How can one really outright enjoy the first Die Hard movie then absolutely hate the sequel(s)? How can one ignore the unlikely premise/s and focus on the truly senseless but highly entertaining onscreen mayhem? The answers to these questions are important, aren't they? They relate to how one will feel about this book by Brad Thor.
This was my first Thor book. First, the aspects of it that I liked: the action, the armaments and , er, the action. Ok, this a short list, but there was a lot of it in various permutations and repetitions. The unlikables: war, unrepentant killing, skimpy character development, non-sequiturs. There's enough of that, too. Enough that the good and the bad balance out. What tips this to one side for me is the unrelenting world view espoused by the author through the characters and the story, that everything can be painted in black or white, that conflict can only be resolved by the mighty quashing everyone else. There was just too much of this for me to be ignored, and ultimately to truly enjoy this book.
An important lesson for me as a writer is to understand how much of my own opinions to infuse into stories, another step on the road to understanding what true story-telling is about. Such a long road still ahead.