Are snakes necessary?

This is a deliciously deceptive novel by noted film director De Palma (Scarface; The Untouchables; Mission: Impossible) and former New York Times editor Lehman. What begins as a Christopher Buckley-style comedy-drama about a philandering politician, his ambitious fix-it man, and some very beautiful women transitions to a dark thriller in which, as its conclusion approaches, the authors execute some plot twists and revelations that would be right at home in a De Palma movie (something in the mode of Dressed to Kill or Body Double). This is a pleasure to read. The tale has dozens of moving parts, each of which must work in perfect synchronization with the others to avoid bringing the whole enterprise to a screeching halt. The writing is nearly pitch-perfect, too: lightly comic in some scenes, darker and more ominous in others. When the surprises start to come, one after another, with increasing rapidity, we realize there have been a few subplots running behind the scenes, just out of our view, that have suddenly become visible, altering the whole texture of the novel. A wonderful, immensely satisfying thriller.--David Pitt Copyright 2020 Booklist

The 2016 reelection campaign of Sen. Lee Rogers of Pennsylvania, a philandering scoundrel, drives this disappointing political thriller from filmmaker De Palma and former New York Times editor Lehman. At a chance encounter with a former flame, Jenny Cours, Rogers meets her 18-year-old daughter, Fanny, who's a political junkie eager to help his campaign. Known as the Hunk of the Hill on Capitol Hill, Rogers agrees to hire Fanny, who's "in the full flush of carnality," as a videographer. He soon lures her into his bed. Their relationship proves dangerous for Rogers after Fanny vanishes, and Jenny's persistent search for her daughter places the politician in law enforcement's crosshairs. A subplot involving a remake of the Hitchcock film Vertigo set at the Eiffel Tower sets the stage for a risible climax. The predictable and tired plot twists aren't helped by the authors' portrayal of present-day politics as if the 2016 presidential campaign never happened. This would have worked better as an intentional parody of the genre. (Mar.)