A pet peeve of mystery thrillers for me is when the synopsis mentions something to the effect of "will the protagonist become the killer's next victim?" It would provide tension... if even a fraction of thriller authors actually followed through with the threat. But the worst the protagonist gets is like, a bullet to the arm. Maybe a couple shallow cuts that need stitches. It rings so hollow these days.
I know this video is old, but I just wanted to say that when you brought up the Irresistible Male Protagonist trope, I IMMEDIATELY thought of The Narrows. Which is funny because I read it 15 years ago now. But it still stands out to me for the reasons you describe. Bosch sleeping with Rachel was so unnecessary. They didn't have any chemistry and Rachel got no real character development. It was my first and last Harry Bosch novel.
As a mystery/thriller writer this was interesting. As a reader I primarily go for historical mystery/thrillers. The only thing I hate is when the denouncement makes no sense, and ignores every atom of human nature.
Love this analysis. AJ Finn sounds like a nutcase. I read about his back story all over the Web. I also hate the teasing device, its a very cheap trick which reveals a hollow bag, nothing of substance
Out of curiosity, what if only one character had a secret past that explains why he is that way? He is not a main protagonist nor does his secret effect the plot just the understanding of his personality?
It’s probably been a while since you got a comment on this video but I just saw it and loved it; I agree with all the clichés you mentioned but may have picked different examples. I love Bosch so it made total sense to me that Rachel would want to sleep with him, whereas in the other “sort of” sequel to The Poet Blood Work Terry McCaleb has just undergone a heart transplant and describes himself as grey, worn and tired and still gets bed the much younger, gorgeous female protagonist. But at least in the book I think Caleb was quite young; in the movie he was played by Clint Eastwood ... If you’d want (but why would you) the ultimate “irresistible male protagonist” writer, or at least where it never seemed logical that they would bi irresistible I propose Stuart Woods. And I also loved The Poet and found his plot twist in the end more scary than annoying. Someone who writes so many plot twists it’s like the number of turns taken in a figure skating program is Jeffery Deaver. For him it is something he reverts to in most of his books which is when it, to me, gets really annoying because you start being prepared for it. I really liked that you included the “It is personal” cliche (which is a very weird part of one of the books I’ve already mentioned); it is so seldom needed, but one cliché or perhaps it’s more of a writing device I find annoying is the cursive killer.
I agree about the "hidden past" teaser. Just go for it, reveal it, let the reader see the character work to protect or overcome the secret, let firends and villains use it against them. Or if you do want to hold on to it don't hold on long. Plus I have seen screen writers very successfully reveal the incident in the past but then slowly uncover the true and complete story of what happened. Unreliable narrators: People really need to go back and read Agatha Christie she was the best at providing a piece of information, or part of a conversation overheard or between characters and the clue was completely reasonable and yet not enough. Unreliable without the lying to the reader.
I am a BIG mystery snob! It takes a really great one to satisfy me. Grisham is not a great writer, TBH. I love Agatha Christie and Steven Saylor's mysteries set in Ancient Rome. Jo Nesbo is great, but only in his Harry Hole books. The bottom line is, I think a lot of writers think that writing a mystery is easy.
What about breathtaking plot twist, I think Steven Moffat is the best in it, the screenwriter of Sherlock and Doctor Who. I personally don't like when a plot doesn't have enough levels of complexity.
Nothing wrong with the first one if done well. And it isn`t a cliche. I agree with the second, although a promiscuous woman could be used to great affect as long as the focus is on why she is like that. Number 3: would an unreliable male be okay? Number 4: I have never come across this. Number 5: too many twists - partly agree, although complex plots work well if handled properly. You keep mentioning Michael Connelly. Far better writers than him out there. Ellroy, Pelecanos etc. Interesting video, but I`ve always felt that an easy criticism to make about a novel is to pull out the word cliche. Cliched plots, cliched characters etc. Cliched writing: now that is different.
You’re not a mister fan, i guess. Just don’t read mistery😅 half the books you mentioned I enjoyed, and I like when an author manipulates me… if you don’t like that it means you might interested in different book types
I've read two books by Dan Brown: The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. To be honest, I thought Da Vinci was strictly okay and I did not like Angels and Demons at all.
![ถามตรงๆ กับ อาจตุพร ทำไม ประเทศไทย ใครเป็นนายก ก็โดนด่า พอออกเเล้วคนคิดถึง!!?? l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3YFLMXxBGAs/mqdefault.jpg)
The [character] in the [setting] is also a very cliched title style
YES! And titles with the word 'girl.'
I hate teasing. I find it annoying and, as you've said, it seems cheap.
Thank you! It drives me nuts!
A pet peeve of mystery thrillers for me is when the synopsis mentions something to the effect of "will the protagonist become the killer's next victim?"
It would provide tension... if even a fraction of thriller authors actually followed through with the threat. But the worst the protagonist gets is like, a bullet to the arm. Maybe a couple shallow cuts that need stitches. It rings so hollow these days.
I remember reading a horror story where out of nowhere the narrator has to go to hospital to get their arm and both legs amputated once
I know this video is old, but I just wanted to say that when you brought up the Irresistible Male Protagonist trope, I IMMEDIATELY thought of The Narrows. Which is funny because I read it 15 years ago now. But it still stands out to me for the reasons you describe. Bosch sleeping with Rachel was so unnecessary. They didn't have any chemistry and Rachel got no real character development. It was my first and last Harry Bosch novel.
Ha! How funny that you thought of Bosch. It's so confounding.
As a mystery/thriller writer this was interesting. As a reader I primarily go for historical mystery/thrillers. The only thing I hate is when the denouncement makes no sense, and ignores every atom of human nature.
I can agree with that pet peeve.
Love this analysis. AJ Finn sounds like a nutcase. I read about his back story all over the Web. I also hate the teasing device, its a very cheap trick which reveals a hollow bag, nothing of substance
I constantly see ads for Dan Brown's MasterClass and he recommends teasing the audience, which makes me want to throw my laptop into an abyss.
Making it personal. Yep, probably my number one frustration with the genre, extending to TV series and movies as well.
It's so annoying!
Out of curiosity, what if only one character had a secret past that explains why he is that way? He is not a main protagonist nor does his secret effect the plot just the understanding of his personality?
It’s probably been a while since you got a comment on this video but I just saw it and loved it; I agree with all the clichés you mentioned but may have picked different examples. I love Bosch so it made total sense to me that Rachel would want to sleep with him, whereas in the other “sort of” sequel to The Poet Blood Work Terry McCaleb has just undergone a heart transplant and describes himself as grey, worn and tired and still gets bed the much younger, gorgeous female protagonist. But at least in the book I think Caleb was quite young; in the movie he was played by Clint Eastwood ... If you’d want (but why would you) the ultimate “irresistible male protagonist” writer, or at least where it never seemed logical that they would bi irresistible I propose Stuart Woods.
And I also loved The Poet and found his plot twist in the end more scary than annoying. Someone who writes so many plot twists it’s like the number of turns taken in a figure skating program is Jeffery Deaver. For him it is something he reverts to in most of his books which is when it, to me, gets really annoying because you start being prepared for it.
I really liked that you included the “It is personal” cliche (which is a very weird part of one of the books I’ve already mentioned); it is so seldom needed, but one cliché or perhaps it’s more of a writing device I find annoying is the cursive killer.
I agree about the "hidden past" teaser. Just go for it, reveal it, let the reader see the character work to protect or overcome the secret, let firends and villains use it against them. Or if you do want to hold on to it don't hold on long. Plus I have seen screen writers very successfully reveal the incident in the past but then slowly uncover the true and complete story of what happened. Unreliable narrators: People really need to go back and read Agatha Christie she was the best at providing a piece of information, or part of a conversation overheard or between characters and the clue was completely reasonable and yet not enough. Unreliable without the lying to the reader.
I am a BIG mystery snob! It takes a really great one to satisfy me. Grisham is not a great writer, TBH. I love Agatha Christie and Steven Saylor's mysteries set in Ancient Rome. Jo Nesbo is great, but only in his Harry Hole books. The bottom line is, I think a lot of writers think that writing a mystery is easy.
I haven't read any Saylor so I'll have to keep my eyes our for some of those books! Writing a mystery is definitely not easy.
What about breathtaking plot twist, I think Steven Moffat is the best in it, the screenwriter of Sherlock and Doctor Who.
I personally don't like when a plot doesn't have enough levels of complexity.
Nothing wrong with the first one if done well. And it isn`t a cliche.
I agree with the second, although a promiscuous woman could be used to great affect as long as the focus is on why she is like that.
Number 3: would an unreliable male be okay?
Number 4: I have never come across this.
Number 5: too many twists - partly agree, although complex plots work well if handled properly.
You keep mentioning Michael Connelly. Far better writers than him out there. Ellroy, Pelecanos etc.
Interesting video, but I`ve always felt that an easy criticism to make about a novel is to pull out the word cliche. Cliched plots, cliched characters etc. Cliched writing: now that is different.
I'm happy to hear when a man criticise showing women as functions
As functions? That doesn`t make sense.
That New Yorker story is *bonkers*!
You’re not a mister fan, i guess. Just don’t read mistery😅 half the books you mentioned I enjoyed, and I like when an author manipulates me… if you don’t like that it means you might interested in different book types
Have you read any Mary Higgins Clark books she’s know as the queen of suspense
I have not! I've always meant to get around to reading one of hers, though.
Please make your videos louder than this one
Have you read something to dan brown?
I've read two books by Dan Brown: The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. To be honest, I thought Da Vinci was strictly okay and I did not like Angels and Demons at all.