Just finished Leviathan Wakes

[Berserk Mecha]

So I just finished Leviathan Wakes. (The first of the Expanse books.) Now I'm wondering if I should read the next book or watch the show. I though that Leviathan Wakes was... okay. Not great or bad, just... okay. I like the hard gritty sci-fi setting and the protomolecule was appropriately creepy but nothing really stood out to me. I though that most of the characters were a little flat. Holden and Miller are fine as protagonists but I wasn't really invested in the idealist vs pessimist dynamic that they had between them. And Miller's fascination with Julie was bordering on stalker territory and I couldn't tell if this was intended by the authors or not.

So my question to the playground is this: Do the books get better or more interesting? Does the TV show do something new with the source material or is it just the books on screen? I've heard folks go on about this series and it's been getting some hype lately so I'm curious to know if it's just not my thing or if I'm missing out on something.

Oh, and try not to get too spoiler-y. Thanks.

[Dragonus45]

So I will say yes, the books get much much better, but I loved the first session one and I love the series overall so my opinion might be a little suspect. I will say though that yes Miller was meant to be a little off putting with his obsession. Although Julie herself wasn’t even really what he was obsessed with and instead finding her had become a stand in for fixing all the other things that had gone wrong over the course of his life.

[Gallowglass]

I think the Expanse is one of the rare instances where both the book series AND TV series are exceptionally good.

IMO, the book series DOES get better. The writing tightens and the characters blossom a bit, although some of that is probably from emotional investment we as reader invest in them.

The TV series is fantastic. My only reservation on recommending it is that the show often "shows without telling" certain facets that can leave the viewer perplexed as to what is going on bereft of an easy narrative explaining it.

Granted, this is something a lot of people have been asking for shows to do for a long time. Stop hand-holding the viewer, trust in their ability to understand what is happening without it being expressly explained. So I can hardly complain about it.

The show will always have a spot on "best sci fi space show" lists for me because they handle the physics of space travel, space battles and life in space far better than anything I've ever seen before.

[Palanan]

I've been wondering the same questions as the OP. I loved the first three seasons of the show (although Season One was very slow-moving) and I weep and gnash that I don't have access to the subsequent seasons.

I've wondered about the books for years, but when I cracked one open it didn't really grab me. I've become wary of starting big series, but given the endorsements thus far I might give it another try.

[Dragonus45]

So without getting into any spoilers but spoilering anyways for safeties sake: the Two Big differences between the show and books are Avsarala, not a real change about her character or anything just that if they had her talk in the show like she talks in the books it would be ten solid minutes of beeping interposed with the occasional adjective, and the show somewhat necessarily compresses events compared to the books which can have up to a few years or so between them and it makes for a very different tone that I think makes the books superior in a lot of ways.

[Trafalgar]

I am usually that guy at the party who says things like "Yeah, the movie was pretty good but the book is soooooo much better" but I liked the TV series better than the books. All the characters are much better developed in series, in particular Amos, Naomi, Drummer, Avarsala. One of my complaints about the book is that James Holden's character is rather boring. He is fleshed out better in the series.

A character you probably haven't encountered yet is Ashford. He is a pretty lame, 2 dimensional charater in the books but is awesome in the series. My favorite performance by David Strathairn by far.

[Berserk Mecha]

Does the TV show adapt the books at a pace of one season per book? Like Game of Thrones' early seasons? Because it that's the case then I'm thinking that I'll watch the first season of the Expanse. Then I'll decide if I want to continue with the books or the show from there.

[Trafalgar]

Does the TV show adapt the books at a pace of one season per book? Like Game of Thrones' early seasons? Because it that's the case then I'm thinking that I'll watch the first season of the Expanse. Then I'll decide if I want to continue with the books or the show from there.

As I recall, Book 1 lines up roughly with season 1 and the first half of season 2. Book 2 is roughly the last half of season 2 to the first half of season 3. Book 3 is last half of Season 3. If I have one complaint about the first 3 seasons of Expanse, it is that Season 3 feels rushed. It's likely because SciFi channel knew they were cancelling the series at that point.

[Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins]

It might be interesting to note that season 1 of the show also adds Earth political plot scenes, which do not appear in the book. In places it adds additional context to events (and introduces Avasarala, since she's important in later books).

The show has compressed more and more of the story as time has gone on, or this would be a rare instance of neither media form being superior.

[Joran]

So I just finished Leviathan Wakes. (The first of the Expanse books.) Now I'm wondering if I should read the next book or watch the show. I though that Leviathan Wakes was... okay. Not great or bad, just... okay. I like the hard gritty sci-fi setting and the protomolecule was appropriately creepy but nothing really stood out to me. I though that most of the characters were a little flat. Holden and Miller are fine as protagonists but I wasn't really invested in the idealist vs pessimist dynamic that they had between them. And Miller's fascination with Julie was bordering on stalker territory and I couldn't tell if this was intended by the authors or not.

So my question to the playground is this: Do the books get better or more interesting? Does the TV show do something new with the source material or is it just the books on screen? I've heard folks go on about this series and it's been getting some hype lately so I'm curious to know if it's just not my thing or if I'm missing out on something.

Oh, and try not to get too spoiler-y. Thanks.

The books get better and more interesting; one interesting thing about the books are they're different tonally. The first book is a hardboiled detective story, second is a political thriller, the third book is a haunted house story, the fourth is a Western.

I'd recommend you give book 2 a try; if you enjoy it then you should continue.

The TV show is a faithful adaptation of the books; the two authors are writers on the show, so they have a big voice in making sure the TV show matches their vision. It adheres 85-90% plotwise to the novels, but the main difference is the cast of characters and how they're pulled into the show. Avasarala is introduced in Season 1 of the show and is featured throughout the show, but she's only an occasional point-of-view character in the books. Another character, Camina Drummer, is introduced in the show Season 2, but is the amalgam of at least 4 different characters.

Because they occasionally divert from the books, it's still exciting for book readers because we have a large sketch of where the series is going, but still questions about the well-being of any particular character.