Customer Reviews

Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000

5 star:		(264)
4 star:		(60)
3 star:		(36)
2 star:		(28)
1 star:		(104)

 

 

The book is always fun to read. I've gone through it 3 times over 12 years. Each time I read it cover to cover, straight through. The style is deliberately over-the-top, and very humorous. Hubbard creates many outrageous scenes of high tension, bigger than life and melodramatic. It can't help but bring a smile to your face, as this book presents innumerable good vs. evil conflicts in the classic tradition.

The "Psychlos" are bumbling alien psychotics, so intent on guile and treachery they can't even grab a goo-food stick without provoking a knock down, drag out fight. Through sheer luck, they've stumbled upon technologies which empower them to rule most of the know universes (all 16 of them). The ponderous, overwhelming Psychlo bureaucracy, replete with the cruelest and pettiest, middle level paper pushers imaginable, sets up the perfect "evil empire" that Johnny Good Boy Tyler defeats at every turn, overcoming incredible odds and triumphing over treachery with intelligence, bravery, and unbelievable luck. The almost stereo-typical conflicts in the book are a basis for it's humor and entertainment value, given the author's talent for creating conflicts of epic, even galactic, proportions.

Although I normally read more intellectualy structured fiction, Hubbard somehow has the knack of creating an entertaining story that is fun to read despite it's intentionally low-brow approach. If you like funny, adventure/sci-fi, you will probably like this book a lot.

I liked this book more than the Hubbard "Dekaology". Battlefield Earth is pretty long, but generally holds my interest throughout. It's almost like (2) books, with an initial phase related just to earth, and a final phase, involving the 16 known universes. The Dekalogy in contrast had a lot of underlying bitterness, and was REALLY long, perhaps because Hubbard was near the end of his life, and his goal was to write the longest sci-fi book, not necessarily the best.

I can think of many "serious" sci-fi authors I prefer to L. Ron Hubbard, but I'm hard pressed to think of one who is more entertaining. I look at Battlefield Earth as equal parts Douglas Adams, Tom Swift, and Asimov. Hubbard is from the same generation of classic sci-fi authors as Heinlin, Clark, Asimov, et. al., but in Battlefield Earth, employs a more humorous and easy-going style, without the dated idealism and self-importance found in many older sci-fi classics.

This is one of the worst books I've ever read (though sadly, not the worst). If it's not too late for you (i.e., you haven't yet attempted a read), allow me to try to save you some pain. I suggest you skim through the reviews here on Amazon. Read the one star reviews, and consider. As for the five star reviews (and there aren't many between these two extremes), allow me to pull some choice quotes so that you don't have to strain through each one:

"Lovable characters, hatable baddies. You always know what to think of a character."

"The villains are really horrible - no bones about it. You just want to watch the hero wipe 'em all out, with no second thoughts. These elements are really pretty fairy-tale-ish. Most modern-day books don't have such black-and-white heroes and villains, and I found it a refreshing change."


"[...]it is not what ud call ground breaking[...]"

"It isn't very deep and is not meant to be."

"I noticed on some of the other reviews critism about a 'juvenile' writing style: I beg to differ - I find it's refreshing! I am as literate as anyone but when I read a story I like to read a story, not a jumble of often extraneous words or ponderous thoughts."

"Hubbard writes at an average 15 year-old reading level, which makes it slightly awkward, but the feeling of the novel can reach out to any aged reader. There are subtle points in the novel that are a little hard to notice and are quite ridiculous.[...]The story drags on a little long and you can get bored with it rather quickly if you're not interested in sci-fi before you read it."

"Granted the names of the characters and most of the events are absolutely ludicrous but Hubbard wrote it like that intentionally. It's a wonderful pulp sci-fi satire. And to those of you who think it's too far-fetched, it's sci-FICTION for god's sake."

"Admittedly, the science in this book is very weak. If you come to this book looking for a world that could actually happen... look somewhere else, you won't find it here.[...]If you are looking for a serious story, the light, cheesy narrative might turn you off."

"...the last 100 or so pages are not needed...who cares if its entirely impossible...since when does a FICTION novel have to be possible[...]"

"Don't read this looking for great literature."

"I actually like the hit on psychology at the end. It's a fake science at best!"

"i understand the bad reviews, you need to approach it with a tongue-in-check attitude."

"That said, there are some things about it that may turn off some people. Namely, some of the things in the book are incredibly cheesy.[...]Also, there are some rather poor stereotypes in this book."

"I thought that I would get tired of the cheesiness of some of the things in the book, like the names of things (Johnny Goodboy Tyler, the Basher Bash Your Way to Glory Battle Tank, etc.), but somehow it just didn't stop being fun. The only thing I disliked were a few minor plot holes."

"Some of the phrasing is a little odd, I get a sense that Hubbard was fumbling a bit as he tried to tell the story, and a few of the scientific issues I find somewhat suspect, but it's still a good read though quite long."

"Yes, it istrue that this book relies on rather tired cliches, (Johnny Tyler is good, the aliens are bad, aliens lose, humans triumph, etc.)[...]It won't change the way you like at the world, or even give you a deep emotional connection to the characters[...]"

"It is not a book if you want rich character development or profound social messages."

"It's definitely a 'guy' book, though, not as unisex as Tolkien's Lord of the Rings[...]"

"Read it for the sci-fi, not for any inner enlightenment as it's not there."

"Somewhere in my literary education I was imbued with a prejudice against 'popular literature,' and was taught to 'appreciate' the classics - Homer, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Jane Austen, Tolstoy, Balzac, Conrad, Henry James, James Joyce and so on.[...]And then I found and read Battlefield Earth! Oh, my goodness! I had to rethink my whole education![...]Here was a book that defied all my precepts of literature!"

"...yes, it defies 'proper' writting. Just because it's different doesn't make it bad.[...]To say the least, this book is unlike any novel you have ever read. Just because the book isn't full of useless literary techniques, and other things only English teachers would find, doesn't mean it's not good."

"[...]it's not the deepest Sci-Fi ever (Or even close)[...]"

"While there are many plot holes through the book and many inconsistencies in character development, including poor writing in parts, predictability of certain situations, etc. it is nonetheless a great read[...]"

"Although I normally read more intellectualy structured fiction, Hubbard somehow has the knack of creating an entertaining story that is fun to read despite it's intentionally low-brow approach."

"This book was not meant to be a 'deep' sci-fi novel like Asimov's and others."

"Its simplicity makes it intense."

"Who cares if he doesn't have verb agreement? Just read the books and enjoy them, stop dissecting them."

"Battlefield Earth isn't too subtle, and if you like your sci-fi 'deep' you might be a little turned off by BE."

"A no brainer to read."

These only represent the serious 5-star reviews, not the joke ones like:

"One of the most enlightening books I have read since Al Gore's Earth in the Balance. The movie is even better only Waterboy was more insightful."

(I'd also like to note the suspicious similarities between many of the five-star reviews, especially the early ones, usually short, written anonymously. Many compare the villain, Terl, to Darth Vader saying "Terl makes Darth Vader look like (fill in the blank)." No conspiracy theorist here, just saying...)

What I think you'll notice is that the 1-star and 5-star reviewers tend to agree on the basics: shallow characters, unbelievable plot, weak science, etc. It's just that one group cares about that sort of thing and the other does not. I know what camp I'm in; you decide where you stand.

I've never been able to make it more than half-way through this snooze-fest, so I won't attempt to review it. I would, however, like refute the opinion that this book has no connection to Scientology. At some point it is revealed that the reason that the Psychlos are so evil is because at birth, they have an aggression device (or something, who really cares) implanted in their brains by a sinister cabal of Psychlos called the Catrists. That's Psychlo Catrist. One of Scientology's main tenets is that the profession of psychiatry is evil and responsible for most of the evil and sickness in the world today (or something, who really cares). For those of you playing along at home, we have:
psychiatrist
Psychlo Catrist.
Please, stop the inanity.

I tried to read this book but could not finish it. Like all L. Ron Hubbard books, and those attributed to him by his followers, this one was not very good. Hubbard, and those who write in his name, do not seem to be able to tell a coherent story. They are always filled with absurd silly characters and even worse dialogue. One gets the feeling that Hubbard was one of those people who simply thought too much of his skills. When one becomes a religious icon, it's hard to edit the words they produce. All the words springing from the mind of such an individual are sacred aren't they? In Hubbrd's case, no. All of his works are in great need of editing. Though I must admit, this book in particular would have made an OK comic book. Maybe.

Erik

Ladies and gentlemen, I am perplexed. I can honestly say thatnever in my life have I ever truly loathed a book. .... An exhaustive tome about the opression and triumph ofthe human race, "Battlefield Earth," though grand in its design, falls remarkably short of its praise.

Hubbard's writing style is crude, repetative, and horribly unimaginative. His sentences are awkward and sometimes hard to understand - my sixth-grade English teacher would weep. Some say I put too much stock in descriptive writing, but I think good imagery is the cornerstone of any book. Everything in "Battlefield Earth" is mind-numbingly simple - the mountains are tall, the aliens are big, our hero is nice. Everything else is purple.

Much like his language, Hubbard's characters are one-dimensional. I suppose I should say two-dimensional, but that's giving them too much credit - flat is more interesting than these people. Good or bad, I don't care at all about anyone in this book. They are all left so undeveloped that even the main character could die and I wouldn't notice.

Hubbard is a very biased author. He wants the 'good guys' to win, and you can tell. Though the evil Psychlos are the ruling force of the universe, Hubbard stacks the deck so in favor of the humans that their inevitable victory is painfully obvious. The Psychlos are ridiculously stupid for having had conquered the universe, and the humans are remarkably clever for having been stuck in the Stone Age for 1000 years. It's the reader's job to root for the good guy, not the author's. Don't tell me to like a character, show me why I should like him or her.

All in all, I suppose Hubbard deserves one star for the sheer length of the book. After all, I've never published a 1000-page novel. But when that day comes, I'm taking my star back.

I had to force myself to get to the halfway point of the book. The concept of the story is a great one, but writen so poorly that leaves you saying "yeah! right!" every page.
Not only is the writing itself bad, but the fact that Hubbard is unimaginative in an attempt to make his story work. For example (this is my biggest irk about this story) our hero is made to learn the Alien's language with this machine that feeds information to your brain without having to do the hard part of learning. Okay, I can live with such a machine, but the fact that the Alien himself who is supposedly smart does not use that same machine to learn English while he ponders what his human "pet" is saying to others is beyond me. His attitude that he is too good to speak human is just one of those easy way out so Hubbard could make his story work.

Save yourself the headache of reading 1000 page drivel, and juse rent the movie, as it was just as bad as the book it came from. This is by far the worst book I have ever attempted to read.

Well after seeing that turkey of a movie Battlefield Earth and then reading cult member written reviews saying, "Oh the book is so much better" I decided to have a gander. I managed to 'grab' a copy of the eBook, and am happy at that because to pay money for this utter tripe is immoral as it will only add to the coffers of Hubbard's Scientology cult. The amount of 5 star reviews here had me at first expectant that the book would be good, but after the first page of this... monstrosity... I have no doubt that every positive review on this site is written by one of Hubbard's brainwashed followers. I have in my time read a great many books ranging from fantasy, to military history to science fiction, and I can quite confidently say that this is the worst book I have ever read.

First off we have Hubbard's introduction which has to be one of the most self-serving and self-centered pieces of text I have ever read. He seems to think he's some big time professional novelist and the man with the final word on what's real science fiction and what isn't, calling his book 'hard science fiction'. Well Mr. Hubbard keep on dreaming, because you sure aren't a professional level writer and this sure as hell is not 'hard science fiction. I simply cannot believe that this book is held as a 'science fiction classic', I was under the impression that for a story to be SF it had to at least have a grounding in reality, plausibility and science, this book totally lacks any of these attributes. Furthermore it reads as if a grade school student wrote it.

Trust me, if you have seen the movie and heard the pleas of Hubbard's devotees saying how much better the book is don't believe them, they are exactly the same with the movie just having less long winded content. You see just like the movie, the book requires you to take these enormous leaps of faith over absolutely gaping plot holes. We are expected to swallow that a bunch of cavemen, remnants of a human society who's high tech armies were destroyed by the Psychlos in 9 minutes, can somehow in such a short space of time bring about their liberation.

Along the way we have many oddities like the humans using 1000 year old flight simulators (where did they get the power to run them?) to learn how to fly 1000 year old Harrier jets (fuel and the restoration it would take to get these planes off of the ground are all totally negated) and somehow learning to use 1000 year old firearms to bring about the Psychlos doom. The only explanation for how they are able to achieve this is quite simply MAGIC there is no other plausible explanation offered in the book. The human characters themselves are painfully devoid of character, they are simply cardboard cut outs and the hero 'Johnny Goodboy Tyler' is just too perfect. The treatment of the female characters is painfully sexist and the racial stereotypes represent by alien races like the Chinkos (an obvious dig at the Chinese) is something I find totally unacceptable. It seems not only is Hubbard the whacked out leader of a ridiculous cult, he is also a sexist and racist bigot.

The Psychlos themselves are so retarded that you begin to wonder how they even managed to conquer earth in the first place. I mean you think that they'd realize after conquering these 'human-animals' who once had a technologically advanced civilization that a man could figure out how to pull the trigger on one of their guns, or how to organize resistance. But they don't, it totally takes them by surprise and the only explanation we have in the book is the Psychlo's arrogance.

The Editorial review of this book mentions that it includes no scientology, well I think this is very misleading, the book is jam packed with scientology propaganda. The Psychlos and the whole implantation thing with the 'Catrists' is so obviously an attack on psychologists who in scientology are held to be the root of all evil which exists in society. I wonder why Hubbard has such a store of hate against Psychologists? Maybe this hate was generated because a Psychologist told Hubbard that his whole idea to start this Scientology cult was ridiculous? Who knows, but I couldn't agree more, this guy and his cult are purely and utterly ridiculous.

It immensely distresses me to find that this piece of garbage is so popular, I guess it just shows how dumbed down society is these days when an all out assault on your intelligence like Battlefield Earth can be called 'classic science fiction'. Either that or it shows how deeply entrenched in society scientology is these days. Take your pick, I find both possibilities equally disturbing. If you want to read some classic SF go and get a copy of Day of the Triffids, 2001 A Space Odyssey or anything by Asimov, this book is quite simply the mucky bottom of the barrel.

In my opinion Battlefield Earth the book, and Battlefield Earth the movie go hand in hand as the worst piece of writing and the worst piece of cinema ever shoveled steaming under the nose of man kind. We should hold a global book burning bon fire where every copy of this utter filth is gathered and tossed into the flames to forever be removed from history, then we can dance around and sing in joy and maybe throw Hubbard himself in.

I refused to read L. Ron Hubbard long, long before I ever knew what Scientology was. I stumbled across some claptrap or other with his name on it, said "Awful" and went back to Bradbury, Asimov, Vonnegut and Heinlein. I tried to read this tome, I really did, but it was just terrible. Hubbard might have been really innovative in the 30s and 40s, but compared with the greats who have come after, he's nothing special. This particular work was, like everything else with his name on it, an overblown, confused, chaotic mass of STUFF--not one page of which made any sense. I gave it about six chapters and never did get hooked. If you want classic SF, spend your money on one of the great names of the genre. Shut your eyes and pick out a Robert Heinlein book. You will be much better satisfied.

If you like alien stuff, simple plots, long books with lots of action packed testoerone, this is a book for you.

If you prefer literature where characters are complex and well developed, and plots that are complex and unpredictable then you will want to pass on this one.

This novel was about action, aliens, and one-dimensional characters going on and on in (often ludicrous) conflict after conflict. On this level I was mildly entertained (I did bother to finish the book).

I was bored with the characters, especially Johnny Goodboy Tyler. At times I wanted him killed off just to end the misery. I was begging for a plot twist, for some simple element of intelligent story development. I have seen better writing from a ninth grader.

This was the first and very last book of Mr. Hubbard's that I will ever read.

In the prolog, the author brags about how he was known as one of the publisher's most prolific writers, moving from genre to genre as needed. I've been reading Fantasy and Sci-Fi for over 20 years and this is one of the weakest books I've picked up. The basic premise of the story is sound, but the author drones on and on clearly trying to fill pages. In many books, this is accomplished by building character definition and drawing the reader into a world that is crisp and inviting. However, several times in Battlefield the author drives the story to viable closure and then just restarts again in a new direction to fill more pages. I recommend you save yourself some time and choose a different author.