Brian S
All novels in this genre require some suspension of disbelief, but this one required just a bit more. Jack Carpenter was given clues at such a prodigious rate, it was hard to believe. Even so, the characters were good enough to keep me reading. I'll give the next in the series a shot.
Great as always
I've read every book in the series, and Taylor Anderson has stayed true to form with River of Bones. It's a great read.
I hope there's more
While this would be a suitable series end, I hope it's not. Even if it's a sort of spinoff, I'd like more.
As good as the first.
As good as the first. I hope the author keeps it up on the next in the series. I'll be buying it.
Easily the most surprising book I've read in a long time. I expected maybe some sort of campy Groundhog Day storyline writ large–“Groundhog Life” if you will. But this was so much more.
I'm not even sure I can put into words how good this book is. It was alternately hopeful and heartbreaking. And by the end, it was hopeful and heartbreaking all at once.
I'm glad I finally got around to reading it.
As good as ever
Anderson's latest in the Destroyermen series is s good as ever. While some may want more detail about the entire scope of the war, the focus on a single theater lent itself well to a tightly packed story.
One again, the clues seemed to come too easily for the main character. Everything just seems to fall into his lap. Not that it's a bad story, it's just too convenient.
Very procedural police thriller, but even so, a good book with a good storyline. Nothing extraordinary about this book except for the characters. If they were anything less than exceptional, this book might have been boring.
So not how I wanted this story to go, but... Could it really go any other way? I felt all of it, and that's enough for me to say it's an amazing 5-star bookl
A good story in the hands of a poor writer
The story was good. It had an excellent premise and enough action to keep it moving. But the writing itself is error prone, repetitive, and badly in need of an editor. It would also help if the author learned the difference between “to,” “too,” and “two.”
Often rambling. Would have been nice if more time was spent on Joyce, and the interesting events of the last 50 or so pages.
A good premise and a plot that moves
The premise was interesting and the story was written well, keeping the plot moving at all times. I recommend it.
A bit slow to start
The story was a bit of a slow starter, but picked up its pace. Seems to have set up an interesting premise to build on.
The weakest of the Quinn Colson series to date. Just plain uninteresting characters and a mystery villain that had no mystery at all.
I can't put my finger on why, but this was not quite as filling as others in the series. As I read it on an e-reader, I did not know how far along in the book I was. So the end came as quite the unpleasant surprise. It ended... without much happening.
This book was basically several short stories strung together. It did a surprisingly good job of introducing a new main character for what I assume will be a series.
What can I say? It's got a tiny bit of good stuff, where the plot seems to advance. But in the end, it's typical David R George III.
I'm beginning to think that this man has no idea what it means to advance a plot. Either that, or he has no idea how to write a plot which encompasses only a single book.
This novel is basically a sequel to Revelation And Dust, which was itself an awful, unfinished piece of literature. And you know, DRG3 is consistent, because this is also an awful, unfinished piece of literature.
If it wasn't for the fact that I'm a big fan of TrekLit, I would never pick up another novel by David R George III. But since I am, I guess I'll continue to hold my nose and read this hack's work, because for whatever reason, The Powers That Be seem to continue to give him contracts to write in this universe.
I find all the 5-star reviews for The Artifact to be highly suspect. This is, quite simply, the most poorly written novel I have ever read.
How bad is the writing? Think of as many examples of poor writing as you can. I'll wait.
That's not enough. Think of more.
The author has exhibited every one of those. Repeatedly.
An example:
Most of the book is written in the first-person. At one point, the author forgot that they were writing from that perspective, between sentences in a conversation, making it appear as though the protagonist is talking to himself.
There are so many instances of near non-sequitors driving the plot. Middle of a conversation, suddenly they're talking about and doing something else.
The characters are paper-thin. There is no conflict. Even during potential genocide, they just go with the flow. Stuff happens, and they just move on to the next conversation.
I have to imagine the protagonist is an avatar of the author. If I had to guess, judging by the protagonist's interaction and the author's use of female characters, the author had never had a girlfriend, or even a close female friend. The author has probably never had a job. The author has probably never met anyone in the government or military.
Simply put, it just seems like the author has no life experience, no ability to imagine it, and has done no research to fill in any knowledge gaps.
There's an idea for a fun story. But the author doesn't have the chops to tell it.
The only reason I didn't give this 5-stars is because it's sometimes “light” on detail / nuance. The writing is very functional.
