|
There never was any foundation established for many of the actions and so the story became unbelieveable. By the end of the book I hardly cared because it all made no sense. The book starts well. The characters, too, were never well developed. I had the feeling when I finished the book that it could have been good ---- but it needed more rewites, more cohesion and a clearer vision. The opening scenes were complelling. After the first rush of interest though the story began to get bogged down in its own convoluted plot.
This is my first read by Reich, and probably won't buy another. I couldn't even get through half the book before I didn't care about anyone in it.
I am running out of synonyms for awful writing - expressions and words, we would have a 200 page decent book, instead of a 576-page bloat. If this is what passes for modern thriller-writing, I think I am changing the class of books I have been reading with such relish for 40 years.
But, it is pretty awful reading material. I will give this book two stars for the plot.
Excuse me, ladies and gents - all 94 reviewers who went before me - have we been reading the same book. Are you kidding.
I, for one, was not entertained and I will probably have to see a dentist to see about the damage caused by hours of teeth-gnashing. If you extracted all the unnecessary, superfluous, redundant, clichéd, unoriginal, worn-out, passé, overworked, stereotypical, timeworn, banal, commonplace, hackneyed, overused, stale, tired, unimaginative,.sigh.
Somebody compared this writer to the likes of Ludlum, Forsyth and Trevanian, true masters of the thriller genre.
Literally coudn't put it down. This book is tense, compelling, and even fun. The story is well-developed, the characters are not paper-thin, and the action is not over-done. Like many folks who have given praise in this forum, Rules of Deception was my first step into the world of Reich. That sounds like a cliche, but in this case it was absolutely true. I'm really glad I listened to those who compared this book to some of the greatest spy novels ever penned. And wow. Simply put, I am an instant fan.
I am not interested in people who blam America for all the ills in the world, even in fiction.There was nothing about Jonathan Ransom that interested me. EGADS. That was the point at which the story lost ANY believability/credibility. His character was barely developed. I just could not buy into this.Then this. I struggled to finish listening to this book.it was so improbable and almost ridiculous in its "convolutedness".
of Defense and the CIA. One reviewer said I could not agree more. The narration was fine, it was the story that was so flawed. the most ridiculous thing of all-->>>>>the leader of one of the groups (Austin) is doing this because he converted to Christianity. I cannot imagine such an undeveloped character "carrying" a series.A good-reading friend tells me the next book is better, but I don't know if I will even try it. I know it is a novel, but I think that a thriller like this should bear some resemblance to reality and have some sense of logic.It was so "out there", so preposterous.two battling organizations are the Dept.
It is just ludicrous to posit or think that no one in these organizations would "blow the whistle" on these terrorist plans.
|
