Rating: 
Summary: it's fun, which is what counts
Review: Bret Ellis' gift as an author is that he has an ear for the nuances of conversation, thought and interaction; nobody can fake this, and it really comes through in his books. This is why he can construct a shallow party-boy like Victor Ward, and then make the reader CARE about what becomes of him when he crashes into a world of terrorism, espionage and killer models. More than anything else, Ellis has a writing style that draws the reader in. His novels are witty enough and clever enough and written with a seeming ease that makes you WANT to keep reading them. 'Glamorama' is a wry and intelligent book, and it will keep you awake at night as you try to fit the pieces of the mystery together. For good writing, this is right up there with Ellis' best, 'Rules Of Attraction', and if you're a fan, 'Glamorama' is the kind of book that you will look forward to reading again and again.
Rating: 
Summary: What's up with the confetti?
Review: I first encountered Ellis in his controversial work "American Psycho." I found it difficult to really enjoy the grusome book, and questioned the sanity of an author who could dream up the tale, but I really enjoyed Ellis's style.
Glamorama is somewhat similar, both in terms of the graphic violence, (although not as violent as "AP". What could be?) the shallow charecters, and electric prose. Ellis indeed has a way with words, and a knack for capturing the essence of a certain time and place.
However, I would not whole-heartedly recommend this book. Maybe I'm slow, but there were parts of this book I just didn't get...including the fact that confetti convered every area the charecters went, and what exactly happened in the second half of the book. (I think I understand the cold and ice.)
I leave you now, to further contemplate the symbolic meaning of confetti....
Rating: 
Summary: 550 pages of tedium
Review: This is really two bad novels for the price of one. Until page 200, you get the boring exploits of a male model in Manhattan and the events leading up to the grand opening of the nightclub that he is opening with the financial backing of a shady friend who he just happens to be cuckolding. The novel is written in the first person from the protagonist's perspective, and the author reinforces the character's shallowness by having him name the celebrities (real life) present at the many parties and functions that he attends. I am not kidding here: there must be 20 pages of this book filled with nothing more than celebrities' names separated by commas. It becomes maddening as this novel grinds on to its pointless conclusion. I suppose that this might be interesting to a Manhattan socialite for a short while, but even Liz Smith would start skipping paragraphs in this book.If you were disappointed and confused by the first 200 pages, the next 350 will do nothing to reverse that for you; the author does a complete about face and ships the narrator to Paris for a terribly unsatisfying turn as an unwitting accomplice to a terrorist group run by former models. The second half of the book has almost nothing to do with the first half of the book (which doesn't really matter because they both stink). I am not really comfortable criticizing the work of others, particularly a talented writer like Bret Ellis, but I just want to warn off Ellis fans from this stinkbomb of a book. If you are not familiar with his work, I highly recommend "The Rules of Attraction". That is a very enjoyable and, in my opinion, well written book.
Rating:
Summary: Another Awful Novel from an Alleged "Author"
Review: Clearly, Bret Easton Ellis' writing is seductive--it's slick, hip, and easy to read (except for huge chunks that make absolutely no sense). But once you remove the style, you find that there's a complete lack of substance. And how tedious it is to read 400 pages of fluff. "Glamorama" is Ellis' latest attempt at credibility, and, once again, he fails miserably, his limitations as an author finally becoming glaringly clear (although "American Psycho" and "The Informers" were earlier indications as well). Ellis wallows in his imagined cleverness and pretentious name-dropping from start to finish, never realizing that this is not what constitutes a worthy novel. Nor is resurrecting characters from his marginal "The Rules of Attraction." Character development? None. Hero? None. Villain? Everyone. Plot? Barely--and what does exist is so faulty, gratuitous, and preposterous that one wonders if Ellis ever took a creative writing course in his entire life. To say this book is rubbish would be an understatment. But congratulations to the overrated hack Ellis and his agent for getting his tripe published. Shame on his editors and publisher for ever letting this pulp find its way into print. And, because all of Ellis' books sound exactly alike (just change the setting--New England college, Wall Street, fashion world--but nothing else), perhaps it's time he found a new career. Maybe as a magician--he's already succeeded in using smoke and mirrors to fool the world into believing he has the ability to write. Or, better yet, selling birdcage liners made from the discarded copies of his pathethic contributions to the world of fiction.
Rating:
Summary: trying too hard
Review: Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of Bret Easton Ellis. But this book was horrible! It had nowhere near the malaise of Less Than Zero nor the comedic satire of American Psycho. In Glamorama he tries to do for the 90s what these other two did for the 80s, and fails miserably. I think the Bret Easton Ellis decade is waaaay over. Sorry, wunderkind.
Rating: 
Summary: A startling roller coaster ride through the 90's...
Review: Before pickign up "Glamorama" I had read "American Psycho" and "The Rules of Attraction." Two very different books, in my mind, were AP and Rules, and so is Glamorama. The idea that Ellis's characters live in one world, where characters from other books crossover and make cameos is a fascinating technique. It provides the reader with a background knowledge of some characters without alienating new readers. When I first encounted Victor Ward in Rules he was vapid, dull, and clearly destined for his supermodel success. When we pick up on his story, sometime in the 90's, he quickly grew on me. Sure, he's shallow and not very smart and not exactly cultured. But there is an innocence to Victor that stuck with me throughout the book, even as the story left NYC and traveled to Europe. For some reason fans of AP identified with Patrick Bateman. Similarly I found myself empathizing with poor Victor. He is so simple and even, on some level, innocent that he has great trouble sussing out that something is terribly, terribly wrong until it is too late. I admit to being confused by some of the plot in the second half of the story. However, it does what a good book should do--make you think. Ellis's style keeps you reading even when the content is blurry.
Rating:
Summary: I'm Dizzy
Review: I enjoy Ellis' style of narration because I can get lost in the senselessness of his characters. Who else could make terrorist/models believeable? But like many of his novels, you can't help but wonder at the cluelessness of the protagonists and the people whom he knows. The pace and the situations presented are a bit mindboggling - so much that I usually feel a bit dizzy and disoriented when reading any of his works - it was hard to place these situations in my own life and experiences (but that is what is so enjoyable about his works). Yet, when I read this novel back when it was released, I never thought I would live through an American tragedy, like those described on these pages - that would somehow make these events part of my own experiences. I am not sure I can reread the terrorist attack descriptions of the 747 crash or the Parisian cafe bombings--yet at the time when it was published, these seemed fantastical and improbable. So now, you can't help but wonder if our own 'real' experiences seem fantastical and improbable. For once, Ellis describes an American 'reality' that we truly wish was just part of his fictional worlds.
Rating:
Summary: hated it
Review: i stumbled across this book by accident really, and what a bad accident it was. i hated reading this so much i could barely even get through it. with each page my detest for the characters grew to a point that i just wanted to burn the thing. don't waste your time.
Rating:
Summary: great read
Review: This is Ellis' best work so far. He overestimate Japans role in the world today course at the time book where released USA was back as the superior economic power and the deal with Japan buying the nation dosn't fit now. Also the thing about clones is unrealistic and the fact that the headperson dosn't discover his 'twin' much earlier - or other does! The charactors seems a good deal smarter than in the real world - more sofisticated in dialog and humor. But all in all a great book of course(danish translation)
Rating:
Summary: don't you get it? it's a comedy!!!
Review: This book is hilarious. If you have even an ounce of cynicism in your body, you will laugh and enjoy this. You will also realize that Ellis is quite possibly the only modern novelist to successfully mock these celebrity losers. They all deserve what they get, in my opinion. The only people who will not laugh are people who are similar to the people he parodies. Same with American Psycho. The only reason everybody got so offended was because they identified themselves with Pat Bateman......the realization that we all have that "potential" inside us scared them.
|
