Take a photo of a barcode or cover
jpeaslee 's review for:
The Crucifix Killer
by Chris Carter
This is a bad book.
It's chock-full of lazy cliches and clumsy info dumps. So much of it doesn't make any sense. Most of the twists are easy to see from a mile away. None of the characters are relatable. It treats POCs and women terribly, and woe to anyone who has a sexual kink, because you're actually secretly a miserable pervert.
I'm sincerely annoyed that I spent any amount of money on this book, and spending money on it is the ONLY reason I kept reading it. I just wanted to get it over and done with as quickly as possible.
Quick 'n Dirty Summary
Detective Hunter and his rookie partner, Garcia, are trying to track down a serial killer. Not just any serial killer! This is a serial killer who was supposedly already caught and executed, although Hunter had his doubts at the time. And rightly so, since the killer comes back! Gasp!
A Sample of the Trite Crap I Put Up With While Reading This Book
Although Garcia is a rookie, one would think Hunter wouldn't need to explain to him the basics of detective work, like "most serial killers are men" and "usually violence is committed by people of the same race as their victims." Truly stunning insights, Hunter.
But! Are you ready for a(n incredibly obvious) twist?
Naturally, that means the killer is seductive lady-on-the-streets, freak-in-the-sheets Isabella, who Hunter has been sleeping with. (Hunter is a terrible detective.)
Yawn. Been there, done that. See: Dark Knight Rises, and that James Patterson book with an identical twist. And of COURSE the killer's entire motive is revenge. She must be out for revenge, because Hunter said that the killer wasn't out for revenge. See how this works? (HUNTER IS A TERRIBLE DETECTIVE.)
Did you know that everyone who likes BDSM is a violent pervert? That's in there, too. And all women in LA are beautiful and shallow - unless they're originally from the South.
You know how I said Hunter had pinned the crucifix killings on the wrong person? Yeah, turns out it's the second time that's happened. Of course, he was the only person who knew it both times, but how are we meant to be impressed with this supposed wunderkind? He is TERRIBLE at his job.
PS - Detective Garcia, when your wife says "oh my god somebody was out in the dark staring at our apartment!" don't just blow her off. Seriously. If you saw a potential intruder or Peeping Tom, you would probably call the cops, right? So why, in a cop book, does the cop just pat his little wife down as being irrational? Oh, that's right - BAD WRITING.
Don't buy this book. Don't borrow this book. Don't read this book.
It's chock-full of lazy cliches and clumsy info dumps. So much of it doesn't make any sense. Most of the twists are easy to see from a mile away. None of the characters are relatable. It treats POCs and women terribly, and woe to anyone who has a sexual kink, because you're actually secretly a miserable pervert.
I'm sincerely annoyed that I spent any amount of money on this book, and spending money on it is the ONLY reason I kept reading it. I just wanted to get it over and done with as quickly as possible.
Quick 'n Dirty Summary
Detective Hunter and his rookie partner, Garcia, are trying to track down a serial killer. Not just any serial killer! This is a serial killer who was supposedly already caught and executed, although Hunter had his doubts at the time. And rightly so, since the killer comes back! Gasp!
A Sample of the Trite Crap I Put Up With While Reading This Book
Although Garcia is a rookie, one would think Hunter wouldn't need to explain to him the basics of detective work, like "most serial killers are men" and "usually violence is committed by people of the same race as their victims." Truly stunning insights, Hunter.
But! Are you ready for a(n incredibly obvious) twist?
Spoiler
Every time Hunter explains a Basic Fact to Garcia ("Serial killers aren't out for revenge; that's just movie stuff"), it turns out that he's wrong and it's all a clue to who the killer is. (Hunter is a terrible detective.)Naturally, that means the killer is seductive lady-on-the-streets, freak-in-the-sheets Isabella, who Hunter has been sleeping with. (Hunter is a terrible detective.)
Yawn. Been there, done that. See: Dark Knight Rises, and that James Patterson book with an identical twist. And of COURSE the killer's entire motive is revenge. She must be out for revenge, because Hunter said that the killer wasn't out for revenge. See how this works? (HUNTER IS A TERRIBLE DETECTIVE.)
Did you know that everyone who likes BDSM is a violent pervert? That's in there, too. And all women in LA are beautiful and shallow - unless they're originally from the South.
You know how I said Hunter had pinned the crucifix killings on the wrong person? Yeah, turns out it's the second time that's happened. Of course, he was the only person who knew it both times, but how are we meant to be impressed with this supposed wunderkind? He is TERRIBLE at his job.
PS - Detective Garcia, when your wife says "oh my god somebody was out in the dark staring at our apartment!" don't just blow her off. Seriously. If you saw a potential intruder or Peeping Tom, you would probably call the cops, right? So why, in a cop book, does the cop just pat his little wife down as being irrational? Oh, that's right - BAD WRITING.
Don't buy this book. Don't borrow this book. Don't read this book.