Joe Moley's Reviews > Nothing to Lose

Nothing to Lose by Lee Child
Rate this book
Clear rating

M 50x66
's review
Apr 17, 2008

did not like it

I'm done with Child after this latest installment. The last few Reacher novels have really dragged and I was hoping this one might revive the series. Unfortunately, this was not the case.

Furthermore, the writer decides to jump on a soap box towards the end and throw in random anti-bush/anti-war diatribe. Obviously, this is his right as the creater of the novel but I found it completely ridiculous and hypocritical of his main character. It would be one thing if Child had done this in previous books (Disclaimer - I've read every Reacher books and have never even smelled a hint of political rants. I could be completely blind though and just missed it...) but it just seemed completely nonsensical.

Unless he takes a break from Reacher for a while and writes something else, I'm on haitus.

*Edited to correct spelling errors. This from a guy who writes "wuite" eloquently. Thanks for pointing them out Grim. Bastard.
22 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Nothing to Lose.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-8 of 8) (8 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Grim (new)

Grim "rediculous"?

Really Joe?


Good stuff.

message 2: by J.D. (last edited Jun 21, 2008 02:00PM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

J.D. I think what would be strange is if Reacher DIDN'T have an opinion on the current situation and act on it as the occasion arose.

If that makes him "anti-Bush," well, he's not alone. Checked the Glorious Leader's approval ratings lately?

message 3: by Joe (new) - rated it 1 star

Joe Moley I don't know, it just seemed out of sorts with the character and themes from the previous novels. In my opinion, these books have not been political in the past. If you want to write a political thriller then do so from the very beginning instead of changing directions towards the end of a story that wasn’t headed that way. The randomness of it all really stuck out at me. It read as a complete throw in to me.

I also don’t think there is much support for your theory about it being strange if Reacher didn’t have an opinion on current events. This is a guy who in “Jules” from Pulp Fiction style, walks the earth, meets people and gets into adventures. He does not watch TV, rarely picks up a newspaper (other than to check out baseball box scores) and barely even talks to anyone (unless they are messing with him). Now he’s suddenly current on clandestine, over the boarder Iran incursions and anti-war propaganda. I just didn’t buy it.

And I'm well aware of the presidential ratings... I just like my political fiction limited to the real world. Novels are my escape to somewhere else. :)

message 4: by Robert (last edited Feb 03, 2014 01:28PM) (new) - rated it 2 stars

Robert You're right Joe. Reacher seems in past books to be decidedly noncommittal when it comes to politics, so this was Child's viewpoints being attributed to Reacher. I could see the veteran stuff, because that would matter to Reacher, but to actually print the idea that there are Americans that think returning injured vets are garbage is a horrible slander against Americans and shows that a British author may be able to study a map of America and write locale's well, but he doesn't necessarily understand Americans per se. I can't even imagine any American thinking injured servicemen or women are garbage.

Martha Colburn You missed one. "Creator" is spelled with an "o" at the end, not an "e".

message 6: by Kb (new) - rated it 2 stars

Kb To "Joe": Reacher travels on buses and hitchhikes a lot. He picks up magazines and newspapers while waiting for and traveling on the bus. When he hitchhikes, he is confined in a vehicle with a stranger for possibly hours on end, and they have to talk about something. I'll bet Reacher has listened to more than his fair share of political rants, if not from people in vehicles then overheard in the diners and coffee shops he frequents.

Mike Blackadder Joe, I agree the anti-Bush anti-Iraq rant is out of place, and personally find it to be a pretty stupid point of view. It's just not credible that Reacher, who is a realist, who certainly would be aware of how politics comes to bear in military decisions, would make such a strong point about Iraq as a 'game-changer' for the military.

Maybe the point was to make Reacher appear as a more realistic character. He's an invincible scrapper, the perfect shot, knows everything about everything, can track the time of day in his head down to the second, but it turns out he's a total idiot when it comes to politics. The book could have been called 'Nobody's Perfect'!

Robert Mike that made my day. Thanks

back to top