Here it is:
![[http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/519Y84GKGEL.jpg]](http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/519Y84GKGEL.jpg "http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/519Y84GKGEL.jpg")
(this is a Hermione dies type thing so don't complain if I ruined the ending for you)
Mortal Engines is a book that takes place in a postapocalyptic steampunk universe where the people of today all nuked ourselves to death and they had to start civilization over. Now, all the cities in the world are mobile, and they roll around trying to "eat" each other in a process they call "municipal darwinism." People who believe cities should go back to the way they used to be are called "anti-tractionists" and treated much like Communists during the Red Scare.
Now, that's an amusing concept. But beyond explaining the mechanics of it, how the cities assimilate each other's populations and cut their victims into scrap metal, the author does little to flesh it out. The book is mostly focused around the adventures of 15 year old Tom.
Tom is such a generic caricature of an old childrens' book protagonist (think Huck Finn) that at first I assumed the book was written in the sixties or seventies. The writing style also seemed to indicate this. But no! It was first published in 2001. WHAT
After being betrayed by his hero (whose daughter Tom is "in love" with), Tom is ejected from his home city of London and starts having an adventure, meeting up with a colorful cast of utterly hackneyed characters. I compared him to Huck Finn before, and there's a similarity here as well because the first two thirds of the book involve him and his deformed girl sidekick repeatedly befriending and/or getting captured by various people or groups. At one point they even get kidnapped by pirates. Throughout all this they're chased by an emaciated cyborg called a "stalker" (I know).
The thing about all this is that you can hear the plot devices audibly falling into place. They're about to get killed by the stalker, then he gets run over by a city. Then they're about to get killed by pirates, and the stalker comes back (because getting run over would be too easy in this sort of book) and kills the pirates. Hooray.
The funny thing about this book is that he sort of builds conflicts, hackneyed though they are, into the characters. The stalker is really in love with the girl he is supposed to kill, the main character is growing close to the same girl who is his sidekick but he is still "in love" with the villain's daughter, who is back at the city and is falling in love with someone else. OH MY GOD LOVE QUADRANGLE. But every time the author seems to lay all the elements in place for a perfect cliche, and you're so sure you know how he's going to resolve it...he just kills off characters until there's no problem anymore.
The book is also filled with hamfisted attempts at political commentary, which apparently make the kids reading the book feel sophisticated. It presents such radical concepts as "nuclear weapons are dangerous!" and "sometimes, criminals aren't really bad people deep down inside!" and "you shouldn't stereotype people!"
Anyway, at the end of the book pretty much everyone dies, including the entire city of London. There are three sequels--presumably they all end with all the characters dying too. I don't trust you anymore, Philip Reeve.
So this is apparently a "childrens' book" which could explain why it sucked so bad. I would recommend Harry Potter over this. Unless you like reading books where all the characters are stereotypes and then get brutally killed at the end.
(this is a Hermione dies type thing so don't complain if I ruined the ending for you)
Mortal Engines is a book that takes place in a postapocalyptic steampunk universe where the people of today all nuked ourselves to death and they had to start civilization over. Now, all the cities in the world are mobile, and they roll around trying to "eat" each other in a process they call "municipal darwinism." People who believe cities should go back to the way they used to be are called "anti-tractionists" and treated much like Communists during the Red Scare.
Now, that's an amusing concept. But beyond explaining the mechanics of it, how the cities assimilate each other's populations and cut their victims into scrap metal, the author does little to flesh it out. The book is mostly focused around the adventures of 15 year old Tom.
Tom is such a generic caricature of an old childrens' book protagonist (think Huck Finn) that at first I assumed the book was written in the sixties or seventies. The writing style also seemed to indicate this. But no! It was first published in 2001. WHAT
After being betrayed by his hero (whose daughter Tom is "in love" with), Tom is ejected from his home city of London and starts having an adventure, meeting up with a colorful cast of utterly hackneyed characters. I compared him to Huck Finn before, and there's a similarity here as well because the first two thirds of the book involve him and his deformed girl sidekick repeatedly befriending and/or getting captured by various people or groups. At one point they even get kidnapped by pirates. Throughout all this they're chased by an emaciated cyborg called a "stalker" (I know).
The thing about all this is that you can hear the plot devices audibly falling into place. They're about to get killed by the stalker, then he gets run over by a city. Then they're about to get killed by pirates, and the stalker comes back (because getting run over would be too easy in this sort of book) and kills the pirates. Hooray.
The funny thing about this book is that he sort of builds conflicts, hackneyed though they are, into the characters. The stalker is really in love with the girl he is supposed to kill, the main character is growing close to the same girl who is his sidekick but he is still "in love" with the villain's daughter, who is back at the city and is falling in love with someone else. OH MY GOD LOVE QUADRANGLE. But every time the author seems to lay all the elements in place for a perfect cliche, and you're so sure you know how he's going to resolve it...he just kills off characters until there's no problem anymore.
The book is also filled with hamfisted attempts at political commentary, which apparently make the kids reading the book feel sophisticated. It presents such radical concepts as "nuclear weapons are dangerous!" and "sometimes, criminals aren't really bad people deep down inside!" and "you shouldn't stereotype people!"
Anyway, at the end of the book pretty much everyone dies, including the entire city of London. There are three sequels--presumably they all end with all the characters dying too. I don't trust you anymore, Philip Reeve.
So this is apparently a "childrens' book" which could explain why it sucked so bad. I would recommend Harry Potter over this. Unless you like reading books where all the characters are stereotypes and then get brutally killed at the end.
