Let me start off this review by stating that if I was reading this for my own pleasure, I would have DNF'd after the third page. However, I am reading out-loud to a loved one who is unable to read on their own currently, so I am reading books that they enjoy, not ones I enjoy. We have a VERY different taste of reading material. While my reading out-loud to them is to bond more with them, I am heavily considering figuring Audible out so they can 1) listen when they want to and not just when I visit and 2) so I never have to read a book by this author, Evanovich or Coulter again. I am not tech-savvy and neither are they, but it is a sacrifice I think I need to make, because I can't put myself through much more of these types of book.
Now, onto the rant/review!
Ok, where to start with this dumpster fire of a book? There is so much that is bad in this book that I really don't know where to start. The flimsy, barely one-dimensional characters? The dialogue that you will never hear in real life? Over 800 pages with only six female characters with both a name and at least one line of dialogue, all of whom are nothing but pre-pubescent male fantasies and not real people? The lack of an editor or the author actually using names in a way that wasn't distracting? How about names that aren't something a crude grade-schooler would come up with and think is funny? The over-the-top violence, especially when trying to rescue a child-hostage?
Ok, let's dig into this, it's going to be a long one. Since I would have stopped reading this after roughly three pages, let's start at the opening scene.
The MC antagonist is Putin.
Yes, THAT Putin. The powerful, REAL human being who is the leader of a rather large powerful country. Was he written in a way that was sensitive to the fact that he is a world leader? That he, that ANY character based off of a real person, should be written with the respect that person as a REAL human being, let alone a world leader should be?
No, no he wasn't. The book starts off with that real world leader receiving a bedroom act from his mistress, a former Miss Ukraine. He zips up and thanks her after receiving said act. At least he is written as being polite, if not written as faithful to his wife.
I'm sorry, but it is the HEIGHT of rudeness to write about a real person cheating on their spouse in a work of fiction. If this was a biography, maybe, but this is a work of fiction. Add the fact that the person being written about in this rude way is a world leader and WOW. I don't care if it's true, if the writer hates that world leader, that is SUPER rude.
Then as the book goes on, he is written as a crazy, alcoholic who has huge plans for a comeback and then scuttles his chances by giving in to alcohol and his violent tendencies.
He is a WORLD LEADER. This is incredibly rude and insulting to those who have him as their leader. Again, I don't care if this is true or not, this is a work of fiction, yes, but he is being depicted horribly and it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Also in this first scene, we have the former Miss Ukraine. She has a name and has a few lines of dialogue with Putin. She is then refrigerated. Great, first female we are introduced to in this book and she is killed off to spur Putin to get revenge.
I had SUCH high hopes for her character. She was described as having complete control over Putin, that he practically lived for her, that he didn't think of anything but making her happy, etc. I thought GREAT! She's a spy and going to use her siren-like powers over him to cause him to act in the best interest of her handlers.
Nope. A huge refrigerator comes out of nowhere and destroys any potential she had as a character. (face palm)
Since that first scene made me realize what sort of book this is, I decided to pay attention to the other female characters in this book and to see if this 800 plus page book passes the Bechdel test (the test is whether the work of fiction has at least two named female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man.) Not only do these 800 pages only have SIX named female characters in them who have dialogue, NONE of them speak to another female character, named or not!!
ALL are sex symbols and only TWO scenes in the entire book have two named females in them. In those two scenes, one has two named females playing canasta in their underwear and they don't start to speak until the men enter the room, and then they only speak to the MEN. The other scene is a dinner party where you know there are more women, though only two have names, and one isn't written as speaking, or described at all, and the other speaks to our "Hero".
One woman at the end of the book is raped by a bad guy while her love looks on, a gun to his head so he can't interfere, then she is sliced up with a knife, though her love is also sliced up, so it's not just the female who is hurt. She actually is allowed to live though, which surprised me.
So women are portrayed as little more than sex symbols that are hurt to further the plot. Distasteful.
We are introduced to a LOT of characters (almost all male), but they, much like plot threads, are dropped and occasionally picked back up. Usually, the characters are in the thick of the plot, only to go off somewhere and then never be heard from again. That's what I thought would happen with the "love" interest of the MC H, as she ran off all upset over something stupid (oh yeah, the female characters weren't written as overly smart either) and then you don't hear about her until the MC H goes out trying to find her. And he finds her, they make-up(? since the reason for the running was stupid, the make-up was too) and make love. In chapter 69. Real slick. I bet the author and editor got a giggle out of that one.
Oh, and randomly, after they make their magical, rainbow causing love, she stretches up and the H mentally remarks to himself that she had enough under-arm hair to nest a whole family of birds. But he was nice enough to not say anything to her about it. (face palm) It made no sense at all. It didn't build her character or further the plot. Just no.
Oh, and to add to the juvenile "humor" of the book, we have the character named Shit Smith. Sometimes he is referred to as "Shit", sometimes as "Smith" and sometimes as "Shit Smith". In the same paragraph. I just called him Smith when his name popped up on the page. The foul language in this book was ridiculous and not something I was going to say out-loud to my loved one.
This is actually something that happens with ALL of the characters. On one page, you could have the full name, title included, then a sentence or two later, just their first name, followed by their last name, followed by their nickname, then just their first and last name, no title. On the same page.
Dude, this isn't some Russian classic where each character has multiple names, depending on who is referring to them. (That caused me major confusion when I attempted to read War and Peace.) At least in Russian literature, the different names being used are for a real REASON. Depending on how well the characters knew one another determined what name they called each other. That wasn't the reason in this book. Not if the names were being used in the text and not in dialogue or the characters thoughts. That is just sloppy writing and editing.
All of the men in this book were supposed to be tactical and military geniuses. Yet NONE of them created a plan that made ANY sense or had any real-life hope of succeeding.
Example 1: Attempt to steal the gold in the Swiss Fort Knox. There were two facilities with gold, followed by one that couldn't be reached except via a one mile long bridge over a huge chasm. Did they go after the two that were close to one another and reachable by road and not an incredibly vulnerable bridge? No, they went after the one that could only be reached by the bridge. The defenders wouldn't blow up the bridge with the bad guys on it, would they? Not even a thought in the bad guys' minds. So what happened? The obvious. Sigh. Also, I don't care how strong a locomotive is, if it hits a concrete barrier on the tracks, that bad boy is derailing, not breaking through the concrete barrier as if it was wet tissue paper. Physics? Who needs physics in this book! Not the author/editor!
Example 2: This one has multiple parts. The MC H has a son who he would live and die for. The son is kidnapped by Putin's goons to distract the H so the H won't try to stop Putin's planned comeback.
First of all, if the kid wasn't kidnapped and Putin kept a low profile, the H wouldn't have known about the comeback to stop it until it was too late and Putin would have been successful.
Second, the kid was kidnapped too early into Putin's plans and how they were setting up, so the H had plenty of time to get his kid back and stop Putin.
Third, Putin had an island fortress AND a fortress INSIDE of a mountain. So where did he have the kid? On the island that the good guys could breach in time to get to the kid before one of the bad guys had put a bullet into the kid, NOT the mountain fortress that in the real world would take hours to get into, if at all.
Fourth, the H went into the island fortress with about 24 mercenaries who were armed TO THE TEETH. They got in with C4 blasting walls away, guns rat-a-tating, grenades flying, etc. and not ONCE did ANYone think, "You know, if the kid gets in the way of ONE bit of shrapnel or bullet, he's toast?". Nope, not even the H daddy.
And after the kid was retrieved unhurt and completely not scared by the noise of the destruction all around him, even though the mercenaries lost some men to the defenders, they all cheered because they got the kid ok and because they all loved and were dedicated to the brave and heroic H.
Also, while retrieving the kid, one of the bad guys, who was friendly with the H, basically told all of Putin's plans to the H when the H asked for it. In front of another bad guy. Without a second thought. (FACE PALM)
Even my loved one thought this book had too much going on in it. After the boy was rescued, the very next scene is of the H storming the mountain fortress with his men. We don't get to see him bring his boy home? His family and friends celebrating and relieved? Weird scenes are added that could have been cut and scenes that the reader wants and needs to actually see the love between the two characters aren't included. Really weird decisions on the author and editor's parts.
Oh, and during a lull in the storming of the fortress, want to know what the H did?!? He freakin' called home and wished his son a happy birthday and apologized for not being there!!! WHAT?!?! You storm the bad guy's mountain lair on your son's BIRTHDAY?!? You can't 1) attack on a different day or 2) plan the party on a day when you aren't kicking in the bad guy's door?!?
I'm sorry, but this entire book is a WHY?!? Because in the apocalypse if I need to burn paper for fire for warmth to stay alive, this 800 page clunker will do the job and I won't feel guilty about it???
Ok, this is just my opinion here, but I think from the above, I have clearly stated why this book is getting 1 star and why I would recommend it to absolutely no one.
My loved one would probably give it three stars, because they really didn't like the lack of the scene showing the full reunion of the kid with his dad and being brought home and some other disconnects, but they didn't see the glaring issues that I did, so I am in no way saying anything bad about those who did enjoy this book. I am saying if the above would bother you, spare yourself and don't attempt this. I have heard good things about the other works by this author, so I am sure this is just the requisite clunker authors are subject to on occasion.
I may, in the future, attempt another book by this author, but I would have had to exhaust my Mt. TBR and have literally nothing else to read before I would crack it open. This book is a hard pass. Save yourself the agony of a stinging forehead from all of the face palming it will induce in you.