dealspride and prejudice and zombies deluxe edition…

17
vote-for2vote-against

Has anyone read this? Is it the same book with some adaptations to include zombies at opportune times or did the author completely rewrite it?

vote-for2vote-against

@bam2379: I've glanced at it in the bookstore and seem to remember familiar passages along with added zombie weirdness. I know that doesn't help much. Let me put it this way, you'll enjoy this version much better if you've read the original.

vote-for1vote-against

Whereas it's been a while since I read the original, I believe this follows the original's main plot lines fairly well. I can say it was a very enjoyable read irregardless of exactly how true it stayed to Austen.

Actually, I think I may go re-read it.

vote-for2vote-against

The book is Pride and Prejudice with certain passages and phrases re-written to indicate the girls' prowess at defense against zombies and to accommodate Jane Austen's England in which a plague of Zombies has occurred. Other than the zombies, the book is very true to the originals, with a few surprises. I'd say the book os between 85% and 95% original Austen.
Quite worth a read for a fan of Austen and zombies, or someone who has seen one of the movies and wants a good laugh or five.

vote-for1vote-against

I have it, and enjoyed it alot, make sure to read to the "readers discussion" in the back, it's very lulzy. What is the "deluxe edition" though?

vote-for1vote-against

I second vati's statement. I read and enjoyed it, after reading the original Austen a few times. I agree that action sequences are added, some plot points are changed a bit to allow continued zombiness. I read the "regular" paperback, and looks from fellow plane passengers alone were totally worth it.

vote-for1vote-against

@bam2379: the former. He's done it with a few other books, but for whatever reason, this one became very popular.

vote-for3vote-against

@shadowkhai: irregardless =/= a word, by the way. In a forum discussing literature, I think proper grammar and punctuation should be followed sans neologisms. :D

vote-for1vote-against

Even the addition of zombies can't save you from Austen's yawn inducing writing. Great ink illustrations though.

vote-for0vote-against

Just finished reading this. It's a great book..identical to the original except with a few carefully inserted changes. Granted it isn't enough to make the casual reader any more friendly to Austen's horrendously boring story, but almost.

vote-for1vote-against

This is available as a free ebook. Just downloaded it today. Check out Barnes & Noble's web site.

vote-for4vote-against

@kylemittskus: =/= is not a symbol, by the way. != or <> would have been better choices, but after the fuss you made about grammar and punctuation, you really should have gone with "is not."

vote-for1vote-against

@lavikinga and @kylemittskus: Thanks for all the input on this. I have been on the fence after seeing this at the book store a few times. I think you have convinced me to read it.

vote-for1vote-against

@bam2379: You're mightily welcome. I'm waiting until the leaves turn and the cool Fall weather sets in. October and Halloween always put me in the mood for a bit of amusing macabre.

vote-for1vote-against

It's apparently still available for free to anyone with download capability. This URL presents the first of five pages of free downloads: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/cdsii/cdsPageTransfer.asp?r=1&r=1&uid=379001668&key=Free-eBooks&IF=N&cm_mmc=dealnews-_-k54384-_-j32187428-_-Free%20eBooks

If that doesn't work, just go to the barnes & noble web site (www.bn.com) and enter "free" (minus the quotation marks) in the search box.

With five pages of free downloads, there's bound to be something for everyone to read.

vote-for1vote-against

@kylemittskus: According to Merriam-Webster, it is indeed a word. Its just far from being generally accepted.

"Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless

vote-for1vote-against

@bobdoleman: Thanks for the assist whilst I was away from the interwebs.

I can use whilst right?

vote-for1vote-against

does anyone know what the difference is between the regular and the deluxe edition?

vote-for1vote-against

@mattiasa: I went back to the B&N reader, loaded up the book, and found out that you're right. Only the first chapter is there. So, I checked the other books I had selected and found that half of them were in the same state. So, I can choose to look at this as B&N screwed me, or B&N was only half as generous as I expected. It's easier (for me) to take the second position.