Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining, Not Prize Winning
Review: Why this novel won the Booker is somewhat of a mystery to me. Weren't there any better books published in the U.K. in 1998? While entertaining, and, a very fast read, there really is not much depth here, but, more of a Hitchcockian comedy that would be better put on TV. McEwan has a black, ironic twist on things, and, he does write well, but, the Booker? Come on.
Rating: 
Summary: an entertaining read
Review: Something about the Booker Prize... I just don't seem to get what makes them select their prizes. Don't get me wrong -- I thoroughly enjoyed this witty, very well written novella about two "old" friends who have a major falling out, but besides the strong writing, I'm not sure what propelled it to the prize. That being said, McEwan does a terrific job of outlining his story starting from Molly's funeral and spiraling outwards from there following all of Molly's former lovers. Perhaps the best scene in the book occurs at the funeral when a staid looking state official pulls one of the main characters by the lapels and says some deliciously wicked things to him. I enjoyed the middle of the novel best, but by the end, I was getting a bit tired and found the ending a bit hyperbolic. Still, the scenes with the famous composer trying to write his masterpiece while hiking in the lake district, so absorbed that he fails to intervene and stop a rapist from attacking, made it an enjoyable read. I recommend it, although i don't think it's a classic that people will know about 50 years from now.
Rating:
Summary: Good book
Review: Amsterdam is a good story, well told and very interesting. It will hold your attention and at times fascinate you. I bought and read this book when I was traveling through Europe last summer. As I read it I really did enjoy it, but upon finishing it, I found it too inconvenient to continue carrying it in my backpack to put on my bookshelf at home. I guess that summarizes how I felt about it. A worthwhile read, but probably not one you will feel that you need to keep around to read again and again.
Rating: 
Summary: Very, very thin (in many senses of the term)
Review: McEwan is a talented writer, but this work is a decidedly minor effort--and its winning the Booker is an utter puzzlement. It's a very plot-driven piece (though at less than 200 pages, with enormous font size, it is more of a novella than a novel--and not worth the expensive price), but the characters seem very thin indeed. It's hard to care much about a morality tale when the characters are so thoroughly dislikable. With their elite educations, glamorous occupations, clever bitchery, and self-aggrandizing behavior, Clive and Vernon seem to have stepped out of a P. D. James novel--unfortunately, there's no Inspector Dagliesh around to provide any sort of moral compass (or real suspense).
Rating:
Summary: clever and insightful
Review: Reviewer Jeff Chen said it perfectly. My browser button mistakenly hit the "no" button under his comments. There is a lot of meat in this short, wicked novel. Thank goodness we don't care a fig what happens to the protagonists. They manage to destroy themselves before they are actually killed.McEwan makes us enjoy watching their demise.
Rating:
Summary: OK
Review: I read it in a few days while commuting to work. It lags at times, and was OK. I didn't understand why this Molly was so loved by men considering everyone knew she hopped in and out of so many beds. Ich! The ending was predictable, but again it was an OK book to pass the time.
Rating:
Summary: Another Booker disappointment
Review: This is certainly not Ian McEwan's finest work, by a long stretch. Compared to his rich, dark, engrossing symphony, Enduring Love, this is a mere bagatelle, an intermezzo. The portrait of the contemporary composer Clive Linley is well drawn, and McEwan does have insight into the creative process which transfers neatly to a composer. The book is very well written, as one would expect from McEwan, but in the end it amounts to little. It is humorous, but the book is not a comedy. It skirts deep issues like euthenasia and the influence of the gutter press without really probing them deeply or thoughtfully. A good, short read, but hardly prize winning material. Enduring Love was much more worthy of the Booker prize.
Rating: 
Summary: An enjoyable jeu d'esprit
Review: This book is a black comedy that is very, very dry. The author takes on the British "chattering classes" and has his fun with their overlapping infidelities as well as their social and artistic ambitions. The style combines the humor of P.G. Wodehouse with the plotting of P.D. James. Highly recommended as airplane reading (especially if one is going to Holland...).
Rating:
Summary: disappointing because it's so promising
Review: I have to admit that I expected a lot from _Amsterdam_ going into the book. First of all, there was the whole Booker Prize thing. Second of all, good word of mouth. Anyways, it's hard to live up to high expectations and that may have something to do with the harshness of my response.Amsterdam is beautifully written. McEwan does an amazing job of economically sketching Molly's lovers. For the first half of the book, the book carries you along with the plot-- circling through the world that the dead Molly leaves behind. It goes *badly* wrong at the end. Or, I should say that the ending doesn't match with the beginning-- I'd bet there are people out there who don't like the start at all, but really like the conclusion. A writer has to earn the right to get from point A to point M in his novel-- McEwan doesn't earn the rather extreme jumps that he made.
Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable reading - no less, but no more
Review: Well written book with an interesting story, centering on the theme of friendship and morale. But what starts off quite impressively turns farcical in the end - and too much so in my opinion. The outcome seems artificial and noticeably contrived. McEwan even starts to explain the ambiguities of English instead of letting them stand for themselves. I am surprised that this won the Booker Prize in 1999.
|
