I always feel like I'm a harsh critic when it comes to thriller books as my number one rule is that I shouldn't be able to predict who the murderer is. There are only a few thrillers that have truly surprised me, and unfortunately this one wasn't one of them. But I wonder if that also isn't the point of a thriller? That you know who the killer is, but the suspense that builds and keeps you on the edge of your seat is the part that makes people love this genre so much. If so, this book wins the award for the suspense alone. 

One of the things that drew me to this book was the fact that it takes place in a small town in Wisconsin; and upon reading the acknowledgments you find out that Allen's Grove is a real unincorporated town and that the author grew up there. The author also used her childhood home as the setting for the whole book. It was so interesting to find that out after finishing such an atmospheric book where you can easily picture the town, the house, and the woods behind the house so well that you feel like you are there with the Thomas siblings.

But the murders and the murderer themself was where it began to lose points for me.

It is a tale as old as time, a child commits a terrible act and the parents cover it up. The book is narrated by the three Thomas children upon their mothers death. Beth and Nicole (the oldest and middle child respectively) narrate most of the book; while Michael (the youngest, and the murderer) had chapters only sporadically throughout. That right there was the first red flag to me. That and the fact that Michael barely had any emotion during his chapters, other than feeding the flames between Beth and Nicole and making it abundantly clear that he wanted out of town as soon as their mothers funeral was over. Then as the story unravels, you find out that Michael killed little Emma and his father, Brian, covered it up in order to protect his son. And as repayment for Brian's protection years later, Michael kills his father and it is also covered up by the mother. Then, seven years after her husband's 'disappearance' the mother's dying words are a cryptic message to her eldest daughter, Beth, and thus begins the whole plot to find out what really happened the night Emma went missing. I just wish there was a little bit more mystery to who the murderer was and why he decided to kill Emma. Her death is chalked up to Michael's parents stating that they will never really know why he did it, just that they need to protect him at all costs. I just feel like the whole parent protecting their child plot is a little overused and I am eager for a new idea to appear in the thriller genre.

At the end of the day, it was an interesting idea; one that appeals to the 90's kids and the nostalgia that goes with the VHS tapes and home movies. Which is what made me interested in this book in the first place. All 90's kids (and older) remember those home videos and seeing their parents carry around the hulking camera to record seemingly random moments of their childhood. No one expects to pop in one of those old movies and instead find one of their parents covered in blood, pleading to the other parent to come and help them hide a body. It is a unique idea, one that plays on the fact that a child sometimes can see their parents through rose-colored glasses. Which means to say, this story had a strong beginning, one that hooks the reader immediately; but then as the plot unravels, so does the mystery of the murderer.