Does EK read like a movie?

Eternal Knight received this review on Amazon the other day. I don't normally share reviews, but I thought this one was kind of cool. The reader seemed to really "get" Eternal Knight. And by "getting" it, I'm not talking about the story, I'm talking about the style. When the reviewer said EK "reads like you can already picture it in your mind" or that it "reads like a fantasy movie" that is exactly how I felt when I was writing it.

Not delving too deeply into details isn't entirely intentional. I tend to focus on story and try just to give enough detail for the reader to create an image in their head. Sometimes I don't put enough brush strokes in. I find adding the little details that flesh out a scene to be one of the most difficult parts of writing. That's where great critique partners like Kemp Brinson, Ann Emery, and Mike Shultz come in. They are great at finding just the right details to make a scene come to life. I couldn't write without them.

The review (from an Amazon reader):

"One of the things I enjoyed most about Eternal Knight is that it didn't overwhelm me with details that keep me from reading a lot of other fantasy novels. Overly detailed descriptions of the character's clothes or actions, or setting the scene, etc... this book has none of that. The story reads like you can already picture it in your mind. It reads like a fantasy movie instead of a fantasy novel, if that makes any sense.

It's also not "magic heavy." Even the few characters that have access to magic have very believable limits. There's no, "Well, I dropped my sword, so I'm going to wave my arms... and drop this mountain on you." There's no "easy fix" by magic in this book. Both the internal and external struggles are realistic.

Looking forward to the sequel!"

By the way, I am currently writing the epilogue to Child of the Knight. Not too long and I'll turn it over to Kemp, Ann, and Mike.