From yesterday… The Killer is good, but what's the difference between 'mediocre' and 'great'? What separates movies like 'Ghost Rider' and 'Dark Knight'? Well, intent. Ghost Rider was a premise that held promise, but became a f**king mess. The Dark Knight was about Batman, but also about civilization, nihilism, civil liberties and security. It handled its themes deftly, so that it wasn't preachy, but you got the creator's message. The Dark Knight was indisputably great. The Killer aspires to the same level of seriousness, but, compared to something indisputably great, like The Watchmen, it fails.
Like an Oliver Stone movie, the book has all the right ingredients to be a masterpiece, but succumbs to its creator’s tendency to soapbox various propaganda and half baked conspiracy theories which derails its chances of becoming a masterpiece. But, even with the political leanings, a book can still be great if the story is good, and the story in this book is good. Basically, the Killer comes out of a beautiful beach retirement because he is tired of not killing people, and then accidentally gets caught up in some serious international espionage. OK, awesome, and the story plays out well and nothing feels to out of place, but there's just a glitch in the awesome matrix. I can't stand the protagonist.
