predictable,same formula
937026
This is a re-hash of Walter Mosley's formula for a mystery novel with a  middle age detective with some physical issue, a mysterious woman, beautiful light skinned love interest (dark women are never "beautiful" to his main character) and he has spiritual/religious conflict and is involved in mutilpe murders. It was okay, just real predictable, lazy writing and I am a fan.
2876059
I enjoyed this book and all of the other books I've read by the same author. They are nice to read, however, predictable.
3390784
I've read everything he's written.  And this wasn't bad in any way. It was entertaining, but they're all pretty much the same plot, just with different killers.  Someone comes into the bar to try and get him to help.  He doesn't want to, but reluctantly agrees. He winds up driving all over Michigan, and sometimes into Canada.  Sometimes he falls in love, sometimes he doesn't.  The murders are solved and he goes back to the bar.  There's some snow plowing and cabin building thrown in for the DIY set. So if you've read all of the previous books, unless you're really bored, there's nothing new here.  If you're just looking for a book to kill a few evernings...have at it.
4641956
This book seems to have been written in Central Casting of Adventure Stories.  The plot is very predictable with few, if any, surprises. There are plenty of well done action scenes, but it is quite obvious that the good guys are going to win, no matter how dire their situation, and, of course, the bad guys get their just due.
4308562
I like the author but this was just too predictable.  Invaders from mars? You had to pick mars?  Oh, and the usual ragtag group that just once again happens to have bunkers and other wonderful places to live.  Standard bug aliens.  Standard marine sergeant.  Lead female character turns out to have moxie.  Just can't buy the next one.
1119307
Quick read, nothing unique.  It felt like the author followed a formula.
2851581
On the good side,  I liked the writing style and the fast pace of the story.  Unfortunately,  the plot makes use of worn out themes that have been utilized many times in other books.  The characters are also pretty one-dimensional and the 'twist" at the end is very predictable.
1205937
Blah, wanna be, but just isn't. Simplistic plot, predictable, and just bad. Stick with the Scandinavian thrillers such as "Department Q". Or "The Treatment". They have substance.
4779259
This was pretty much the same story as all the other books N. Sparks has written. Is was a fast, mindless read but very predictable since the story line mimicked all of his other books.
3097055
For me predictable is good.  That's why I go back and buy the author's work.  Like character and direction.
4749298
These are very light and formulaic. It's fairly easy to see everything is going to be resolved in a more or less predictable manner. The characters are stock and unsurprising hoeing to defined types. If you're looking for something with a little suspense and darkness this is definitely not it. Additionally there are some pretty glaring errors in the descriptions of Detroit even if you take into account another world. I think if you are mentioning existing freeways you might want to get them at least going in the right direction unless you want to explain why they are different. The most interesting part of this story was something sort of cribbed from Anne McCaffrey which was a visit to the original home world of the dragons. Those few pages I found quite intriguing but as there was little left unsaid by the time Julius and I can't even remember the girls name, got back, having more of it wouldn't make much sense.

It wasn't a complete waste of time, but I probably will not read the next book in the series. I find Julian wholly forgettable and frankly pretty unlikable in his utter lack of backbone. Or maybe not unlikable exactly. I just didn't really bother to feel one way or the other about him. If you read the first one this will give you some closure if you are interested. Otherwise I'd probably just skip it.

Somehow I can't quite escape the feeling that Ms. Aaron is trying out her "anyone can write Urban Fantasy" model on us and I for one won't be buying it. When there are people out there like Neil Gaiman, I can't see spending more time than I have to in this world.
4859395
I was excited to read because of so many good reviews.  Sorry to say this was such a simple predictable story.  The big "twist" at the end lacked any notion of being clever or well thought out.  I kept on reading, waiting for a shocking turn of events, but it never came.  The selection of a villain felt as if the author put the names of ten characters from the book on the wall, threw a dart at her list while blindfolded, then chose the name closest to her randomly thrown dart.  In short, this is a very one dimensional suspense, and the number one rule with a good suspense is that there are at least two dimensions and ideally many, many more.
711458
Book was ok (I made it through it to the end).  Maybe I'm getting tired of thriller/mystery  books, having read too many over the years, but this one did seem to be of a formula and somewhat predictable.
761104
POSSIBLE SPOILERS: I am surprised at the five star reviews for this somewhat predictable police procedural. Aside from the fact that the hero detective is a practicing (more or less) Muslim, much of the story is predictable. It seemed like the author took a page from the Harry Bosch series-a detective not obeying orders, doing what he knows is the right thing to do, angering the powers-that-be, uncovering up a possible police cover up etc. and added a few new or different elements. There are good cops who are really bad, bad cops who are really good, powerful men who threaten the hero-all familiar plot elements. The vampire/blood drinking subplot seems artificial and added for shock affect.
The author knows his stuff-it is well written and the plot is non-stop action, but it is also predictable. I read it because it is listed as one of  "the 100"  in&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/The-Bestseller-Code-Anatomy-of-the-Blockbuster-Novel/dp/B01B1MWKIU/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">The Bestseller Code: Anatomy of the Blockbuster Novel</a>&nbsp;as having all the essential elements of bestsellers.
243629
This started of slow. And it followed a formula that was exciting for the first few books. But in the end the formula made this book predictable. I like what JM does with reinventing Classic characters like the vampire, or zombies. But that is not enough. Predictability will kill the series.
1928232
Enjoyed this well-written but predictable book.  Nothing really bad ever happens, so it's too much same 'ol as first book...but readable.
4861769
I was reluctant to read this book, but I let the reviews on the jacket and the prizes it won/nominated for influence my decision.  Nice Work isn't a bad book, but it isn't a good book either.  It is the story of a businessman and a Literature and Women's Studies professor who are thrown together due to a project that is part of Industry Year in Great Britain.  It is the very cliche tale of two people who are different in just about every way who discover that they have things in common and can learn from each other.  No offense, Mr. Lodge but how many times has this tired formula been used in books, films, etc.
The problem with this book is that there is nothing distinguishing about it.  It is rather generic.  It isn't comical enough or enough of a true social commentary to have any sort of an impact on you.  However, the saving grace of this book is that it is well paced.  Despite the fact, that I found the writing and story banal, the author kept it moving along and kept me reading until the conclusion.  The conclusion is the most unfortunate part of the book.  Without divulging it, beware that the conclusion is contrived and from the school of  happy endings.  I believe that with a more original story Mr. Lodge has the talent to produce a good novel and will probably try another one of his books.  I recommend that you don't read this one.