It's not about the elements so much as the skill of telling a story.
926751
My first take on this book is that it is another "Cinderella" story.  That does not mean, however, that I did not thoroughly enjoy the read.  This is the fourth of Jacque's books that I have read.  Author's who write series books tend, naturally, to have similar elements that can be found in each of their books.  I've run into series of books by other authors who tell nothing but the same story with different characters.  This book, however, I feel is the most different from the other three books that I have read.  While there are many of the same elements: "One of the daughters is 'bad ton', daughter becomes good ton, lots of mis-understandings with greatly delayed explanation and insight, a nasty 'other woman' out to smear the daughter's reputation, girls both get boys, blah, blah," as quoted by C. Mattoon from a review on Amazon.  These elements are not what is important so much as the story and how the story is told.  Yes, all of Jacque's books have these elements...  However, as is different in this story it is not love that seems so impossibly out of reach as it is the means by which the heroine is to reach that love, the obstacles that she must overcome. Different from the first three, the love between the heroine and the hero is never doubted.  There is more action and more bravery in this story then in the others where scandal and disgrace are the primary modes of conflict.  In this story, Jacque takes the conflict one step further to a desperate chase and daring rescue with injurious consequences.  Yet justice leads to a happy ending, and as much as I LOVE a happy ending, this is much more like a Brothers Grimm fairy tale then the fluffy "happily ever after" of Disney.
1981778
It may be a classic, but it's not my favorite story.
3792080
Beautiful story but not very well written: syntax isn't very good so the story doesn't flow as well as it could.
168438
Story narrator is not a very likeable character, but his life experiences explains much.  Story is complex, but readable.
1088393
While I've used changing points-of-view in my own writing (and this story telling methodology is seen more in YA stories), I found it a bit distracting.  McQuestion tells the story well, using a combination of an omniscient point-of-view with a rotating first person, but the reader always has to look at the chapter heading to see which character they are following in this section of the story. Perhaps the short attention span of the audience requires an approach that forces the reader to keep engaging with the formal structure. Anyway, good set.
James
1418670
This was tricky to rate, because while it's called a novel, it reads more like a storyboard for a movie. It doesn't really read like a graphic novel either, since graphic novels have mostly just pictures which tell the weight of the story, and the only text is dialogue. In this story, there are lines of text followed by pictures. And in the text, there is more telling than showing, more of a: he did this, she did that, etc. than really showing what was going on, and as a result, I was wiffle waffling between a two and a three. What made me decide to bump it up to a three, was that the storyline itself is pretty good, and the pictures were well done.
2489390
The books concept to teach a young child to try something new with a proper mindset is apparent. However the articulation of this concept was not well executed by the author. Toward the ending the point of the story had a shotgun feel. It's worth reading at least once. I'm sure the author's storytelling will improve with time.
843233
Let me begin with a confession. I really struggle with giving 1 or 2 stars to a book. I used to not even rate them if I wasn't going to give them a 3 or above, but then I realized that there's an opportunity to offer some helpful feedback. So, that's the spirit with which I offer this review.

The story's premise really grabbed me. I love creative, unusual story ideas, and I like watching how an author tells a story. With this one, I think the plotting is good and fits the story idea very well, but there was something stilted and awkward about the actual narrative. I have to confess, too, that the first paragraph put me off, and I almost didn't read any further. I understand that the author wanted to take an old cliche/song and use it for a twist, but for me it didn't work. But I did continue on. And the story itself works, and it worked enough for me to keep me reading. Those are the upsides.

Now for what I hope will be helpful criticism. The narrative voice seems almost too juvenile, but I see on Amazon that it's related to the children's categories, so I'm assuming that is in fact the target audience. My suggestion would be to make sure the categories are set correctly for the intended audience. So, with that said, let me continue this review with the assumption that it's supposed to be a youth/young adult book.

The first-person narrative is popular for young adult books, and so is a good choice here. But that also requires that the author really be able to get into the mind of the protagonist, and at times I felt like that was missed. It is possible that my reading of this aspect of the book was due to the difficulty I had in following time sequences. A straight forward, linear progression would have clarified all of this. Why not tell the story straight out from the key incident and let the story unfold from direct action, rather than starting with the "doggy in the window" and going back in time to tell the story? I think the narrative would have ended up with far more showing than telling if it had.

That last piece is at least 80% of my negative feedback, by the way. I'm big on showing, not telling, and this story relies far too much on the protagonist telling us things (thoughts as well as action). More immediacy would be had if the narrative had taken readers to a more direct experience with the story itself.

I want to emphasize that there is MUCH that is redeemable here. The story itself is a great idea, and the plotting by Mr. Cognard suits it. The story moves along a good timeline (except for the complaint shared above) and it was planned out well. Eddie is a very likeable character, and his reaction to the dog and the meteor incident are engaging--and those are the keys to the story itself. I think good editing and a solid revision could catapult this book into a 3 to 4 range easily.
2703549
Settling into the book was easy enough with writing that sets the scenes well but the characters were difficult to engage with.

In a book like this you want to engage closely with the characters, empathise, criticise and go with them on their journey, yet it always felt like there was a pane of glass between the reader and the characters so you could not quite touch or engage with them on the level you needed to to realy feel the story here.

A worthwhile read but not on top of the pile.
3451965
This was a different way of telling a story but I liked it.  It is nice for a change.
1140033
I was somewhat disappointed.  It may have had more to do with the time period than the storytelling.
4840710
Not being able to award three and one-half stars, I rounded up.  An account of brutal murder of the most horrifying kind, that of children, I was left with a feeling of digesting a narrative with a less than fulfilling delivery.  A true crime story is not a novel, and Mr. Petit exemplifies this difference. It reads like the work of a newspaper staff writer; not that of a columnist. It is not an exciting read, nor a riveting one. But the story does present the writing ability of a good account of a seasoned reporter.
3303109
The story and concept are great but the way it's told is not. The storytelling jumps over details too frequently. I felt like I was reading someone's outline instead of a story.
4076932
It isn't literature, but it does represent an interesting telling of a story I never heard. It's a quick read and other than the author having a really outdated notion of what's "kinky", it's worthwhile.
3396226
this is more of an outline than an actual story. We are given story hints - a conversation is described rather than taking place - leaving you wondering about the state of mind of the characters. If it is ever fleshed out I might try reading again. As it is, got about 70% through the book before I got tired of trying.
4613838
I've always been drawn more toward character than any other aspect of a story, for without character than can be no plot. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this because I hope to incite an argument on which is more important--plot, character, prose, or whatever--I'm saying this because Tony's skill with manipulating his audience's emotions is directly related to his skill with crafting three-dimensional characters. Many authors tend to skimp out on a deeper level of development, focusing on one or two characters and leaving out the rest to dry like partially-washed laundry. Tony, however, shows a higher sense of detail the likes of which I haven't seen in years.
2120730
It's pretty useful and has a lot of good stuff related to the process of thinking, biases and how we can improve our lives through correcting those biases and acquiring knowledge. It's not great at story telling though, it's the quality of striking me with insight and brilliance that's missing. And maybe that's fine.