I thought Rosalie Barrette's review of The Hunger Games was disconnected and contradictory. It left me frustrated with its confusing point – or, rather, lack of one.

The review itself was positive, but it was sprinkled with negative comments that distracted from the overall message. Rosalie said she read The Hunger Games because of its popularity and intriguing plot. She admitted that the overall story line was good but that “the writing is only so-so.”

She devotes a paragraph each to two issues she had with the book: the lack of development in a supporting character, and the main character's lack of leadership skills and intelligence. I thought that such a heavy emphasis on these negatives undermined her conclusion: Rosalie actually liked the book – she gave it a 6 out of 10 rating.

While I appreciate that a positive review does not need to sound like a gushing fangirl wrote it, I think I should have been able to tell whether or not the author recommends the book. Rosalie's indeterminate review only succeeded in making me wonder why she wrote it at all.