What do you think?
Rate this book
Straight Cut
A freelance film editor, Tracy Bateman goes where the work is. So when his old partner calls with an assignment, Tracy finds himself on a plane to Rome. But there are surprises waiting for him- deadly surprises that will lead him on a desperate chase across Europe, into the hands of a pair of brutal drug smugglers, and back to New York City, where the greatest betrayal of all awaits.
253 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1986
11 people are currently reading
302 people want to read
About the author
Madison Smartt Bell
57 books174 followersMadison Smartt Bell is a critically acclaimed writer of more than a dozen novels and story collections, as well as numerous essays and reviews for publications such as Harper’s and the New York Times Book Review. His books have been finalists for both the National Book Award and the PEN/Faulkner Award, among other honors. Bell has also taught at distinguished creative writing programs including the Iowa Writer’s Workshop, Johns Hopkins, and Goucher College. His work is notable for its sweeping historical and philosophical scope matched with a remarkable sensitivity to the individual voices of characters on the margins of society.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
February 2, 2012
I almost clicked one star for this one. I did it! I clicked one star! Maybe I should go back and give the Max Allan Collins books one star, too, but they at least succeed in being an entertaining enough piece of genre fiction. This book doesn't succeed there at all.
And it wasn't because I think I remember reading once that Bell thought DFW was floundering for not producing at the rate that Vollmann was. But I could be wrong about this.
This book is remarkably bad. Not bad in the way remarkably bad manner of say Max Allan Collins' hardcase novels (of the few I've read) are bad, but bad in the, why was this book even written, bad category.
I will grant that I'm getting tired of the crime-genre. I've read too much of it in the past few months. I want out. I don't understand how people can exclusively read one or two types of genre fictions, doesn't it get old being stuck in the same basic structures? Yeah, there are some brilliant writers contained in those structures, but there is also so much mediocre-ness. So much that is formulaic, and too often when a writer tries to break from the tried and true formulas you realize why those formulas are there in the first place, innovation just doesn't work sometimes in this element. (Yeah, literary fiction can be formulaic, too, but I think (in my opinion, mine) there is more room for writers to move about in the literary world, yeah there are a bazillion and counting Corrections knock-offs, but you can see them from a mile away and if you don't want to read yet another dysfunctional modern family novel you can easily avoid it, you can judge a book by the cover).
While walking through the Times Square Subway station, transferring from the N train to the 7, walking up the steps that lead up from the platform that leads down to the N train, up to the platform that would be a couple of dozen steps to the long staircase leading down into the bowels of the station where the 7 train waits(I'll return to this in a moment, keep this somewhere in the back of your mind, because there is a reason I gave those details), I thought maybe I'm being unfair to the book, maybe I'm thinking of it as a 'crime' novel or a thriller (as Walker Percy raves about it being on the front cover) when really I should be reading it just as a novel, a literary novel? written by a literary novelist? Maybe I need to enframe the text and remove it from the context of being a hardcase novel and see it for what it is in a Heideggerian thing-in-itself essence or some shit like that. I thought this for a moment and then I thought, no, it still pretty much fails. And then I thought, yes it's boring, yes it's bogged down in details and minutiae, but then again so are the novels of John le Carré, but his slow pacing builds layers to the story, it's slow but the layers are all building to the edifice of the story.
Not here.
About three quarters of the novel could have been cut and it wouldn't have hindered my understanding of what was going on, or taken away anything from the plot. There is so much wasted details given, we get detailed directions of where the narrator walks to in New York City, which is great I guess, it shows that you are familiar with the Union Square / Chelsea / Williamsburg Bridge (I think maybe it's the Brooklyn Bridge) / Brooklyn Navy Yard areas of the city, but it doesn't add anything to the story. It was as necessary as the description I gave above of my walk from the N train to the 7 train. I could have just as easily said, I was thinking as I walked from the N train to the 7 train and it would have been just as fine. Directions. What the narrator ate. And again what he ate. The time he wakes up. The long first chapter where he shots his dog because the dog is getting on in the years (I kept thinking, that was a pointless chapter, and I kept thinking that there is a reason he included it, and it will come back in some significant way later on in the book, but nope, he does return to the dead dog theme but it's only as a neat little bookend to wrap up the book, totally unnecessary (in my humble opinion, but what do I know I'm just some doofus who works in a big box bookstore and writes reviews on the internets). The narrators a part-time drunk, we know this because we are given too many pointless scenes of him drinking too much in bars. He seems more like some dude who likes to tie one on now and then, but through repetition of seeing him drinking yet again and because we are told he's one the reader can be safely ok with thinking that the narrator is his old friend the drunken protagonist of hard-boiled novels. Instead of giving (probably, I didn't count, but I'm making an educated guess) about forty pages or so to the narrators drinking, mostly in scenes that do nothing for the plot, Bell could have just said something like, 'I took my place on the stool at the bar, even though it was a new bar the familiarity of the place made me feel at home, and when the first shot of bourbon hit my stomach I felt like I was home again", yeah that sucks, but you get the idea. He's comfortable in bars drinking copious amounts of booze.
Even though Bell gives an excessive amount of tedious details about the day to day life of the narrator, I didn't feel like I really knew anything about the character. He never comes alive. None of the supporting characters do either. Everyone feels like a stock character lifted from the hardboiled handbook.
But what about the actual 'crime' element? Well, once the novel finally gets around to this somewhere just a few pages past the halfway point, the novel doesn't get any stronger. It quickly became apparent that the whole first half of the book wasn't adding too much to the story, it was background material and a chance to put lots of details in place in lieu of having to tell a story. If I didn't think too much I might think that what was happening in the first half was a slow progression, but that wasn't the case, it was mostly just filer, pretty much none of the 'background' and 'build-up' added anything to the novel. The crime element itself was farcical, unintentionally. It made no sense, it made no sense why people acted like they did, why in the age of Swiss Bank Accounts and Off-Shore Accounts and other ways of moving money around that half of the stuff needed to happen that was happening. This could have been given an explanation, and I would have been happy with one, but instead none was offered. I feel like Bell expected me to think the crime element was well thought out and because he had bombarded me with unnecessary details earlier in the novel (and continued to throughout the novel).
At one point I was suspecting that Bell was guilty of just withholding information from the reader that could have been given earlier and then he would spring it on me to make the story come together and make it seem like a mystery had been solved when there hadn't really ever been one except why I was being kept in the dark. But that wasn't the case. There was nothing offered.
There is actually so much in this book I could point out as being bad. Like, when he has the narrator sniff some heroin and then he goes through withdrawl for three days. Really? One sniff of heroin and you're going to be junk sick? Did you learn your drug facts from one of those War on Drug ads or an After School Special? It makes me wonder what other 'details' about film editing, currency exchange and other things in the book are fabricated bullshit (not that I'm an expert on heroin, but I've known people who have dabbled in it and one friend who killed himself with it to have at least a bit of knowledge about what sniffing heroin does and does not do to you).
While the writing itself is fine, what the well strung together words mean and the story they are working towards telling is pretty much a waste. Needless to say, I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone. Maybe this is the result of what happens when a 'literary' writer thinks he just can slum it and churn out a piece of genre fiction.
And it wasn't because I think I remember reading once that Bell thought DFW was floundering for not producing at the rate that Vollmann was. But I could be wrong about this.
This book is remarkably bad. Not bad in the way remarkably bad manner of say Max Allan Collins' hardcase novels (of the few I've read) are bad, but bad in the, why was this book even written, bad category.
I will grant that I'm getting tired of the crime-genre. I've read too much of it in the past few months. I want out. I don't understand how people can exclusively read one or two types of genre fictions, doesn't it get old being stuck in the same basic structures? Yeah, there are some brilliant writers contained in those structures, but there is also so much mediocre-ness. So much that is formulaic, and too often when a writer tries to break from the tried and true formulas you realize why those formulas are there in the first place, innovation just doesn't work sometimes in this element. (Yeah, literary fiction can be formulaic, too, but I think (in my opinion, mine) there is more room for writers to move about in the literary world, yeah there are a bazillion and counting Corrections knock-offs, but you can see them from a mile away and if you don't want to read yet another dysfunctional modern family novel you can easily avoid it, you can judge a book by the cover).
While walking through the Times Square Subway station, transferring from the N train to the 7, walking up the steps that lead up from the platform that leads down to the N train, up to the platform that would be a couple of dozen steps to the long staircase leading down into the bowels of the station where the 7 train waits(I'll return to this in a moment, keep this somewhere in the back of your mind, because there is a reason I gave those details), I thought maybe I'm being unfair to the book, maybe I'm thinking of it as a 'crime' novel or a thriller (as Walker Percy raves about it being on the front cover) when really I should be reading it just as a novel, a literary novel? written by a literary novelist? Maybe I need to enframe the text and remove it from the context of being a hardcase novel and see it for what it is in a Heideggerian thing-in-itself essence or some shit like that. I thought this for a moment and then I thought, no, it still pretty much fails. And then I thought, yes it's boring, yes it's bogged down in details and minutiae, but then again so are the novels of John le Carré, but his slow pacing builds layers to the story, it's slow but the layers are all building to the edifice of the story.
Not here.
About three quarters of the novel could have been cut and it wouldn't have hindered my understanding of what was going on, or taken away anything from the plot. There is so much wasted details given, we get detailed directions of where the narrator walks to in New York City, which is great I guess, it shows that you are familiar with the Union Square / Chelsea / Williamsburg Bridge (I think maybe it's the Brooklyn Bridge) / Brooklyn Navy Yard areas of the city, but it doesn't add anything to the story. It was as necessary as the description I gave above of my walk from the N train to the 7 train. I could have just as easily said, I was thinking as I walked from the N train to the 7 train and it would have been just as fine. Directions. What the narrator ate. And again what he ate. The time he wakes up. The long first chapter where he shots his dog because the dog is getting on in the years (I kept thinking, that was a pointless chapter, and I kept thinking that there is a reason he included it, and it will come back in some significant way later on in the book, but nope, he does return to the dead dog theme but it's only as a neat little bookend to wrap up the book, totally unnecessary (in my humble opinion, but what do I know I'm just some doofus who works in a big box bookstore and writes reviews on the internets). The narrators a part-time drunk, we know this because we are given too many pointless scenes of him drinking too much in bars. He seems more like some dude who likes to tie one on now and then, but through repetition of seeing him drinking yet again and because we are told he's one the reader can be safely ok with thinking that the narrator is his old friend the drunken protagonist of hard-boiled novels. Instead of giving (probably, I didn't count, but I'm making an educated guess) about forty pages or so to the narrators drinking, mostly in scenes that do nothing for the plot, Bell could have just said something like, 'I took my place on the stool at the bar, even though it was a new bar the familiarity of the place made me feel at home, and when the first shot of bourbon hit my stomach I felt like I was home again", yeah that sucks, but you get the idea. He's comfortable in bars drinking copious amounts of booze.
Even though Bell gives an excessive amount of tedious details about the day to day life of the narrator, I didn't feel like I really knew anything about the character. He never comes alive. None of the supporting characters do either. Everyone feels like a stock character lifted from the hardboiled handbook.
But what about the actual 'crime' element? Well, once the novel finally gets around to this somewhere just a few pages past the halfway point, the novel doesn't get any stronger. It quickly became apparent that the whole first half of the book wasn't adding too much to the story, it was background material and a chance to put lots of details in place in lieu of having to tell a story. If I didn't think too much I might think that what was happening in the first half was a slow progression, but that wasn't the case, it was mostly just filer, pretty much none of the 'background' and 'build-up' added anything to the novel. The crime element itself was farcical, unintentionally. It made no sense, it made no sense why people acted like they did, why in the age of Swiss Bank Accounts and Off-Shore Accounts and other ways of moving money around that half of the stuff needed to happen that was happening. This could have been given an explanation, and I would have been happy with one, but instead none was offered. I feel like Bell expected me to think the crime element was well thought out and because he had bombarded me with unnecessary details earlier in the novel (and continued to throughout the novel).
At one point I was suspecting that Bell was guilty of just withholding information from the reader that could have been given earlier and then he would spring it on me to make the story come together and make it seem like a mystery had been solved when there hadn't really ever been one except why I was being kept in the dark. But that wasn't the case. There was nothing offered.
There is actually so much in this book I could point out as being bad. Like, when he has the narrator sniff some heroin and then he goes through withdrawl for three days. Really? One sniff of heroin and you're going to be junk sick? Did you learn your drug facts from one of those War on Drug ads or an After School Special? It makes me wonder what other 'details' about film editing, currency exchange and other things in the book are fabricated bullshit (not that I'm an expert on heroin, but I've known people who have dabbled in it and one friend who killed himself with it to have at least a bit of knowledge about what sniffing heroin does and does not do to you).
While the writing itself is fine, what the well strung together words mean and the story they are working towards telling is pretty much a waste. Needless to say, I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone. Maybe this is the result of what happens when a 'literary' writer thinks he just can slum it and churn out a piece of genre fiction.
July 11, 2011
Tracy Bateman, a former film editor, goes to Italy to cut a film for a friend. Throw in his ex-ish-wife Lauren and a mysterious briefcase and the ensuing chaos, and you have Straight Cut.
First of all, there were things I liked about this book. The writing was good and I liked some of the ideas, like how Tracy figured out how to smuggle the briefcase back to the states. I felt sad when Tracy had to put down his dog at the beginning. Poor dog.
The things I didn't like? Not a lot happened that I cared about. None of the characters really gripped me. It felt like seventy pages could have been easily pulled out. Do I really need to know how difficult the film was to cut? Not in a Hard Case book I don't!
So, I guess you could say Straight Cut isn't a bad book. It's just not a particularly good one either. It's just there. I'd give it 2.5 stars if I could.
First of all, there were things I liked about this book. The writing was good and I liked some of the ideas, like how Tracy figured out how to smuggle the briefcase back to the states. I felt sad when Tracy had to put down his dog at the beginning. Poor dog.
The things I didn't like? Not a lot happened that I cared about. None of the characters really gripped me. It felt like seventy pages could have been easily pulled out. Do I really need to know how difficult the film was to cut? Not in a Hard Case book I don't!
So, I guess you could say Straight Cut isn't a bad book. It's just not a particularly good one either. It's just there. I'd give it 2.5 stars if I could.
December 12, 2021
This is literary noir. Or, to be more specific, think Jules et Jim meets The French Connection.
Tracy and Kevin work in the film industry. Each uses their international connections to raise funds in unsavory ways, but they’re solid professionals and possibly even gifted artists. They have a symbiotic relationship, and together – but separate as the novel opens – they’ve established solid mid-life careers.
Lauren came along and seemed to fall in love with both. Or, as she herself puts it, become a sign of what draws the two men together. She marries Tracy for a green card, but she seems to sleep with Kevin almost as often. No one quite likes it, but it’s a version of an eternal triangle.
All of that is backstory that Bell skillfully doles out in the course of the action here. Tracy is our narrator, and the novel opens with him in early middle age, reading-Kierkegaard despair. Lauren has left him, as she often does, and his geriatric dog has to be put down. He’s missing a spark he once knew which makes him vulnerable when Kevin calls with a job offer in Italy. It’s a little too good to be true, with a salary double what he’d ordinarily get, but that’s a sign: there’s more to this than the job. There has to be, because it’s Kevin, and Italy suggests some international criminal possibility.
Eventually, there is. Lauren shows up, duped by Kevin into being a drug courier, and Tracy feels he has to take over so he can save her from likely harm. Enter Bulgarian gangsters and a day-of-the-jackal-style French assassin, and things get messy. In a climax, [SPOILER:] Tracy manages to direct Kevin into a set-up meant for him – it’s shown as like a Voodoo curse returned to its sender – and he writes from a mostly happy place. He even gets himself a new dog.
For all the breathlessness of my description, the novel moves at a slower, tension-raising pace. Bell may or may not know his way around a professional film-editing room, but he makes me believe he knows what he’s talking about. You never know where the danger is coming from, so everything takes on a particular edge. We get extended descriptions of film editing – and later of scuba lessons – and they carry an urgency. Everything feels like it’s in shadow, literally noir.
I suspect I’d have thought this was great when it first came out, and I have still enjoyed it. There are enough changes in technology, in the trappings of the world of the novel, to make it seem marginally less urgent. Also, if I’m being picky, I could use a little more clarity in Kevin’s overall scheme.
This is strong work, though, and I can imagine re-reading it for some of the many stylistic tricks that accomplish all that Bell does.
Tracy and Kevin work in the film industry. Each uses their international connections to raise funds in unsavory ways, but they’re solid professionals and possibly even gifted artists. They have a symbiotic relationship, and together – but separate as the novel opens – they’ve established solid mid-life careers.
Lauren came along and seemed to fall in love with both. Or, as she herself puts it, become a sign of what draws the two men together. She marries Tracy for a green card, but she seems to sleep with Kevin almost as often. No one quite likes it, but it’s a version of an eternal triangle.
All of that is backstory that Bell skillfully doles out in the course of the action here. Tracy is our narrator, and the novel opens with him in early middle age, reading-Kierkegaard despair. Lauren has left him, as she often does, and his geriatric dog has to be put down. He’s missing a spark he once knew which makes him vulnerable when Kevin calls with a job offer in Italy. It’s a little too good to be true, with a salary double what he’d ordinarily get, but that’s a sign: there’s more to this than the job. There has to be, because it’s Kevin, and Italy suggests some international criminal possibility.
Eventually, there is. Lauren shows up, duped by Kevin into being a drug courier, and Tracy feels he has to take over so he can save her from likely harm. Enter Bulgarian gangsters and a day-of-the-jackal-style French assassin, and things get messy. In a climax, [SPOILER:] Tracy manages to direct Kevin into a set-up meant for him – it’s shown as like a Voodoo curse returned to its sender – and he writes from a mostly happy place. He even gets himself a new dog.
For all the breathlessness of my description, the novel moves at a slower, tension-raising pace. Bell may or may not know his way around a professional film-editing room, but he makes me believe he knows what he’s talking about. You never know where the danger is coming from, so everything takes on a particular edge. We get extended descriptions of film editing – and later of scuba lessons – and they carry an urgency. Everything feels like it’s in shadow, literally noir.
I suspect I’d have thought this was great when it first came out, and I have still enjoyed it. There are enough changes in technology, in the trappings of the world of the novel, to make it seem marginally less urgent. Also, if I’m being picky, I could use a little more clarity in Kevin’s overall scheme.
This is strong work, though, and I can imagine re-reading it for some of the many stylistic tricks that accomplish all that Bell does.
September 24, 2022
Very plodding and none of the characters or their plights were really very interesting. I would recommend this only to people who have to read anything and everything Hard Case Crime.
July 7, 2017
Straight Cut stands as Bell's foray into the hardboiled crime arena. The basic story in Straight Cut is a love triangle between two best friends, Tracy and Kevin, both in the film business, and Lauren, a strikingly beautiful woman, who Tracy marries ostensibly to help her with immigration issues, although he subsequently falls in love with her. It's never clear if it was ever intended to be a real marriage or who is committed to whom. Kevin offers Tracy a job editing a film in Rome, offering twice what Tracy considers to be market rate and Tracy, although he has misgivings, accepts and heads to Rome, only to find that the film is a mess and wondering what the real deal Kevin is involved in is. One day he comes home, stopping first at the trattoria downstairs, only to hear that his wife has returned. Tracy has had a wife on paper, but never a real marriage. He finds that Lauren has been in Europe and is muling a suitcase full of money at Kevin's behest. He sends Lauren home and takes over the muling, wondering all along if that had been Kevin's plan, given that Kevin knows him so well.
Eventually, the story morphs from a self-indulgent love story ostensibly about film editing to a cutthroat heroin deal that takes Tracy across international borders and pursued by gun-toting Bulgarian criminals.
There is underneath everything a strong, hardboiled plot, but it seems lost amidst the lengthy expositions on Tracy's work on the film and his meanderings through Italy. Granted that Bell is an accomplished writer, but this work could have used some editing just as the film Tracy works on did, but that's not the method to this writing. Overall, it is worth reading, but it is like watching a slow-paced film grind on rather than the frenetic pace of most hardboiled crime novels.
Eventually, the story morphs from a self-indulgent love story ostensibly about film editing to a cutthroat heroin deal that takes Tracy across international borders and pursued by gun-toting Bulgarian criminals.
There is underneath everything a strong, hardboiled plot, but it seems lost amidst the lengthy expositions on Tracy's work on the film and his meanderings through Italy. Granted that Bell is an accomplished writer, but this work could have used some editing just as the film Tracy works on did, but that's not the method to this writing. Overall, it is worth reading, but it is like watching a slow-paced film grind on rather than the frenetic pace of most hardboiled crime novels.
January 19, 2015
Bell seems to be pretty well-known, and I have seen his books getting good reviews. This looked interesting - perhaps a cool, hip drama about filmmakers and filmmaking? It starts out like it might be that, but then turns out to be something else: a fairly conventional mystery.
Spoiler alert: Tracy is the narrator and main character. He is a somewhat morose, alcoholic film editor in a difficult marriage with Lauren, a flighty ex-model. To complicate things, she is having an on again off again affair with Tracy's former partner and best buddy, a manipulative wheeler-dealer named Kevin. Kevin offers Tracy a job cutting a mediocre documentary in Rome, and he accepts. While there, Lauren shows up on a mysterious mission, and it transpires that she is carrying a case full of money that Kevin wants delivered. Tracy, who apparently will tolerate any hardship for his wife, takes over, and althou he should have realized it from the beginning, ends up the middleman in a heroin deal with a couple of tough Bulgarians, Grushko and Yonko. Kevin is clearly the brains behind this web, which was designed to con Tracy into doing his dirty work and perhaps to get rid of him entirely. But Tracy has had enough of Kevin, and begins to turn the tables on him.
The style is tight and concise, and with the exception of Tracy, the characters are pretty bland. This was a pretty good read, but nothing to get all excited over.
Spoiler alert: Tracy is the narrator and main character. He is a somewhat morose, alcoholic film editor in a difficult marriage with Lauren, a flighty ex-model. To complicate things, she is having an on again off again affair with Tracy's former partner and best buddy, a manipulative wheeler-dealer named Kevin. Kevin offers Tracy a job cutting a mediocre documentary in Rome, and he accepts. While there, Lauren shows up on a mysterious mission, and it transpires that she is carrying a case full of money that Kevin wants delivered. Tracy, who apparently will tolerate any hardship for his wife, takes over, and althou he should have realized it from the beginning, ends up the middleman in a heroin deal with a couple of tough Bulgarians, Grushko and Yonko. Kevin is clearly the brains behind this web, which was designed to con Tracy into doing his dirty work and perhaps to get rid of him entirely. But Tracy has had enough of Kevin, and begins to turn the tables on him.
The style is tight and concise, and with the exception of Tracy, the characters are pretty bland. This was a pretty good read, but nothing to get all excited over.
March 11, 2008
Straight Cut is narrated by Terry, a freelance film editor with a fondness for Kierkegaard. Intellectualism is not uncommon in noir fiction, and when it is done well, it can enhance a narrative with an added vein of dark poetry. In the case of Straight Cut, however, the narrator's philosophizing serves only to make a tedious narrative even more tedious. Terry, who is at least not UN-likeable, is invovled in a love triangle (and other things) with his self-absorbed ex-wife Lauren and his creepy sometimes-best friend Kevin. As the narrative progresses--and it progresses SLOWLY--it is difficult to fathom why Terry would ever have wanted anything to do with either one of them. Most interesting part of the book: the extended descriptions of the techincal aspects of film cutting and editing.
September 25, 2015
Have read and liked a lot of Madison Smart Bell's short stories and really liked his craft book Narrative Design: Working with Imagination, Craft, and Form, but this crime book didn't do much for me.
June 13, 2016
I had never heard of this author before but I thought I'd take a chance on the book anyway. It was very well written. The pacing was a little slow, but it was interesting enough overall to hold my attention. Hard Case crime books are usually hit or miss for me – while this is the best one I've ever read, I consider it a hit.
October 29, 2011
Awesome. A great read, tough to put down.
April 11, 2021
A very elegantly written novel in the structure of a noir.
January 24, 2024
The story begins with a man named Tracy who has to put his dog to sleep. Quite a bummer. Then he gets a call to fly to Italy to edit a film. But first, a stop in NYC. And a bizarre love triangle between him, his 'good' friend Kevin, and his ex-wife(or actual wife...) Lauren. The film editing in Italy bored me to tears. As did all of the text dedicated to Tracy walking around, eating, and drinking booze. Boring.
That story fills Parts I and II of the book, about 135 pages! Almost 60% of the book!
Then there is a heroin sub-plot, complete with a skin-diving maneuver?!??
It's not a very good read, in my opinion.
That story fills Parts I and II of the book, about 135 pages! Almost 60% of the book!
Then there is a heroin sub-plot, complete with a skin-diving maneuver?!??
It's not a very good read, in my opinion.
November 15, 2018
You know the writing has to be good when Walker Percy writes a blurb for the book. An excellent caper novel, featuring a film editor and his sometime friend, a film producer/director. Their jobs make international travel easy, and there are things that may be carried about by such folk and exchanged for other things that can be quite profitable. It took me a while to get into the book, but it eventually got to me, and I finished it in a rush.
April 9, 2023
A novel that's difficult to categorize
I'm not quite sure how to categorize this book. At bottom, it is a novel involving crime, but is also the story of a complex relationship involving three people. Whether one part of it predominates over the other is hard to say, and in a way that's part of the book's appeal. If you like crime novels you'll like it. If you don't, but do like novels exploring relationships, you'll like it as well. A winner either way.
I'm not quite sure how to categorize this book. At bottom, it is a novel involving crime, but is also the story of a complex relationship involving three people. Whether one part of it predominates over the other is hard to say, and in a way that's part of the book's appeal. If you like crime novels you'll like it. If you don't, but do like novels exploring relationships, you'll like it as well. A winner either way.
July 14, 2018
A two is being generous. This was the worst 'Hard Case Crime' book I've read. The fact I made it to the end was only due to a stubborn streak to see if it got better. It did not. a 250 page book where the highlight of the first 150 pages was a guy putting down a sick dog. A waste of paper.
January 25, 2019
No I will not write a review because I don't want to waste another minute of my life on this book. Tracy should have taken the needle for the dog in the first chapter and saved me from reading the rest of this book altogether.
January 12, 2020
I come out of this one just kind of blah. It was okay and certainly a fast read but it is going to be easily forgettable. Nothing especially grabbed me and yet I turned the pages and got something out of it. It was entertaining to a point.
July 19, 2023
There’s an interesting book in here somewhere but it’s buried under overwritten descriptions of a guy editing films and bohemian jet setting through Europe. Still not a bad effort for someone under 30.
March 28, 2019
Well wriiten but the story built was slow. As Tracy is film editor , the book has some details regarding to editing. It has a happy ending. Overall Good.
May 6, 2019
Another Hard Case Crime novel. I feel sorry for Tracy because he is dragged in again by Kevin and you would think he would know better but...I leave you with that.
August 29, 2021
Tremendous
January 31, 2023
Excellent style and story. For more details:
https://discontinuednotes.com/2023/01...
https://discontinuednotes.com/2023/01...
March 9, 2025
Much better prose than most of these but not very plot-driven
November 23, 2025
A cool noir tale with some great characterizations.
April 1, 2012
Tracy Bateman is a freelance film editor with a less than ideal personal life. He’s divorced, and his ex-wife, Lauren, is off with his best friend and occasional employer Kevin, an inept and untrustworthy executive. Bateman’s in the middle of an alcoholic depression when Kevin gives him a call for a film editing job in Italy… with the hint that the job will entail more than simple editing. While working on the documentary film, Bateman finds out what that “more” is: Lauren’s been sent to Europe for a drug smuggling job. Not about to let his ex-wife do something that dangerous—a job Kevin attempted in the past, resulting in the death of a mutual friend—Bateman takes on the role of drug trafficker. And when he realizes that’s what Kevin expected him to do, he has to fight against his self-destructive, depressive nature, and do something about it…
From the first page, this book makes one thing clear: it’s one of the top five, if not the best itself, well-written books in the Hard Case line. The writing is extravagant, with vivid imagery dripping with description. The language is smooth but flowery, very engaging and a pleasure to read. It gives a wonderful feeling of both character and setting, and stands out in the mystery/crime crowd.
However, the novel is very, very flawed. Bell is an acclaimed author, but not a genre one; therefore, the mystery and crime aspects are painfully predictable. I’ve seen several reviews praising its “unexpected ending.” I felt it was broadcast from early on, and while I hoped it wouldn’t be that predictable, I was proven wrong: it was exactly as I’d expected. The novel’s beautiful first section—dreamy introspection and character building—moves on to a long, dull section about film editing. It’s a common occurrence in crime novels (and moreso in men’s action novels of the period) to dive into great detail about something rather unrelated to the plot; here, it’s all about film production and philosophy. Those segments make the book drag rather than enhance anything; before getting anywhere near a plot, we spend a huge section learning about film editing. Yawn.
Thankfully, the book makes a rapid turn around the halfway point, and gets into its drug-smuggling plot. Here, we see a multitude of strange and interesting characters: Bulgarian thugs and drug traffickers, a hitman living in the suburbs of Paris. While the characters are unique, the plot isn’t; it’s pretty straightforward, and ends up at the predictable ending I called from the start. I was hoping to be surprised, but no; the book makes its last intentions very clear, and then spends far too much time getting there.
Straight Cut was read in a long line of Hard Cases chosen by cover alone, and was more than a letdown. (Among other things, the cover is unrelated to the book.) In terms of writing, it’s top-notch; in character, it’s pretty good; in terms of plot, originality, entertainment value, and so on, it’s mediocre and predictable. It takes too long to become engaging, and when it does, it neither rises above the crowd to defy the genre, nor does it fulfill the genre criteria to be a solid if straightforward novel. The plot is meandering, vague at points, and could use some tightening up. Worse, it’s plain boring, for large chunks of the novel. My suggestion is to avoid it unless you’re absolutely sure you’d like it.
(Full review found here.)
From the first page, this book makes one thing clear: it’s one of the top five, if not the best itself, well-written books in the Hard Case line. The writing is extravagant, with vivid imagery dripping with description. The language is smooth but flowery, very engaging and a pleasure to read. It gives a wonderful feeling of both character and setting, and stands out in the mystery/crime crowd.
However, the novel is very, very flawed. Bell is an acclaimed author, but not a genre one; therefore, the mystery and crime aspects are painfully predictable. I’ve seen several reviews praising its “unexpected ending.” I felt it was broadcast from early on, and while I hoped it wouldn’t be that predictable, I was proven wrong: it was exactly as I’d expected. The novel’s beautiful first section—dreamy introspection and character building—moves on to a long, dull section about film editing. It’s a common occurrence in crime novels (and moreso in men’s action novels of the period) to dive into great detail about something rather unrelated to the plot; here, it’s all about film production and philosophy. Those segments make the book drag rather than enhance anything; before getting anywhere near a plot, we spend a huge section learning about film editing. Yawn.
Thankfully, the book makes a rapid turn around the halfway point, and gets into its drug-smuggling plot. Here, we see a multitude of strange and interesting characters: Bulgarian thugs and drug traffickers, a hitman living in the suburbs of Paris. While the characters are unique, the plot isn’t; it’s pretty straightforward, and ends up at the predictable ending I called from the start. I was hoping to be surprised, but no; the book makes its last intentions very clear, and then spends far too much time getting there.
Straight Cut was read in a long line of Hard Cases chosen by cover alone, and was more than a letdown. (Among other things, the cover is unrelated to the book.) In terms of writing, it’s top-notch; in character, it’s pretty good; in terms of plot, originality, entertainment value, and so on, it’s mediocre and predictable. It takes too long to become engaging, and when it does, it neither rises above the crowd to defy the genre, nor does it fulfill the genre criteria to be a solid if straightforward novel. The plot is meandering, vague at points, and could use some tightening up. Worse, it’s plain boring, for large chunks of the novel. My suggestion is to avoid it unless you’re absolutely sure you’d like it.
(Full review found here.)
Read
April 17, 2016From the beginning of the novel when Tracy has to walk his sick dog up a mountain to put him down and bury him, we know that this guy is both courageous and compassionate. He doesn't shoot the dog. He doesn't hit him over the head with a shovel. He sits down with him on the hilltop, and while he rubs him behind the ears, he injects a syringe into the muscle in the back of his neck
Tracy is a thinking man who reads Kierkegard to help him straighten out his crooked world. He needs to put order to the betrayal of his best friend who is sleeping with his wife. Beyond that, he has drug and alcohol problems, and I don 19t think anyone can be quite sure which came first. The drugs or the hatred.
When his best friend Kevin offers him a job in Rome, he can 19t turn it down. It 19s the only way he is going to set things straight. Tracy is a talented professional film editor who knows that the job offers him an opportunity to control his life. He also knows that with Kevin, drugs will be involved. Here is the balance that he searches for. He 19s smart enough to realize what he 19s getting into with Kevin: a dangerous heroin smuggling scheme, but with all of his problems, it 19s the only way he is going to settle with Kevin.
I read Straight Cut like twenty years ago before it was advertised as a classic crime novel. I liked it then, and I like it now. After all, I had never read of a heroin dealer who was able to smoothly mesh concrete reality and abstract thinking into a world of drugs, needles and guns. I liked the way Tracy 19s commitment to his philosophy stood up to his fears and shortcomings.
In the darkest of times, there is light. In the most obscure rhythms, there is a beat. And when you think there is nothing left to live for, there 19s a half a million dollar's worth of heroin in your backpack. That 19s great writing.
Tracy is a thinking man who reads Kierkegard to help him straighten out his crooked world. He needs to put order to the betrayal of his best friend who is sleeping with his wife. Beyond that, he has drug and alcohol problems, and I don 19t think anyone can be quite sure which came first. The drugs or the hatred.
When his best friend Kevin offers him a job in Rome, he can 19t turn it down. It 19s the only way he is going to set things straight. Tracy is a talented professional film editor who knows that the job offers him an opportunity to control his life. He also knows that with Kevin, drugs will be involved. Here is the balance that he searches for. He 19s smart enough to realize what he 19s getting into with Kevin: a dangerous heroin smuggling scheme, but with all of his problems, it 19s the only way he is going to settle with Kevin.
I read Straight Cut like twenty years ago before it was advertised as a classic crime novel. I liked it then, and I like it now. After all, I had never read of a heroin dealer who was able to smoothly mesh concrete reality and abstract thinking into a world of drugs, needles and guns. I liked the way Tracy 19s commitment to his philosophy stood up to his fears and shortcomings.
In the darkest of times, there is light. In the most obscure rhythms, there is a beat. And when you think there is nothing left to live for, there 19s a half a million dollar's worth of heroin in your backpack. That 19s great writing.
July 7, 2025
Καλό αλλά άνισο βιβλίο. Ξεκινάει πολύ ωραία, ανεβάζοντας τις προσδοκίες, συνεχίζει δυναμικά αλλά στο τέλος, όπου δίνεται η λύση της υπόθεσης, απλά απογοήτευση. Απογοήτευση γιατί ενώ έχει όλα τα συστατικά ενός καλού βιβλίου, πέφτει σε ευκολίες κινηματογραφικού στυλ, κάτι που εμένα αφαιρεί από το πυρήνα του βιβλίου. Ο πρωταγωνιστής, ο Τρέισι είναι ένας κινηματογραφιστής, ο οποίος ζει απομονωμένος σε ένα ράντσο και εργάζεται κατά περιόδους, ανάλογα με τις οικονομικές του ανάγκες. Έχει για συντροφιά ένα γέρικο σκύλο, τον οποίο αναγκάζεται να αποχωριστεί κάποια στιγμή & τον φιλόσοφο Κίρκεγκωρ. Έχει μια ιδιότυπη σχέση με τον άλλοτε φίλο του Κέβιν, με το οποίον έχουν ξεκινήσει μαζί την καριέρα τους στο χώρο του κινηματογράφου και μια ακόμα μια περίπλοκη σχέση με την σύζυγο του, Λορήν. Τελικά, αν και ο Τρέισι ήταν ένας ικανός μοντέρ, που μπορεί να πάρει μια άθλια κόπια και να την μετατρέψει σε ένα αξιοπρεπές φιλμ, αποτυγχάνει να συλλέξει και να κολλήσει αποτελεσματικά τα δικά του «στιγμιότυπα», έτσι όταν φτάνει η κορύφωση της υπόθεσης καταφεύγει σε διάφορα κλισέ που παραπέμπουν σε ταινίες blockbusters και αυτή είναι και η ένστασή μου, άλλωστε.
February 22, 2010
The first 100 pages of this book read like a how-to on film editing. Which would be great if I had any interest at all in the field. Once the story kicked in I found it a little dull.
One thing that could be said for the author; he knows his way around New York City as well as the many locations throughout Europe were the character travels.
Other than that, this book didn't seem like a great fit in the Hard Case Crime series and to me, the tag line on the cover of the book seemed a little misleading. In the end, this was a pretty thin, boring story that was barely worth the dollar I paid for it. Slow and uneventful.
One thing that could be said for the author; he knows his way around New York City as well as the many locations throughout Europe were the character travels.
Other than that, this book didn't seem like a great fit in the Hard Case Crime series and to me, the tag line on the cover of the book seemed a little misleading. In the end, this was a pretty thin, boring story that was barely worth the dollar I paid for it. Slow and uneventful.
October 12, 2008
I enjoyed a lot of things about this book: locations both familiar and not, very accurate descriptions of various technical aspects of film work which weren't boring, and a well-constructed plot that kept me turning the pages with interest, never guessing how things were going to turn out.
The characters weren't particularly warm or likeable, but they were believable.
Overall, I thought this was a well-written and enjoyable novel with some interestingly atypical aspects for the genre.
The characters weren't particularly warm or likeable, but they were believable.
Overall, I thought this was a well-written and enjoyable novel with some interestingly atypical aspects for the genre.
Read
October 19, 2014The Hard Case Crime series offers pulp noir at its finest. They re-publish classics; give a voice to new talent; and wrangle bug names to stretch a little (Stephen King has penned two books for them). They're not high-minded, life-changing literature. But if you're looking for fun quick reads, I recommend them. At one point, I was getting 2 paperbacks a month direct from the publisher for $8/month. Great deal! Don't know if it's still out there. But seek them out regardless. You'll be happy you did.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews