Sam Bourne – The Righteous Men – Book Review

Sam Bourne - The Righteous Men

I was sceptical about The Righteous Men from the moment I read the strapline across the top: “The Greatest Challenger To Dan Brown’s Crown”.

Aw, shite. Not another Da Vinci Code rip-off.

The Plot

The plot centers around Will Monroe, a rookie journalist at the New York Times whose wife is inexplicably kidnapped while he’s out obsessively working on a story. As he desperately tries to find and save his wife, he also needs to work out what the connection is between two unrelated murders he covered recently.

Interestingly, Will’s investigations lead him to an Hassidic neighbourhood in New York where he finds his wife’s captors and is promptly given a hiding by them.

Just to confuse matters, Will starts receiving cryptic clues by text message that seem to be guiding him. With the help of the text messages and his hot ex-girlfriend, Will has to find his wife before time runs out.

The Verdict

To be fair, The Righteous Men beats the Da Vinci Code for more realistic characters. You can empathise with Will Monroe more than you could with Dan Brown’s characters. His back story is more developed and you find yourself thinking about how you’d react in the same situation. You can also see his conflicts whenever he has to call upon his former girlfriend for help in decoding the text messages he’s been receiving.

I would say for the first two thirds of the book, I was completely drawn in. The last third, I had started to guess at how the story would end. Let’s just say that the storyline takes a weird and wonderful flight of fancy and becomes completely detached from reality.

The increasingly bizarre events and ever more unlikely climax ruin the book in my opinion. I won’t spoil the ending here, but maybe we can discuss it in the comments. If you want to avoid spoilers, don’t go any further.

2 Comments

  1. Diabolus Infernalis

    I believe, sorry to contradict, that the “Righteous Men” by Sam Bourne could not have  had a better conclusion in order for all the ends to meet in as neat and unquestionably clean a manner as they have– contrary to what you said, through such words as “The increasingly bizarre events and ever more unlikely climax ruin the book in my opinion” ,for it is a known verily indicated fact, though not clearly stated, that ideas where Religion of such high degrees is concerned, Supersticious concepts are all but likely to come into play, whereby they cannot, and by all means, should not be dismissed as “Bizzare” or “unlikely”

     

     

    although I do gladly acknowledge the fact that you are free to have and express your opinions, however contradictory, I beg to request you to please not overtly impose your negative views on the conclusion of the novel in the eyes of those who otherwise may better enjoy it. Thanks infinitely

    1. Dara Hickey

      although I do gladly acknowledge the fact that you are free to have and express your opinions, however contradictory, I beg to request you to please not overtly impose your negative views on the conclusion of the novel in the eyes of those who otherwise may better enjoy it. Thanks infinitely”

      Given that Gerard found the ending to be such as you ardently disagree with, it would rather defeat the object of the entire review if he were to simply comment on the novel objectively. This is the same with any form of review – there will always be subjectivity and to request that it be removed is a far more heinous crime than to simply leave the very nature of the review format as it is. Without subjectivity, the review would simply become factual, and therefore would, as Gerard took such care in avoiding, ruin the entire plot of the book as that would be there is to talk about. In such an instance I’m sure you’d have been even more pissed off, so even if you persist your case, this is definitely the lesser of two evils.

Log In or Sign Up

css.php
Skip to toolbar