Scan barcode
A review by ragne
Preserving Hope by Alex Albrinck
2.0
While the first book was kind of interesting, and things happened, albeit in a clumsy, staccato way, this is just worse.
The characters are not believable, the progression the same. The conversations, such as thy are, are not natural.
The author doesn't seem to remember what he wrote ten pages back, or even ten sentences. There's less focus on the story and character development that detailed, confusing descriptions of the main character's "inventions". (Read more about these in my review of the third book. Yes, I read the third. No, I don't know why.)
The author shows no knowledge of architecture, society, or really anything at all, of the era. It's baffling that they wrote these books without ANY research. I mean, did he just watch "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" - and not even all of that as that film actually happens to be correct at times - and think they knew enough?
It's just frustrating. The story has so much potential, if only the story and the characters were the important parts.
So, two stars, because the idea deserves one star, and I can't give zero for the execution.
The characters are not believable, the progression the same. The conversations, such as thy are, are not natural.
The author doesn't seem to remember what he wrote ten pages back, or even ten sentences. There's less focus on the story and character development that detailed, confusing descriptions of the main character's "inventions". (Read more about these in my review of the third book. Yes, I read the third. No, I don't know why.)
The author shows no knowledge of architecture, society, or really anything at all, of the era. It's baffling that they wrote these books without ANY research. I mean, did he just watch "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" - and not even all of that as that film actually happens to be correct at times - and think they knew enough?
It's just frustrating. The story has so much potential, if only the story and the characters were the important parts.
So, two stars, because the idea deserves one star, and I can't give zero for the execution.