But what about the best-selling authors, surely their reviews aren’t that bad? If they were than their rating would drop along with their sales and ranking.
HERE ARE A FEW REVIEWS I LOOKED UP:
77 Shadow Street by Dean Koontz Rating 3.1
The storyline was weird. The suspense was lukewarm. Character development was pretty much nill.
This is one of the worst books I’ve read in a long time.
The ice dragon by George R.R. Martin …….Rating 3.5
It was slow to develop any kind of goal… The narrative and dialogue were clumsy …
Revival by Stephen King ….Rating 3.9
It was slow. It was boring, and I couldn’t figure out where it was going. Once I found out where it was going all I could think was “really? Is that all? Is that all there really is to this story?”
The finisher by David Baldacci Rating 3.5
The finisher has some very strange word choices. I’m having trouble thinking of what kind of reader would really like this one.
Gray mountain by John Grisham Rating 3.7
I kept waiting for the excitement to begin … it never happened.
This was the most boring book I’ve read in years.
Shallow characters, unresolved issue.
Zoo by James Patterson & Michael Ledwidge Rating 3.2
Is full of point-of-view errors, sloppy dialogue, one dimensional main characters.
Ugh. This plot is nonsensical.
A big waste of time and money.
Here’s a couple of notable things. 1) Gray Mountain had a 3.7 rating, but is #241 in the Kindle store. 2) Zoo had a rating of 3.2 and had almost as many 1 star ratings as 5 stars, but still ranked #135 in Kindle store.
I guess you have to have a couple best sellers before the bad reviews don’t matter so much.