Scan barcode
A review by isabellarobinson7
Lost in Time by A.G. Riddle
adventurous
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
Rating: 2 stars
Lost in Time was good, but it had obvious flaws. It was entertaining, it was never a chore to read, but it had major draw backs that kept it from being a "good book", in my eyes at least.
The premise was cool: in the future, there is a quantum physicist called Sam Anderson, and due to an unfortunate set of circumstances, his daughter is about to be wrongly arrested for murder with all the evidence needed to convict. So Sam decides to confess and go to jail in her place. But he doesn't go to jail. He goes to the dinosaur age (more on the "dinosaur" part of "dinosaur age" later). You see, by 2027 humanity has found a way to send people back in time, and it is used in place of the death penalty to send criminals 201,320,641 years in the past (why it is so specific, I have no idea). It is no secret that my Whovian-ass loves time travel - it was really the only reason I picked this book up - and that part of Lost in Time was quite good, but everything else let it down.
While the fact that this book was so fast paced made it compulsively readable, it was also what lead to one of its biggest issues: the characters. The pacing was so balls to the wall that there was very little time (bar the first few chapters) to get invested in the characters and their relationships. There was a major twist about halfway through (that I won't spoil) and we really needed to sit with this character and unpack the implications of this knowledge for the rest of the narrative to land emotionally. But the twist didn't feel legitimate for a very long period of time, all because we rushed through this important reaction. The character just accepted it and treated this life shattering, world altering event like it was just a Tuesday. Sure, we can guess they stewed and fretted about it for days, but all we actually see (i.e. all that is actually written) is them learning the information and spewing up (literally) in response, but then next page we skip forward in time and they have fully processed the information and are moving on with their goal. This was supposed to be the twistiest twist of all the twists! Outlander lady even even praises it in her author blurb on the front cover! And we don't even get to unpack the impact of this highly venerated twist in the actual book?! WHY WAS IT INCLUDED AT ALL THEN????!!!!!!
Along with the stunted characters, the writing could be a little on the weak side at times. This book is the king of only telling and refusing to do even a little bit of showing instead. This is a direct quote:
Lost in Time was good, but it had obvious flaws. It was entertaining, it was never a chore to read, but it had major draw backs that kept it from being a "good book", in my eyes at least.
The premise was cool: in the future, there is a quantum physicist called Sam Anderson, and due to an unfortunate set of circumstances, his daughter is about to be wrongly arrested for murder with all the evidence needed to convict. So Sam decides to confess and go to jail in her place. But he doesn't go to jail. He goes to the dinosaur age (more on the "dinosaur" part of "dinosaur age" later). You see, by 2027 humanity has found a way to send people back in time, and it is used in place of the death penalty to send criminals 201,320,641 years in the past (why it is so specific, I have no idea). It is no secret that my Whovian-ass loves time travel - it was really the only reason I picked this book up - and that part of Lost in Time was quite good, but everything else let it down.
While the fact that this book was so fast paced made it compulsively readable, it was also what lead to one of its biggest issues: the characters. The pacing was so balls to the wall that there was very little time (bar the first few chapters) to get invested in the characters and their relationships. There was a major twist about halfway through (that I won't spoil) and we really needed to sit with this character and unpack the implications of this knowledge for the rest of the narrative to land emotionally. But the twist didn't feel legitimate for a very long period of time, all because we rushed through this important reaction. The character just accepted it and treated this life shattering, world altering event like it was just a Tuesday. Sure, we can guess they stewed and fretted about it for days, but all we actually see (i.e. all that is actually written) is them learning the information and spewing up (literally) in response, but then next page we skip forward in time and they have fully processed the information and are moving on with their goal. This was supposed to be the twistiest twist of all the twists! Outlander lady even even praises it in her author blurb on the front cover! And we don't even get to unpack the impact of this highly venerated twist in the actual book?! WHY WAS IT INCLUDED AT ALL THEN????!!!!!!
Along with the stunted characters, the writing could be a little on the weak side at times. This book is the king of only telling and refusing to do even a little bit of showing instead. This is a direct quote:
"[Blank] studied her face and shook his head. 'I thought I was the hero. But it was you, all along. The price you paid. All those years you gave to this. Half your life. Most would've given up.' "
Well, no kidding! This is a pretty obvious conclusion to draw from the actions that have taken place! We don't need you to spell it out for us! This was hardly the only instance of this; it was a staple of this book's prose to overly explain and under demonstrate plot points and character beats. It did make everything move rather quickly, so maybe that was the intent all along, but sacrificing proper character development for speedy pacing is not a worthy trade in my eyes.
I don't know where to put this, but there was also a Star Trek joke, which I greatly appreciated, though you would think a Doctor Who joke would be more thematically appropriate, but I'll take what I can get.
Also, if anyone tells you that you should read this because you like Jurassic Park DO NOT LISTEN TO THEM. There are dinosaurs in the background and mentioned for the first half of the book, but then the narrative shifts and we do not hear about them. At all. I'm not exaggerating. I don't know all if this would be considered a spoiler, but I have receipts: the last appearance of a dinosaur in this book is in chapter 43 out of 80. There is no mention of them in the second half of the book at all. This is not Jurassic Park, regardless of what the marketing will tell you. To illustrate this point further, we "see" the first dinosaurs in chapter 17 and their appearances end at the aforementioned 43. Out of these 26 chapters, thirteen take place in dino time. That's thirteen chapters out of the entire book; barely 61 pages. Percentage wise, only 16.25% of chapters and just 13.53% of pages directly involve dinosaurs. PLUS, if you want to get really anal and overly granular, (which as it appears I do) most of the time spent in the Triassic is taken up by flash backs to the non-dino world! Did I spend way to long on those stats and made writing this review a weeks long project? YOU BET I DID.
For me the first half of this book was part Interstellar part Castaway (note: neither of these movies have dinosaurs in them- OK SHUT UP ABOUT THE DAMN DINOS NOW.) The second half I'm not going to get much into because of spoilers, but trust me when I say it was another book. Totally different tone, different atmosphere, different characters (effectively), different setting, almost a different world even (figuratively)... and I'm verging into major spoiler territory, so I better stop now. All I want to say is that it is a book of two very distinctive halves, and whether that is a good or bad thing is really up to interpretation.
All that being said, Lost in Time is the perfect popcorn read. I know it seems like I hated every minute of this book, and reading this review back I have kind of sort of maybe ripped it to shreds, but this is truly not the worst thing in the world. It is a perfectly serviceable thriller. The only thing I'm really mad about is the misleading marketing around thE STUPID DINOSAURS. I MEAN IT'S ALL OVER THE COVER AND I-