The Sword and Laser discussion

So I've just started it and mostly enjoying it... But if I have to hear the words 'Duval said' another 3 million times I may cut my ears off. It's beyond repetitive.

That's the problem with 'unabridged' audio. If the writer writes it, the reader has to read it.

It sounded repetitive, Amy said.

Tamahome wrote: "It sounded repetitive, Amy said."

+1 for Tamahome, Rob said.

All Scalzi books are like that. When you read the print, it's easy to overlook but it becomes painfully obvious in the audio. I also find it helps to speed it up to 2x when Wheaton narrates.

I enjoy him at normal speed. Then again, I don't like speeding up audio books at all.

To me, the repetition sounds rhythmic, like a poetry reading. I thought it was awkward at first but the plot of the story is also strange, so it seems to fit the experience of the whole thing. This is my second time listening to Weaton's reading of the story. Still funny the second time around.

"When" they make this into a movie, WW has to be Kerensky! I was cracking up through the whole drunken scene. I think he more than made up for the 'he said's, but especially in the beginning, it was really hard to take. Strangely, reading the text, I thought they kind of added to it, gave the narration a quality (to me at least) of being more down to earth. Sort of a "so I said to him!" gossipy quality, if that makes any sense.

That said, I don't think I was supposed to laugh so much during the third coda...Wheaton should definitely NOT play Jenkins' wife!

Deon wrote: ""When" they make this into a movie, WW has to be Kerensky! I was cracking up through the whole drunken scene. I think he more than made up for the 'he said's,"

I forgot to mention that in my review, but that part was awesome. He does a very good drunk voice.

I'd say Wheaton did a great job with this audiobook. I can ignore repeated 'Duval said' when the performance is top notch. It almost convinced me to listen to Boneshaker but I'm still not that interested in steampunk and/or zombies.

I'm in camp Wheaton. He hit this one on the screws.
As for dialogue attribution... He/she said tags are probably the best and cleanest way to identify the speaker. Especially when there are large groups of people. Obviously you'd like to see characters developed enough that their way of speech identifies them without the need for dialogue attribution but if it is needed, she/he said is the right way to do it.

"And since I'm already up on my soapbox, I hate adverbs in dialogue tags," he said angrily. "I hate"—a heavy fist slams down—"hate, hate adverbs."

Star Trek - Sparks McGee into Darkness - The Movie Trailer

I'm in Camp Wheaton as well. He and Scalzi are friends, and I could hear in his reading that he gets where Scalzi is coming from. I really like his work on "Agent to the Stars." Wheaton doesn't do much voice differentiation, but he has energy, and you gotta admit, the man can do sarcasm.

And there goes my Friday night. Haha

I may attract some hatred for this, but I really don't think that Scalzi and Wheaton are a good combination. I enjoyed the audiobook just fine, but frankly I would have enjoyed it much more with better voice talent.

Scalzi's dialog tends tends to be snarky, sarcastic, and two dimensional. Wheaton's default speaking style is all of these things, so we get a double dose when he's narrating a Scalzi book.

Being a long-time audiobook listener, I've become accustomed to voice actors who can really make each character sound different. This is not one of Wheaton's strong suits. All of his characters pretty much sound the same, even the women. This is made worse by Scalzi using pretty much the same dialog style for most of his characters. (I concede that Wil's drunk Kerensky was awesome! I could have listened to that all day).

I have similar feelings to the way Scalzi and Wheaton came together on Fuzzy Nation. It seems that Wil gets the call because he is a hero to the geek community, and not because of his voicing talents.

On the other hand, William Dufris does an excellent job reading the Old Man's War series. The written dialog really isn't any better, but it sounds better with skilled voice talent.

I couldn't agree more, Rick

Well said, Rick.

I can't comment on Wheaton, but I definitely agree with Rick about William Dufris. He is the reason I have not continued with the Old Man's War series: his narration of the first book is so excellent that it would feel wrong to experience the rest any other way, but the audible versions are not available in the UK. I only got the first one because amazon.com offered me a free audio book if I signed for a free trial of audible, and even then I had to be a tad economical with the truth! (don't tell :P) Now I long for the rest of the series. I really hope it becomes available in the UK soon.

I actually thought Dufris was a little dry on the sarcasm in Old Man's War. But yeah, Rick, I agree that Wheaton and Scalzi are both kinda goofy, so Wheaton reading his books can be too much of a good thing.

Deon wrote: ""When" they make this into a movie, WW has to be Kerensky! I was cracking up through the whole drunken scene. I think he more than made up for the 'he said's, but especially in the beginning, it ..."

YES. This so much.

Deon wrote: ""When" they make this into a movie, WW has to be Kerensky! I was cracking up through the whole drunken scene. I think he more than made up for the 'he said's, but especially in the beginning, it ..."

I reached that part this morning while driving to work by myself and i was absolutely cracking up.... i was wondering if other drivers thought i was crazy

I don't mind Wheaton narrating... coincidentally i just listened to ready player one, which he narrated as well and i found it to be ok... at normal speed...

i agree with the fact that there too much de said.. she said.. but this is my first Scalzi book

I guess you need the dialogue tags because all of the characters are so flat you'd forget who was speaking otherwise.

The man writes said way to often, audio or not, but it is just compounded in audio format. I was driven completely nuts by it. There are other ways to convey who is speaking, and Scalzi employed none of them. Mediocre writing at best.

You'd think that a decent editor could go through and fix the he said / she said insanity. I'm in favor of direct publishing and all, but editors do provide an important service.

terpkristin wrote: "All Scalzi books are like that. When you read the print, it's easy to overlook but it becomes painfully obvious in the audio. I also find it helps to speed it up to 2x when Wheaton narrates."

Listening to Wil Wheaton read this book put me off of any Wil Wheaton read book. The only emotion that Wheaton can convey is "Wil Wheaton trying to convey emotion".

He almost killed Ready Player One for me and pretty much ruined this book for me.

While I agree that Wheaton's character narration was very one-dimensional, I didn't really mind it here. Most of the characters were written with the same manner of speaking anyway, so the voice acting seemed to fit. Having spent 9 years in the Navy, a lot of military people share that sharp cynical way of speaking, so again, the one-dimensional tone of the characters worked for me.