Don't eat this Book by Morgan Spurlock.

This is basically his film, Super Size Me in book form. The premise of the film is that he eats nothing but McDonalds for 30 days, three meals a day. There are other rules he sticks to, but I don't want to give spoilers for the film or the book.

I have mixed feelings about this book. I found the content informative, such as the appendix showing which brands are owned by big tobacco corporations (though I'm not sure how far this extends outside America- I'm in the UK), and details of marketing strategies used to ensure children like going to these places- and indeed, how these tactics have been going on since the 1950's. The book discusses America's relationship with food, and how this is spreading accross the globe, along with school meals, and how McDonald's was critiscised for not allowing overweight people in their adverts.

However, and it's a big however, I found Spurlock's tone arrogant and sometimes childish. Yes, this is a heavily researched book, citing sceintific journals etc, but referring to "UpChuck E. Cheese" and "McCrap" really does his argument no good- in fact, it lessens it in my mind. I liked the film, but feel the book could have been better. I'd say this was worth a read if you're interested, as a source for further information, but if you didn't like the film I don't think you'll like this book.

The Last Continent by Terry Pratchett.

This book follows the "adventures" (or rather "attempts to not get killed") of inept Wizzard Rincewind on the strange continent of Fourecks (XXXX), which bears a stiking resemblance to Australia. Linked into this is is the attempt by the wizards of the Unseen University to find Rincewind, as only he knows the librarian's real name, needed to cure him of of a form of flu that has him changing into random items (all with a tell-tale covering of red fur). In typical wizard style they do this by going about things completely the wrong way, and putting the whole continent into danger.

This was Pratchett on fine form. I don't normally like books where Rincewind is a main character, as I find him annoying, but I got into this one easily and it kept me hooked. It was also fun seeing how many Australian references Pratchett can shoehorn into one book. Still, no worries, eh? ;)

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K Dick (which was later made into the film Blade Runner).

I can see why this book is considered a modern classic, and a seminal sci-fi work. Set in 1992 on an Earth decimated by nuclear war (World War Terminus), humans are encouraged to emigrate to colonies on other planets. One of their incentives is an android slave- completely lifelike. The problem is, some of these androids turn on their masters, which is where bounty hunter Rick Deckard steps in. His job is to "retire" the androids (or "andys"), but this is made difficult because they are so lifelike.I'd say this was a good comment on the nature of humanity, and it shows people questioning themselves. Androids can be given false memories of being born, and having a long life, so some characters begin to doubt themselves, and for some you're not sure unless you keep reading.Definately recommended! I'm going to have to watch Blade Runner at some point now, to see how well it translates to film.

NOTE: I looked this up on Amazon to double-check something, and apparently the version I read (SF Masterowrks) isn't the full text. Can anyone confirm this? Are all the books in the series edited like this? I'm asking because I read I am Legend last year in this series. If it's true I'm a bit disappointed, and will try and get the full versions.

It, by Stephen King.

Plot: In 1958, seven children are pulled together through either fate or circumstance, and fight the unspeakable evil that lurks in their town, an evil which takes children, including one of their brothers. Twenty-seven years later they are called back to the town to face the evil once again...

This was a ...chunky book to say the least (my paperback copy was over 1100 pages long). I did find at some points that the plot got a little bogged down in the detail (it worked sometimes for suspense, but not always). As the climax approached however, the plot swapped between past an present in a way that really moved the story along. From the King books I have read I would say this is pretty typical (although I haven't read any of his newer books), by that I mean it's psychological, with the occasional burst of gore. The idea of It preying on fears, and being tuned into those fears is a good one, and the notion of people choosing not to see what is happening under their noses is sadly something that happens in real life. I won't be reading the book again any time soon, but that's not saying it's bad. It was well written and did grip me. For those who have seen the TV movie they made in the 90's, I would suggest reading the book if you haven't already, as the ending of the movie is rushed. The book is better in that respect.

Can anyone explain the "floating" thing- is it to do with the dead? Also, why Bob Gray? It seems strange that It personified itself in such a way, I can understand the clown, which is both friendly and scary at the same time, but not why he chose that name.