Rating: 
Summary: I cannot believe this book ever got printed
Review: Facile, predictable and badly written. This possibly the worst book I have ever read. A poorly educated teenager with a medical dictionary could have done a better job.
Rating:
Summary: Shock-ingly awful
Review: I have been a huge fan of Cook for a long time, but I probably won't pick up his next book. Shock was an absoultely appaling novel.There are so many things wrong with this book that it is difficult to know where to begin. I guess perhaps the compelte implausibility of the plot would be a start. I can't believe Cook thought anyone would buy this story. I have worked in human resource positions, and there are very few laboratories or clinics that would hire new employees without verifying Social Security numbers (I would say none do, but I'm sure I could be proven wrong). The ridiculous nature of the story simply continues from there. My second huge complaint is the dialogue, especially between the two graduate students at the center of the novel. I don't know any graduate students who talk in the stilted, superficial way these two characters do. What ever happened to spontaneity? Slang? CONJUNCTIONS???? The dialogue is horrid! I can't remember the last time I read something so uncreative. Finally, is the buzz I hear about a sequel true? God forbid! If a publisher has agreed to a sequel to this book, I won't feel sorry if they go under in the future. Editors and publishers are supposed to protect us from drivel like this, not inflict it upon us. DON'T read this book. Read one of Cook's earlier works, like Coma or Fever, even Toxin for that matter. You'll be much better off.
Rating:
Summary: It is Laverne & Shirley!!
Review: I should have listened to the reviewer who pegged this book as a lost episode of Laverne and Shirley.
The story line is weak, the characters have a mental age of about 9 and are driven to face danger without enough apparent motivation (sort of like robbing a bank for lunch money).
What drivel.
Avoid this book unless you get the audio book from the library and want a laugh while driving to work.
Rating:
Summary: A new low for Robin Cook
Review: I've read most of Robin Cook's earlier novels and enjoyed them immensely, despite his tendency to send protagonists on foolish, "Nancy Drew"-style amateur investigations. This one, sadly, is far below Cook's usual standard. If a lesser-known writer had produced this, it would never have been published.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most ineptly written books of all time
Review: I've read most of Robin Cook's earlier novels and enjoyed them immensely, despite his tendency to send protagonists on foolish, "Nancy Drew"-style amateur investigations. This one, sadly, is far below Cook's usual standard. If a lesser-known writer had produced this, it would never have been published.
Rating:
Summary: If only someone had warned me...
Review: I, unfortunately, am unable to just stop reading a book--no matter how bad it is. Shock was by far the worst reading experience I have ever had. Everyone here has pretty much summed it up, so I won't go into detail, but holy cow, this was an awful book. The fact that I read it all made it worse, and the fact that I read Oryx and Crake just before make it excruciating. Oy!!
Rating: 
Summary: This robin's nest should be cooked.
Review: Shock was terribly terribly sad. What a waste of trees. I can't believe that there is a supposedly sequel to this story that went from bad to worse and ended terribly. This was my second Robin Cook misfire. I will not repeat this mistake again. I'm sure there are people who enjoy his books, but I am not one of them. What a waste of time and energy. I love to read and was therefore gravely disappointed. :(
Rating:
Summary: One of the most ineptly written books of all time
Review: Simply put, this book should never have been published. (It ranks up--uhh, I mean DOWN--there with Patricia Cornwell's "Isle of Dogs" as an example of how a "name" author can churn out drek and and get it published. I realize that they have "quotas" of so many books per year they have to write, so quality is of little concern.) The dialogue lumbers and is completely unrealistic, for starters. "I guess we'll have to spoon," says one young woman when the two heroines get in a small car trunk. I stopped counting the number of times that one woman "rolled her eyes for the other's benefit." Just awful, awful, awful. And the more than abrupt ending leads one to think that we'll be faced with "Shock, Part II." Thank god I got this book from the public library and didn't spend any money. Sorry, Dr. Cook....I used to love your books, but no more. You--and your editor--should be ashamed for foisting this inane drivel upon your readers.
Rating:
Summary: Shock - ingly Bad!
Review: The title Cook gave this novel was "Shock". The title should have been "Laverne & Shirley Meet Dr. Frankenstein". If this novel was translated to the screen without major dialog modifications, I suggest it be done as a comedic farce. The female lead characters are at once Ph.D. candidates yet devoid of any common sense, planning ability or street smarts. At no time was this reader ever concerned about either heroine [the gene pool would have improved without these two ditzes in it]. The "menacing" staff at Wingate were uniformly two-dimensional and about as scary as last year's Halloween costumes. To make up for the stringy and fragile plot, Cook bores the reader incessantly with long-winded descriptions of barely relevant scene, building and equipment details. {A Reader's Digest condensed version of this novel would contain half the words without degrading this story.} I hadn't read a Cook novel for years and the contrast between this one and, for example, Coma is striking. Cook needs a new editor who will prod him to write well again or suggest he take a sabbatical or try a new career.
Rating:
Summary: Shock - ingly Bad!
Review: The title Cook gave this novel was "Shock". The title should have been "Laverne & Shirley Meet Dr. Frankenstein". If this novel was translated to the screen without major dialog modifications, I suggest it be done as a comedic farce. The female lead characters are at once Ph.D. candidates yet devoid of any common sense, planning ability or street smarts. At no time was this reader ever concerned about either heroine [the gene pool would have improved without these two ditzes in it]. The "menacing" staff at Wingate were uniformly two-dimensional and about as scary as last year's Halloween costumes. To make up for the stringy and fragile plot, Cook bores the reader incessantly with long-winded descriptions of barely relevant scene, building and equipment details. {A Reader's Digest condensed version of this novel would contain half the words without degrading this story.} I hadn't read a Cook novel for years and the contrast between this one and, for example, Coma is striking. Cook needs a new editor who will prod him to write well again or suggest he take a sabbatical or try a new career.
| 
