of the most boring books I've ever come across. I couldn't feel for the main character. I got further in the book than I did with the other, but I quit before the halfway point. Afterwards, I checked out the reviews and found out I wasn't the only one who'd felt this way.

I don't think I'll be trying her books again, though. I'm not a fan of Chick-lit, though I've read a few here and there, most times because I didn't know it was Chick-lit. I've just never been the type of person who likes 'light reading'. Light reading doesn't satisfy me.

Goldfish wrote:

I'm hoping I can be here more often. This site is addictive, so I had to just cut off my contact completely. Only temporarily, though.

Quote :

On a similar note, I think that Sarah Dessen get's a bit more attention that is necessary. She's not a fantastic writer and her plots aren't that original; some books don't seem to really have one, either. I do give some of her books props though-- there are more good ones than bad ones. I liked Dreamland for its honesty.

Eragon is worth reading, but not worth getting excited over if you've read Narnia or Harry Potter (and I'm sure Lord of the Rings, but I've not read those, so I can't talk). Harry Potter is over-hyped in some ways, but it is very good. Twilight is insanely inflated.

Oh, I forgot about Sarah Dessen's books. I got one--Silence, or something like that. Speak up. Something. I didn't get very far in it; it just didn't interest me, plus I'd seen a move with the same plot (whether the movie turned into a book or vice versa, I don't know) and it's the reason I wanted to read it. And then I read another book--this one I remember--Lock and Key. Had a nice cover (yeah, I'm shallow) and a nice plot. It was one of the most boring books I've ever come across. I couldn't feel for the main character. I got further in the book than I did with the other, but I quit before the halfway point. Afterwards, I checked out the reviews and found out I wasn't the only one who'd felt this way.

I don't think I'll be trying her books again, though. I'm not a fan of Chick-lit, though I've read a few here and there, most times because I didn't know it was Chick-lit. I've just never been the type of person who likes 'light reading'. Light reading doesn't satisfy me.

Exactly. I like things that make me feel deep down, rather than just make my nose warm.

Well, I like light reading sometimes, when I need to remove myself from all of my work. I do light reading when I really don't feel like thinking. Of course, this isn't too often. I'm more partial to works that have something that goes a bit deeper.

Most of the authors that I think are overrated are light-reading authors. I'm not sure why, but it's something I've noticed.

My idea of light reading is reading a book I've read a hundred times already. If I've read it a lot I don't really have to think.

As for books that are deemed "light reading," I find I have little use for them.

I think that Sara Dessen and Meg Cabot are both very good at what they do...writing chicklit. One thing I've always loved in Sara Dessen's books is the minor characters...I like how she tries giving even the small ones a distinct personality. Her endings always give me the warm fuzzies, too. Dreamland's her best book, in my opinion. As for Meg Cabot, she has a fun writing style and she makes me giggle. The books are like hot chocolate with marshmallows...maybe not the most wholesome thing, but where would I be without them?

But yes, they are overrated.