Tony

Oh my. I'm not a fan of Stephen Baxter's writing, and this series has convinced me to never again read a collaboration between a legendary and a lesser author, unless I already like the work of the lesser author on its own. I'm ashamed to admit I speed read parts of the book, that was how bad it was. Take my review with a grain of salt because it might not be impartial.

If you're reading the review of the third book, I'm confident to speak about things that might be spoilers. If you haven't read the previous two books, please don't read further unless you don't mind mild spoilers.

So, where do I start? Space Odyssey was a great trilogy, and I naively expected Time Odyssey to be another trilogy. What a fool I was, this is written to make a long series and thus no concrete answers were gained.

First, the science part of scifi feels off. The previous book made more sense, in this AIs vary wildly its hardware requirements, contradicting their massive needs stated on the second book; solar sails become combat ships; and a few other nitpicks.

Second, the plot moves glacially, dragging its feet with unnecessary frequent descriptions of clothing, environment, climate, buildings, people, etc., only to forget about it almost immediately. Authors get paid by the word, I get it, but I don't enjoy when words are there without purpose.

Third, plot holes made evident by the books themselves. For example, it was discovered that Mars suffered the same fate as Earth, Sunstorm and later Q bomb, yet the Mars of Mir seems to be timesliced during the Q Bomb, while Mir was timesliced before the Sunstorm. Why? Because that Martian is there to implausibly save the day, that's why. If her Mars was before the Sunstorm, she wouldn't be of use.

Fourth, the twin narration of Mir and Earth's timelines is done by alternating a chapter on Mir and a chapter on Earth. This come and go can become jarring because the final chapters are short and surprisingly bereft of content.

In conclusion: this series is not Arthur C. Clarke's Space Odyssey trilogy, it should be thought as an independent work by Stephen Baxter, related only by accident.

After having read [b:Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World's Most Wanted Hacker 10256723 Ghost in the Wires My Adventures as the World's Most Wanted Hacker Kevin D. Mitnick https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1344265017s/10256723.jpg 15156997]. this book was missing details about how he managed to pull his scams off, and this is the main reason of my bad review.I was interested in finding how he did what he did, but the book reads more like a novel than a biography. It just glosses over numerous important details, which makes many incidents seem implausible. I was glad when I read the last page, because by then I felt I was wasting my time.

Continuing from [b:Time's Eye 64936 Time's Eye (A Time Odyssey, #1) Arthur C. Clarke https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388208559s/64936.jpg 1524294], but loosely. A different setting and only one character in common with the first, so it could be read on its own; but don't because you need the first anyway to make full sense of the third. My review of the first book.Should you read this? Yes if at least one of these is true:- You understand Clarke's name sells, but not guarantees actual Clarke writing.- You like other Stephen Baxter's books he's written solo.- You enjoy natural disaster novels because that's what this book mostly is.This is a welcome change from the first book, as it includes more science fiction. Like Space Odyssey, it happens in our not-so-distant future, yet we get to see how satisfyingly far technology has advanced.Its most glaring fault is that the whole book resolves a single plot point. Granted, it's a very significant plot point, but it becomes tiring because a book a third of the length would have sufficed, and the ballooning prose becomes an unnecessary delay. Nevertheless, it's better than the previous book.Nitpick: I consider a bad sign when authors sprinkle scifi pop culture references. At least here it's done sparingly.