Rating: 
Summary: Thoroughly enjoyed this book!
Review: This is my first of Turow's books and I loved it. I have read most of Grisham's works and have run hot and cold on them, cold enough so that I haven't even bothered to buy his last two. But Turow's "Personal Injuries" was entertaining in every way. In my opinion, his writing exhibits more depth and complexity than Grisham's in terms of story content and character development. I look forward to reading his other books.
Rating: 
Summary: Robbie Feaver Gets What He Deserves
Review: Robbie Feaver, a ruthless lawyer specializing in personal injuries, has been bribing judges for years to make rulings in his favor. His deceit is uncovered by U.S. Attorney Stan Sennett, who offers Robbie immunity if he cooperates in an elaborate FBI sting operation to net all of the guilty judges. Feaver is represented by his attorney, George Mason, who is the primary narrator of the novel. The choice of narrator is sometimes confusing because the book alternates between his first-person narrative and the omniscient observer point of view when Mason is not present in a scene.The FBI sting includes a fictional lawyer and a deep cover agent, Evon Miller, who masquerades as Robbie's paralegal and latest in a string of girlfriends. Evon becomes an integral part of the sting as she becomes inextricably woven into the daily professional and personal life of Robbie. The legal maneuvering is detailed, intricate and sometimes so hard to follow that it becomes rather boring. The real core of the story is the peculiar relationship that develops between Robbie and Evon. She wants to hate him, and he gives her many reasons to do so; but she also sees his human, caring side particularly when he is caring for his wife who is dying of ALS. This dichotomy between the reprehensible, lying, skirt-chasing Feaver and the loving, sincere husband is sometimes stretched beyond believability. The overly complex plot, like the sting operation, starts to fall apart in the last part of the book, and the ending, while dramatic, is somewhat anticlimactic. Not one of Turow's best efforts, but a challenging and interesting read nonetheless.
Rating: 
Summary: A fun read with some moral resonance
Review: I'd been avoiding Scott Turow ever since I read *Presumed Innocent*, thinking that his later books looked just too ponderous to be fun. Big mistake: While the critical ecstasy is overblown -- I wouldn't go so far as to call this literature -- *Personal Injuries* undoubtedly raises the bar for courtroom potboilers. Now I'm eager to go back and see what happened in Kindle County while I was gone. The critics are dead-on about one thing: Flamboyant lawyer and grudging informer Robbie Feaver is an enjoyable, compelling character, and Evon Miller, his more subdued FBI keeper, just as well drawn. Beyond this, however, there's a steep drop-off: Despite much authorial effort the other law enforcers never come alive, and even the corrupt judges seem flat. Turow's narrator, George Mason, is a bit player and cipher -- not someone I care to meet again -- and his villain, Brendan Tuohey, remains forever out of focus. Still, it must be said: Two compelling characters is plenty for a book like this. Indeed, it's two more than can be found in the average John Grisham book. Turow's plotting is well done, and his portrait of Feaver's ailing wife affecting. Mostly, however, the book is notable for the issues it raises: The price paid by the informant; the value of loyalty; the moral lines we draw so carefully -- and then step over. Turow's treatment of these topics is anything but facile, and resonates in unexpected ways. In the end, we're in the same boat as most of the characters in *Personal Injuries*: We've come to know Robbie Feaver and, despite ourselves, we admire the guy. What does it mean to admire such a man? It's not a trivial question, and this is not a trivial book.
Rating: 
Summary: Tough to get into and even tougher to finish
Review: I have read all of Turow's books but found this one real tough to get into. It was extremely tedious, in my opinion, and there were no characters that were particularly likeable. Bottom line is the book drug on. Action picked up in the last 100 pages or so but it was not enough to carry the book.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating, compelling and tedious
Review: Turow is an excellent writer. He has written some of the best crime fiction on the last several years. This isn't one of them. Given the secondary focus of this book, the devastating disease ALS, it's too bad. Robbie Feaver is a top personal injury attorney. For years he's been in league with the devil, fixing cases womanizing, and making tons of money. Now the Fed comes to call and he has to rat on his colleagues all the while trying to cope with his wife's ALS, which no amount of money can cure. Turow has written a bitter, cynical novel. His skills as a writer are topnotch and his illumination of ALS is highly useful. But the novel, compelling as it is, is way too long and has few likeable characters.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointed
Review: I have been a fan of Turow's for some time, but I was disappointed by "Personal Injuries". Like so many writers who become successful, he has abandoned the style that made him famous for a more "artsy" approach. He has thrown out tightly written dialog and replaced it with long narratives that add little to the story. He has created characters that no one can really care about. Turow should get back to basics!
Rating:
Summary: Pretty Much A Waste Of Time
Review: Author Scott Turow wrote one of the best books I have ever read titled, "Presumed Innocent." This book - "Personal Injuries" is one of the worst I've read. I believe the author has superlative writing skills but there is no character in this book that a reader can admire, or identify with, or root for. The plot is like a bad dream wherein the same stupid things keep happening or almost happening over and over. This book and his previous book, "The Laws Of Our Fathers" are a depressing waste of a great talent. I keep hoping that Turow will find a good "leading man" for a decent plot (someone we would enjoy spending time with) - and I am sadly disappointed that he does not. Also - this book could have eliminated one-third of its verbiage and it would be a slightly better read. What annoys me is the list of effusive reviews that appear in the first pages of the paperback edition. Where in hell do they get reviewers that praise this dreck?
Rating:
Summary: A Best-Seller That Actually Deserves To Be Read
Review: This is not a television movie. This is not a screenplay waiting to be optioned. This, people, is a real novel. Turow is a superb writer, who understands the language, texture, and atmosphere of his world in a way that younger, supposedly more "hip" authors never could. I'd give him the highest praise by saying his ear is as good as George V. Higgins's, while his story-telling sense is even sharper. For the people who complain "I didn't like the characters" or "I wanted it to be a normal thriller," I'd suggest you have entire bookstores devoted to titles that will pander to your taste and avoid challenging you. Stretch a little. It won't kill you.
Rating:
Summary: Not the usual stuff
Review: Very rarely do we find a legal thriller that has any substance, and we finally find one here and many readers pan it. I guess you are just too used to the usual drivel that that is foisted upon us. This book is nicely written and you get some nice deep characters. You people who panned this book are reason that so many authors of this genre write books just for the slight hope that Hollywood will make it a movie. The good guy has some rough times in the book, maybe a nice guy gets sadly killed, but Hooray for Hollywood, the good guys win. We get a very nice book and all you want is a whodunit. Sorry, but I think its sad. Bravo for you Scott Turow.
Rating:
Summary: Are we supposed to CARE about any of these characters???
Review: I really didn't like anything about this book. I was a journalism major in college and I found the long, tedious descriptions in this book to overwhelm what little plot there was. That sort of thing should supplement a plot, not replace it. I kept waiting for an unexpected plot twist, but there were not. I'm also a third-year law student, and I wasn't the least bit impressed by the legal aspect of the book either. The judges are bad, the prosecutor's bad, the lawyers are bad. I couldn't stand the main character, or really any of the characters for that matter, so in that sense Turow fails as well.
| 
