Take a photo of a barcode or cover
sunbean 's review for:
The False Prince
by Jennifer A. Nielsen
This was a good book, but suffered in my opinion because of its similarities to The Thief series by Megan Whalen Turner. Since it's one of my favorite series, it's hard to live up to it. Nielsen has great writing, but doesn't have the genius of Turner for turning a plot. There were no big surprises for me. Sage reminded me a lot of Eugenidies, but a bit less clever. However, he is likable and smart and vulnerable, and I will for sure be reading the rest of the series to find out his story.
Likes: Good character development. I liked Mott (who reminded me of Pol), and felt that the antagonist, Conner, had some layers to his story as well. I almost wish he could have become an ally, but he was far too ruthless. The plot was well imagined, but nothing new... again, it reminded me strongly of Turner's books.
Dislikes: All the secondary characters were interchangeable to me. At times they would seem ruthless, then capitulate. I think it was meant to add layers to the characters, seeing the good and bad sides, but the inconsistencies just made them seem like either one could have the other ones lines and it wouldn't have changed the story much. I also couldn't get a feel for the setting and world that Sage found himself in. What time period is it? Well, they use swords. And printed books, I'm assuming, since Conner had a large library. And they live in huge mansion castles. But I don't even know what times of year it was. The world building was minimal and it would have added more to the story to have a few basic details.
Over all there was a lot to like and keep the pages turning. Nothing I will probably read again, but not sorry I read it either.
Likes: Good character development. I liked Mott (who reminded me of Pol), and felt that the antagonist, Conner, had some layers to his story as well. I almost wish he could have become an ally, but he was far too ruthless. The plot was well imagined, but nothing new... again, it reminded me strongly of Turner's books.
Dislikes: All the secondary characters were interchangeable to me. At times they would seem ruthless, then capitulate. I think it was meant to add layers to the characters, seeing the good and bad sides, but the inconsistencies just made them seem like either one could have the other ones lines and it wouldn't have changed the story much. I also couldn't get a feel for the setting and world that Sage found himself in. What time period is it? Well, they use swords. And printed books, I'm assuming, since Conner had a large library. And they live in huge mansion castles. But I don't even know what times of year it was. The world building was minimal and it would have added more to the story to have a few basic details.
Over all there was a lot to like and keep the pages turning. Nothing I will probably read again, but not sorry I read it either.