Rating: 
Summary: one star is generous
Review: How to make a laughing stock of literary awards? What possessed the Booker committee to award this unoriginal, lightweight collection of unthoughtful rambling their top honour??Mr McEwan may well have a better body of work to his credit, but I bought this book since "Winner of the Booker prize" usually affords me unabridged reading pleasure. Instead I feel cheated - you get a predictable and downright dull regurgitation of the old Tory-baiting, kneejerk-reactionary 1980's backlash. Set in the mind of a conceited composer and populist broadsheet editor we are not even afforded the luxury of character depth to paint over the lack of a biting storyline. And the prose is tired, jaded and doesn't know where to jump and bore the reader next. Oh yeah - the ending is so predictable. Perhaps I'll have to be more selective in judging Booker prize winners in the future, but I'll allow anyone one such glaring error.
Rating: 
Summary: Good potential, story lacking
Review: The first half of the book was extremely well written and held me captivated, but slowly eroded into a somewhat weak story. I think I would have enjoyed it more purely as a look into the lives of three lovers of Molly Lane instead of going in the direction it did. I enjoyed McEwan's style, but the plot was not up to par. I also felt that the end result was out of character for the players in the story.
Rating:
Summary: Clinton's scandal with Monica is probably the muse for this
Review: This has to be the Consolation Booker's Prize. It is definitely lightweight compared to other winners. The part that the book discusses that interests me tremendously is the media's dilemma of reporting, uncovering news versus the moral implication of it all. And is our current society really a compassionate one or one that merely suffers a low morality and chooses to overlook moral lapses saying it's not right to intrude into other people's private life. McEwan's book draws many parallels from the Clinton scandal - down to the televised part when Clinton and his family retreated to Martha's vineyard after his confession that he did have "inappropriate" behavior with Monica and McEwan's Garmony retreating to the countryside with his family. All in all, this is more an entertaining book with social commentary and observations than a literary book.
Rating: 
Summary: Very interesting read
Review: A well-written thoughtful book - yes, about silly, conceited people, but the world happens to be made up of such folk. It works on many levels, but better as an allegorical commentary than a straight narrative. Enjoyable.
Rating:
Summary: Amster-doh!
Review: I have to believe that Mr. McEwan tossed this thing off for a bit of fun. I imagine too that he is quite depressed to have won the Booker for it and not for one of his other books; shame on the judges.
Rating:
Summary: Darkly humorous indictment of contemporary morality..
Review: In response to the prior reviewer, a book about "silly, conceited people" is not necessarily a silly and conceited book; consider The Great Gatsby. Amsterdam is a clever book that reveals the conflicts of people who have either found or placed themselves in moral dilemmas. The central characters share the common denominator of having been lovers of Molly Lane who has recently died. They are brought together at her funeral, and as the story unfolds she seems to have been the only true and trustworthy moral compass among them. The book causes the reader to contemplate our contemporary values. What have our morals and ethics become at the end of the 20th century? Consider the "integrity" of our political "leaders"; the media's right to know vs. an individual's right to privacy; the value of human life vs. modern medical science. The characters in Amsterdam come across as opportunistic, self-centered, and morally indecisive. Do we feel more sympathy for Vernon,the editor who must publish something scandalous to keep his paper afloat or for Julian, the politician whose private indiscretion is made public? Do we feel any sympathy at all? Even Clive the successful composer is corrupted and looks away because he believes his musical genius is more important than another human being. (echoes of Wilhelm Furtwangler?) Is it more important to save the Mona Lisa, a timeless work of art, or a transient human life? Today's politicians take polls first to determine which decision or action will most likely keep them in power. Amsterdam considers all of these issues in less than 200 pages and concludes in a deliciously wicked ending.
Rating:
Summary: Booker, Shmooker
Review: The only reason I bought this book was because it won the Booker. I won't make that mistake again. A silly, conceited book about silly, conceited people.
Rating: 
Summary: Induldgent uninteresting characters following obvious plot
Review: After all the hype I was surprised at how disappointing this book was. It doesn't really evoke any special time, place or characters. Thank god it was short or I would have felt really betrayed.
Rating: 
Summary: short and bitter sweet
Review: Good interesting read. Moderately contemptible characters feel everyone around them is contemptible and grow worse. Good perspective, clear writing and quite enjoyable.
Rating:
Summary: Strong attempt, poor execution
Review: This is not a put down on the Booker winner, but this book simply didn't work for me. It could have, the idea was right, but the twists were contrived, the ending bland, and the action unreal. The social commentary tried to work, but when things aren't real, how could it?
| 
