I found Rosalie B’s review of The Hunger Games to be a far cry from a satisfying book review. On the contrary, it was disconnected and contradictory, and it left me frustrated with its confusing point, or rather the total lack of one.
The review itself was technically a positive one, but it was sprinkled with negative comments that distracted me from the overall message it was trying to relay. The author wrote that The Hunger Games was a book she read due to its growing popularity and intriguing plot. She admitted that the overall storyline was indeed a good one, but that “the writing is only so-so”. She also devoted a paragraph each to two other issues she had with the book: the lack of character development in one of the supporting characters, and what she deemed the main character’s lack of leadership skills and intelligence. I thought that such a heavy emphasis on the book’s negative qualities undermined the conclusion of the review, which stated that the author actually liked the book [she gave it a 6/10 rating as well]. While I appreciate that a review does not need to be the epitome of a gushing fangirl, I feel that I should at least be able to determine whether or not the author recommends it or not.
After completing a book review, I have usually made at least a small mental note [or, in certain cases, a hefty order for the local Barnes and Noble] about whether or not I should put the book on my reading list. However, Rosalie’s indeterminate review of The Hunger Games, where she “sort of” liked it but stressed its downsides, only succeeded in making me wonder why the review was written at all.