Fans of Daphne du Maurier will appreciate this varied and engaging collection of nine "twisted" short stories. Some stories are better than others, but who cares when it's a short read? All demonstrate du Maurier's unique ability to capture the atmosphere of her settings. Included in this collection is the chilling original story "The Birds", which I especially enjoyed reading, having seen the Hitchcock movie several times. Another favorite was the at times hilarious "The Blue Lenses". Overall, this was a very fun book!

I read Rebecca and adored it - the subtle darkness and drama, the nuances that one only picked up on the second and third readings, the intense yet always likeable characters, the delectable prose...

I hardly even glanced at "Parasites" when I bought it (thankfully, I only spent a dollar at a used bookstore) and eagerly sat down to read it. Two hours later I tossed down the book, feeling depressed and cynical about humanity in general.

This books follows the lives of three siblings, the children of equally self-absorbed actors, who are "parasites." Each one has the capacity for greatness, given their respective talents, but each wastes them on cheap, unnoticeable books, music, and stage plays.

If you're a fan of flashbacks you might like this - their lives in the 20s to 40s are covered over a massive number of pages, after a look at them in the "present" day. But this book hadn't DuMaurier's other books' sparkling prose and intense dialogue, or any of the spinetingling atmosphere that sucks you in.

It also wasn't helped by the fact that the main characters ARE parasites, living off whoever they are nearby. Their whininess and complaints augmented their selfish personas. I spent much of the book wanting to slap them. There don't really seem to be ANY likeable characters, and while I didn't expect the ending, I felt even more depressed when I read what one of the characters did.

I advise you to read "Rebecca" or "Jamaica Inn" for a first book. Had this been my first Du Maurier book, there would have been no second.

It is an interesting story that follows the lives of three siblings. I was constantly hoping for something exciting or suspenseful to happen (like most of Daphne's books), but nothing really did. It had a somewhat surprising ending, but by then I didn't care anymore.

I have to agree with the other reviewer that this book lacked suspense and dark mystery that I found in some of du Maurier's other books. But, I found myself completely involved and interested in the lives of the three siblings. If you enjoy reading period pieces(this one ranging from the 1920's until the late 40's)and reading indepth portrayals of individuals, you will like this book.

This is some of the most famous stories that he has gathered. Famous writers like Poe, Dickens and Wilde... In my oppinion this book is just as many others of this sort. They have the almost the same stories in every book. And after some of them you get pretty tired of them. I didn't like it at all, but i Know that some of you will.

I don't understand why sequels to brilliant novels are written long after the original author's death. They all fail miserably, yet continue to get published. Mrs. DeWinter might very well be the worst of the lot, with no character development, no plot, and absolutely NO point. Nothing is resolved, except the solution of who burned down Manderley, which was better left unknown. Susan Hill rambles on and on about nothing. The book is extremely boring and way OVERLONG and took me weeks to finish. I was so glad to finally be able to put the book away. Fans of Rebecca should not waste their time reading this garbage. Nothing in the book makes sense, from the narrarator's actions to Mrs. Danvers living down the street, to why Maxim has become so annoying and childish. The last page is the only decent one in the book. Save your time and money, this book was better left never being written.

The novel, Mrs. De Winter, was a very good effort on trying to copy Daphne Du Murier's origional story, Rebecca, but failed as far as character developement and style. Susan Hill is a very good writer as a general rule, however, I did not like the sudden change in character. Suddenly, Maxim De Winter becomes rude and arrogant and once in the novel, the narrator (who remains unnamed in this as well) suddenly comes out of her shy coma to reveal a pillar of power to Mrs. Danvers. It is only shown once in the entire novel and just doesn't fit. Also, Susan Miller has tried to recreate the feel of the thirties, but the plot is changed so much with the De Winters buying a new house. Finally, the book was very predictable with coincidences. This made the story very boring to read because you always seemed to know that when Mr. or Mrs. De Winter finally get settled again, something terrible happens. If Miller had written this as a seperate novel from Rebecca, it would have been much better.

"Mrs. De Winter" was so much better than "Rebecca," in my opinion. I found the writing in "Rebecca" very dreary and long, while "Mrs. De Winter" was more upbeat, in a monotone sort of way. The plot is not a thick one, but just sums up the life the de Winter's led after the incidents at Manderly. The ending is rather abrupt, but yet, not uncalled for. I really don't understand why people did not appreciate this book. Hill did a very good job continuing where du Maurier left off. I recommend.