It's often considered a faux pas to leave anything less than an absolutely glowing review if you are an author. In the indie author world, it's an extreme faux pas in the sense that a negative review hurts us harder than those who are traditionally published.
I kind of straddle that rule right down the middle. If the book was absolute garbage, then I'll say nothing. If it had potential but required work, then I'll leave a review.
In this case, Mr. Carr will likely never read my review, and it certainly won't put a dent in his popularity and sales. In the off-chance he does read it, though, I hope that this review will serve as constructive criticism.
A brief summary: The Terminal List deals with LCDR James Reece, SEAL Team 7, whose entire team is killed in an ambush in Afghanistan when they are forced by the National Command Authority to assault an objective without proper reconnaissance and battlefield preparation. Shortly upon returning, Reece is accused of dereliction of duty by his chain of command, his best friend is suicided, and his family is murdered by gang members. Reece begins to call in every favor he can and prepares for war, uncovering a massive conspiracy along the way.
I have friends that absolutely love this book. That initially got me interested in it. Then I read the 1- and 2-star reviews and was concerned. I met Jack Carr in person and he was a nice-enough guy. I think it's that last point that compels me to write the review, because I want him to succeed and I see he's got the potential to do so.
I find myself somewhere between the glowing reviews and the total dress downs.
What does Terminal List do right?
The action is top notch, and it's clear that Carr's experience as a special warfare operator translates well onto the page. When bullets start flying, the reader is immersed in the firefight. There are glimmers of dialogue and characterization that hint at larger potential.
What does it do wrong?
The first mistake that comes to mind is that there is a **lot** of showing instead of telling. Moments that could have been powerful are reduced to summation and lose their impact. This is especially obvious in the scene where Reece loses his team. Zero buildup, which makes it hard for anyone who hasn't experienced that loss first-hand to connect.
For every glimmer of solid characterization, there are also several missteps. Aside from telling rather than showing, there were moments that really struck me as off. Reece does an awful lot of smiling for somebody whose entire world had been destroyed. In that circumstance, I think of the 2004 Tom Jane version of The Punisher, a man driven solely by revenge. He's not smiling. He's not cracking jokes. He's still reeling from the death of his family. Reece acts a lot like the death of his family is well behind him, and it's noticeably jarring. There are others examples of mischaracterization, but this is the most grievous.
The final item that docks points is the heavy-handedness with which Terminal List handles politics. It is very much "conservative good, liberal bad," with multiple tone-deaf takes throughout. I understand the thriller genre is predominantly conservative. This docked point isn't about a political disagreement but rather a disagreement on writing technique.
There are two thriller books that came out in the early 2010s which will remain nameless. Both had George Soros type characters as antagonists. One handled it with deftness, making the character nuanced while decidedly still an antagonist. The other resorted to caricatures, making conservatives out to be everything that was right with the world and liberals to be everything that was bad with the world.
Nobody sees themselves as the bad guy of the story. Nobody is going to cackle and rub their hands evilly and plot destruction like a vaudeville villain. The liberal antagonists of this novel very much come off like that, and while it may score points with the Trumpist base that's looking for "gotcha!" moments that support their political tribe, an objective eye--regardless of personal politics--will be put off.
Terminal List unfortunately falls victim to this. There were multiple occasions where I was starting to lose myself in the story, only to be snapped back to reality by the painfully obvious fictional take on Hillary Clinton spouting lines that come off as what conservatives think liberals sound like.
I have to wonder if nobody offered these suggestions to Mr. Carr on the basis of his being a Navy SEAL and wanting to be supportive. I understand that, but there is more than one way to be supportive. As I said at the onset, Mr. Carr absolutely has potential and I think he can make a fine thriller author. He certainly bats above average in the category of "SOF veteran turned author." I hope somebody makes these suggestions to him so that he can continue to grow as an author.