OnlineBookClub.org

FictionLover wrote: ↑30 Jul 2018, 22:17

JHuschle519 wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 02:28 I just finished reading The Girl Who Knew da Vinci, and while I enjoyed many aspects of the story there is one thing that I felt could have been done better. It seemed to me that Scordato's plan to steal the painting and murder Angela was brought to light much too early in the story; all the way back in Chapter 1. This took a lot of the suspense out the book for me because I knew what was coming. There was no surprise at the end when he ,finally, made his move. I think it would have been more exciting to not know who was after Angela and Alex right from the start. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Yes, I agree. I think the problem comes from the fact that this was really a paranormal romance.

In my review, I made a point of stating that this was not a thriller. Thrillers are really fast-paced and the main characters are always chasing the next clue to find out who is behind the plot. Sometimes things are so convoluted, you don't find out until the very end who is behind the crime. Also, there is a lot of tension, running, hiding, plotting, tactics. There was none of that here. Unless you consider long soapy showers suspenseful.

So I guess you needed Scordato around to have some suspense.

Yes, as others have mentioned, Scordato was just a one-dimensional character and introducing his intentions right off the bat contributes to his lack luster existence. I have a suspicion that Ami couldn't decide what she wanted this novel to be: a thriller, paranormal, romance, mystery, etc.? Or perhaps she was just trying to appeal to everyone in hopes of writing a bestseller? As a reader, I couldn't decide what she was doing.

I thought there would be a plot twist, I was disappointed at how predictable Scordato was.

Wahu_m wrote: ↑23 Aug 2018, 23:47 I thought there would be a plot twist, I was disappointed at how predictable Scordato was.

Predictable is right!

MollyEnter wrote: ↑23 Aug 2018, 22:57

FictionLover wrote: ↑30 Jul 2018, 22:17

JHuschle519 wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 02:28 I just finished reading The Girl Who Knew da Vinci, and while I enjoyed many aspects of the story there is one thing that I felt could have been done better. It seemed to me that Scordato's plan to steal the painting and murder Angela was brought to light much too early in the story; all the way back in Chapter 1. This took a lot of the suspense out the book for me because I knew what was coming. There was no surprise at the end when he ,finally, made his move. I think it would have been more exciting to not know who was after Angela and Alex right from the start. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Yes, I agree. I think the problem comes from the fact that this was really a paranormal romance.

In my review, I made a point of stating that this was not a thriller. Thrillers are really fast-paced and the main characters are always chasing the next clue to find out who is behind the plot. Sometimes things are so convoluted, you don't find out until the very end who is behind the crime. Also, there is a lot of tension, running, hiding, plotting, tactics. There was none of that here. Unless you consider long soapy showers suspenseful.

So I guess you needed Scordato around to have some suspense.

Yes, as others have mentioned, Scordato was just a one-dimensional character and introducing his intentions right off the bat contributes to his lack luster existence. I have a suspicion that Ami couldn't decide what she wanted this novel to be: a thriller, paranormal, romance, mystery, etc.? Or perhaps she was just trying to appeal to everyone in hopes of writing a bestseller? As a reader, I couldn't decide what she was doing.

The book definitely was a mash-up of genres, the problem is they didn't weave together well. And I have only read like 5 romances in my life because that particular plot doesn't hold my interest. So, I don't know how often rapists and rapey guys are included, but Scordato was too one-dimensional for me.

I think in films and movies sometimes portray the "evil" or "bad" character's plot too early, but for the good. Sometimes knowing their motives can get into the reader's mind and it can help progress the plot. Knowing the intention of the "bad" early has happened a lot in films and books.

I also think revealing his intention earlier on killed most of the suspense which was a great disservice to the story.

I agree, Ami did a great job with the other characters in this book. The lack of development with Scordato made him seem kind of out of place the few times he did show up in the middle of the story.
[/quote]

I was so disappointed at the lack of other characters besides Angela and Alex and their past life versions, though they were developed very well (except for Alex's wiggling eyebrows lol!) . I agree that Scordato was a weak character and it would've been great to see a couple other possible villains, like Max Jaegar.

I'm only 50% through the book, and I definately agree Scordato's motivations could have been brought out more gradually. It takes out the mystery and suspense aspects of the book. The only thing I'm wondering about now is where the painting is going to be found, and how the relationship between Alex and Angela continues to develop.

JHuschle519 wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 02:28 I just finished reading The Girl Who Knew da Vinci, and while I enjoyed many aspects of the story there is one thing that I felt could have been done better. It seemed to me that Scordato's plan to steal the painting and murder Angela was brought to light much too early in the story; all the way back in Chapter 1. This took a lot of the suspense out the book for me because I knew what was coming. There was no surprise at the end when he finally made his move. I think it would have been more exciting to not know who was after Angela and Alex right from the start. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Absolutely, this was one of the major flaws of the book. But I think it goes a little deeper than you realize. The character of Scordato was underdeveloped and as a result, his entire plotline was almost non-existent. He should have been the antagonist, which means that he should have been opposing Angela, blocking her from reaching her goal. Instead, we get his motives spelled out AND told that he's going to sit back and let her lead him to the painting. Talk about putting him on autopilot. There was nothing for him to do.

v i n wrote: ↑25 Jul 2018, 22:39 I too have a feeling that Scordato was brutal and his intention are know right from the beginning. however how Ami developed the characters is very exceptional.

Maybe I missed something, but I thought Scordato was almost nonexistent. He was presented as a predatory male to the point of being a stereotype with no depth. His desire for the painting was for monetary gain and fame. These don't take any thought at all either to write or read. I would have liked to see something more, something deeper. For example, he could have been more attractive in a way that made it harder for Angela (and us) to understand his motives. She could have known that her soulmate was near, but be confused about his identity, making it harder to choose between helping Scordato or Alex.

And as an antagonist, he did very little to advance the plot or impede the heroine from reaching her goal. I'm not really trying to argue, but would love to know what you saw in the character that I missed.

Swat3737 wrote: ↑27 Aug 2018, 11:04 (except for Alex's wiggling eyebrows lol!) . I agree that Scordato was a weak character and it would've been great to see a couple other possible villains, like Max Jaegar.

Yes! Absolutely, those wiggling eyebrows drove me nuts. I mean, what the heck does that even mean? I didn't think too much about Max J., but you're right he could have played a much larger, more complex role.

I agree, I felt his role was very underdeveloped and rushed, and as a result, the conflict was never fully built up so the resolution felt too easy. I always appreciate a well developed antagonist and I love it when the enemy character has multiple layers, but in this book Scordato was very one dimensional and predictable.

JHuschle519 wrote: ↑25 Jul 2018, 01:46

sarbearah wrote: ↑25 Jul 2018, 00:29 Yes, I agree 100%! I hated Scordato because he was so one-dimensional and so clear with his intentions from the start - such a bad villian. I wish we got something more from him, but nah, it was all just the same stuff. No ulterior motive, no secret attack, nothing. It was really disappointing, especially because it seems Ami spent a lot of time rounding out the other characters.

I agree, Ami did a great job with the other characters in this book. The lack of development with Scordato made him seem kind of out of place the few times he did show up in the middle of the story.

Scordato's character was not very well done. You knew right from the beginning that he was the villain. It would have been better to make him appear friendly and then have him double cross Alex and Angela at the end. That would have made the story more suspenseful.

Jsovermyer wrote: ↑01 Nov 2018, 14:45

JHuschle519 wrote: ↑25 Jul 2018, 01:46

sarbearah wrote: ↑25 Jul 2018, 00:29 Yes, I agree 100%! I hated Scordato because he was so one-dimensional and so clear with his intentions from the start - such a bad villian. I wish we got something more from him, but nah, it was all just the same stuff. No ulterior motive, no secret attack, nothing. It was really disappointing, especially because it seems Ami spent a lot of time rounding out the other characters.

I agree, Ami did a great job with the other characters in this book. The lack of development with Scordato made him seem kind of out of place the few times he did show up in the middle of the story.

Scordato's character was not very well done. You knew right from the beginning that he was the villain. It would have been better to make him appear friendly and then have him double cross Alex and Angela at the end. That would have made the story more suspenseful.

Even if he didn't seem friendly in the beginning, it still would have been nice to see some build up to his reveal as the villain.

For me, I don't think it really mattered either way. We know someone had to be the bad guy and, while the suspense of not knowing would have been interesting, I don't think knowing who it was took anything away from the novel.