"Inn-sewer-ants" has got to be my favourite mispronunciation of insurance I've ever seen.

Pratchett gives every character so much life with their words, and I love it.

Give me your silliest, nitpickiest reason you stopped reading a book!

My pettiest reason has to be when a woman living in Arthurian times took note of another woman not wearing a corset, when corsets wouldn't be invented until literally a thousand years later (and not even called corsets until the Victorian era). I was about four chapters in I think and I put that book right down.

So, I ended up watching Edge of Tomorrow, which is the heavily Westernized Hollywood adaptation of the novel. It wasn't a bad movie by any means, and as a standalone would be a really solid sci-fi action movie. It shares the same main presence, and three characters (who are vastly different from their novel counterparts). The rest is different, ranging from smaller changes to outright brand new experiences and scenarios.

The movie was decent, but the book felt more engaging. Keiji was more endearing than Cage. Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt were good in their roles, but they were also significantly older than their novel counterparts.

Now that I've seen/read all the media for All You Need Is Kill, I can safely say that my novel is my favourite of the three.

What’s your “ i don’t want to ever see this in my books”? For me I despise a miscommunication trope that’s written just to fill the plot when it’s a whole grown adult relationship. I also hate when the mmc gives the fmc a random cringy nickname. In fantasy I hate when books describe their fmc ( who apparently can take a whole kingdom down with her pinky finger) as someone with a body of a child like make it make sense?

hi! i've not found a post on this topic, so i want to ask you a question: when you rate a book, what do you base it on?

for example, i don't expect a very complex world-building from certain genres like romantasy, to me, it's the relationship of the characters that is more important in these types of books. so i wouldn't rate how good it is in general, on some universal scale of how close it is to a 'masterpiece' so to say, but rather if it's good enough for its specific genre.

do you rate it differently? like, maybe based on how it impacted you? or how good the writing is? maybe some other criteria?

i'm very curious to learn what your approaches are :)