Rating: 
Summary: One of the worst books I've ever read
Review: Quite frankly, it pains me to give this book even one star, but there's nothing lower.Picture the worst spaghetti western you've ever seen. Now get rid of the horses and hats and replace them with computers. There, now you have Neuromancer. The plot is so cliched it hurts. A lot. With a flat plot and characters that are hard to give a damn about, I was left feeling completely bamboozled by the people who said this book was a masterpiece of cyberpunk. If you want a great book of the cyberpunk genre, read Snow Crash, by Neal Stephenson instead. And for those who said it was a mind-rattling, brilliant book: read "Foucault's Pendulum". Then we'll talk about mind-rattling brilliance.
Rating: 
Summary: Without question one of the few to put it all together.
Review: Neuromancer by William Gibson is one of maybe two or three books I have read in my thirty years to put all the elements of a story told together perfectly... (1) I read it non-stop. (2) I read sections over and over again, just for the exeperience of the prose. (3) I never wanted it to end. I wanted to know this world by inhabiting it. Like an album you know is good because you just let it play, flip over and play again, over and over, because the album is a journey, each part telling a portion of the tale, Neuromancer captured me, and never let me go. The book is a part of me, now...that's the power of this particular novel, and the legacy of any novel that's truly evolutionary, as opposed to revolutionary (ie., in a style that's part of a stylistic continuum that we've seen before and will see again - one thing this book is NOT is something we've seen before; it evolves us)...
Rating:
Summary: My name's Molly.
Review: One of the best books of the Millenium. Written in 1984, this book outlines the world unfolding in front of us. I found this book very difficult to read and actually put it down twice. On my third try I was prepared and enjoyed every minute of it. I liked it so much that I have read all the rest of his books. If you enjoy movies like The Matrix and Blade Runner then I highly recommend purchasing this book and reading it immediately. You will be glad you did.
Rating: 
Summary: A unique story...
Review: I finished reading this book last night and found that I was a little disappointed. It was recommended to me as the BEST sci-fi novel ever, but I am not so sure. Case is a rogue computer hacker and drug addict living in the seemingly dirty and downtrodden enclaves of great cities past. His glorious life of stealing information was cut short when he messed with the wrong people who burnt him out of cyberspace. His life now consists of minor wheelings and dealings until he is recruited for his reputable hacking panache by an irregular group of people looking for the ultimate score; giving him a second chance. The story follows Case around the world and through cyberspace as he "jacks in" to the matrix to manipulate computers to his advantage, not quite knowing the full purpose of the deal. Along the way he meets and avoids an array of different and interesting characters; some trying to help and some to hinder. I found Gibsons language difficult to follow at times and found myself confused at other stages as he jumped about from situation to situation. The story is dark and his descriptions of everyday life in the "Sprawl" are intoned with a bleak disdain for the purpose of existance, allowing you to feel more compassion for some characters than others. Overall, I was intrigued; enjoying the obvious uniqueness of this books idea, the complex world and Gibsons intelligent imagination, but I think that I may have missed the point of its meaning. I give this book 3.5 to 4 stars, but I can understand why so many rate it higher. Maybe I should read it again.
Rating: 
Summary: Hard to Follow, Brilliant
Review: Neuromancer has its ups and downs. Every reader has to recognize William Gibson's absolute brilliance when it comes to describing Cyberspace, hacking (which should be called Cracking now), and the computer scene. However, written in the 1980s, it is apparent the Gibson was still not able to articulate things as well as an author nowadays could. As a result, Neuromancer is a tricky novel to get into, but worth the read if readers are willing to dedicate more time than usual to each page. Case's adventure is rather intriguing, but I found that the whole conflict was ambiguous at best. I understood what was happening for the most part, but Gibson's lack of detail and descriptive paragraphs of characters and events hindered Neuromancer's potential. Nonetheless, Gibson needed to be more precise. Characters' are confusing, his lack of proper noun usage makes Neuromancer hard to follow. In fact, the entire story seems to be unclear to the author. While there are not many inconsistencies, Gibson clearly had to rethink the conflict several time while admist writing Neuromancer. Being the first Gibson novel I have read, I hope to read more of his books, wishing they will be far more comprehensive than this one.
Rating:
Summary: Bit hard to follow...very original scifi novel
Review: Reading this I kept looking back at the original date of publication in amazement. Gibson used a variety of technical terms that are only now part of our language, terms like "microsoft", "the matrix", and others. I'm a big fan of "The Matrix" the movie and I imagine this could have been an inspiration for it. The main character is a data thief who plugs into computer networks to steal information. He spends the book hooking up with shady characters and avoiding shadier ones. It is quick moving but can be a bit hard to follow (I glazed over a few pages when I lost attention). If you like computers & scifi you might like it.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best novels of the 1980's in any genre
Review: William Gibson burst onto the literary landscape in 1984 with this spectacular first novel, eventually attracting a readership well beyond science fiction fandom. His edgy, streetwise prose is evocative of Pynchon's, Burrough's and Chandler's best work, rich in descriptive, lyrical detail. I have met English professors and writers who will not read science fiction, but will pay attention to Gibson because of his splendid prose. Gibson coined the term "cyberspace", and the world he describes in "Neuromancer" remains fresh and vividly real to me after all these years. Moreover, the characters he introduces are an intriguing cast of people trapped by dire circumstances due to their personality flaws. Do believe all the hype you've heard or read about this novel. Without a doubt, it was one of the finest science novels published in the 1980's. And I believe it deserves recognition as one of the best novels published - in any genre - during that decade.
Rating:
Summary: Stellar
Review: I don't read cyberpunk as a general rule. I tend to get bogged down by the techno-speak (also one reason why I go nowhere *near* Tom Clancy - the rest will be saved for another review)and the characters who people the novels seem to take second place to the gadgetry, often seeming like paper dolls being moved from scene to scene. But since everyone kept raving to me about "Neuromancer" and after seeing it on so many lists, I decided to give it a try. I was not disappointed. The technology is there and it is, in itself, a character in the book, but Gibson has managed to create credible, well-rounded, want-to-know-more-about-them characters in Case and company. It was hard for me to put this book down because even for me as a non-techie, Gibson was enough of a storyteller to keep me compelled by the characters, what they were doing and how it would all turn out in the end. His world is exciting and colorful, where people dance on the edge of a knife because they are compelled to - or they just like it. I gave it a four because it was a little difficult at times to stumble through the technology portion of events, but that more reflects my read of it than the book itself, I think. "Neuromancer" has not left my mind and even while reading other books, my eyes stray over to the shelf on my bookcase where it resides. I *do* plan on reading it again. It grabbed me and it ain't lettin' me go. It's one of those books I expect I'll get more out of each time I sit down with it. Buy it, read it. It'll be worth the ride.
Rating:
Summary: I hated this book
Review: When I got this book, I thought I was in for a delight. William Gibson is probably the most famous science fiction writer alive, and Neuromancer got rave reviews from everyone. However, after I finished reading the first page, I was lost already. The plot was almost impossible to decipher because Gibson does not introduce his characters. Basically, a random person will show up and end up being one of the main characters. Gibson's choppy desrcriptions didn't help either. I despise this book with a passion.
Rating:
Summary: The Worst Science-Fiction Novel Ever Writtem
Review: Hey! I've got an idea. Why don't I write a book in which I hide behind technological jargon so people have no idea what the plot is? These were the exact thoughts of Mr. Gibson as he contemplated writing this novel. The story is easily forgettable. What makes it even easier to forget this plot is that you can't rightly tell what the plot is. Someone clue me in, please. But for now, while all of you critically acclaim this book, I don't understand why.
| 
