Rating: 
Summary: "Virtually" unreadable.
Review: I did manage to trudge through this novel, but I really had no idea what I had read by the time I finished. I agree with the reviewer below who says that anyone who claims to love this novel is lying!
Rating: 
Summary: A jargon-filled comic book
Review: Absolutely unreadable; I couldn't force myself farther than 100 pages into this morass. The "story," such as it is, has all the depth and interest of a video game with pretentious techno-babble commentary. Worse yet, the book takes itself *so* seriously. There's not even the unintentional humor one sometimes finds in spectacular flops like _The Bridges of Madison County_ or _Plan 9 From Outer Space_. _Neuromancer_ is leaden and plodding; an absolute dud. This is the kind of book that leads people to erroneously dismiss science fiction as shallow, nerdy drivel.
Rating: 
Summary: Corrections and comments
Review: First, I would like to correct all of the people out there that compare this book to a sci-fi movie (aka The Matrix, Blade Runner), these movies should be compared to the book. This book inspired the ideas that spawned these movies. Second, I could not put this book down, I thought it was a great book (hence 4 stars), and I would recommend anyone read it. Although I do agree with some of the 2 star reviews, all any book is is a rewritten version of an older book (as someone pointed out while comparing Gibson to Poe). Also, if any book is torn apart to its core no book is really worth reading (as another reviewee stated by tearing down major themes in the book which resulted in him commenting on just one aspect). In conclusion, this book is not just for the computer geeks sitting at a terminal at home, it is for anyone that likes mystery, intrege, and a little spin out of the ordinary.
Rating:
Summary: read it over and over again
Review: i started bying the entire sprawl trilogy, read it through, and understood absolutely nothing of it...that is untill i finsihed mona lisa overdrive...and thereby found out how neuromancer was put togehter. This trilogy CANNOT be read one time, neither can you read just one of the books, you have to read them all to understand the true genious that put these three pieces of art together. currently i am reading neuromancer for the third time, and the story just keeps getting better and better.buy them all...read them all
Rating:
Summary: People who tell you they like this book are LYING TO YOU
Review: That's the only way I can fathom this piece of work getting the accolades it has. It's got to be some kind of conspiracy. If people are convinced this is seminal cyberpunk, they won't be interested in reading others (I recommend Jeff Noon). Paging through the 5 star reviews, you'll come across people who admit that the characterization is nonexistent, and the plot is weak, but try to explain away their love of Neuromancer by comparing Gibson's writing style to that of established authors. The number of times William Burroughs' name is sprawled across this page and not next to phrases like "Gibson's talent is miniscule compared to that of..." or "... would probably stab you to death with a syringe if he heard you compare him to this hack." boggles my mind. Gibson is also credited with blending styles. What he is actually doing is sticking a 50's dime store crime novel and an computer engineering textbook in his MixMaster and playing dadaist cut-up poet with the resultant confetti. It makes me wish he'd stuffed his head in as well. In every interview with him I've seen, Gibson has worn mirrored sunglasses. I think this has less to do with his dedication to the genre, and more to do with the way his eyes get shifty when asked about his work. His evasive answers to questions make me wonder if he ever actually reread anything he wrote, never mind the editing his work sorely needs. Avoid reading this. If someone tells you to read it, don't. Pretend that you have. If you're quizzed on it, imagining a third grader's short story about their dog will put you well on your way to bluffing knowledge of this "book".
Rating:
Summary: An engrossing read, yet somewhat disjointed.
Review: Gibson's stark, distopian vision of the future is vivid and gratifying; the descriptions are fantastically detailed. Yet the jumpy, disjointed style and fast pace with which the plot moves can make the narrative hard to follow. In addition, Gibson's style keeps the reader one step behind the story's characters, and often keeps important information secret until absoluetly necessary. Overall, Neuromancer is a satisfying and evocative novel, and certainly worthy of its many praises.
Rating: 
Summary: Download the future today by a cybernetic interface
Review: Gibson opens the window to the future and shows us how we're running for it. A realism book; a preview of the future. Read it and the next thing you will do is buy all his other books
Rating:
Summary: Great concept - delicious reading***Gibsons best book.
Review: Yes it is a mix of Blade Runner and 2001 - but what an interwsting mix. The only problem is that some of the descriptions are two wordy and the reader is easily lost. But a great intro to Gibson...
Rating:
Summary: Step aside "the matrix" this is a real story line
Review: I loved the movie the matrix, but.... NEUROMANCER was brilliant, it was the first william gibson book i read and my goal is to read them all. The story line is clever and you will struggle to put the book down. I read it in a single sitting and i suggest that anyone who likes the idea of computers in the future should read it.
Rating: 
Summary: Neuromancer is like a peanut-butter wheat bread sanwich!
Review: Tasty but very dry.The tasty: Gibson tells a interesting story swirling elements from 2001, Bladerunner{the movie},and Naked Lunch into his very original book. The dry: His writing style ain't interesting at all. Reading this book was agonizing. Gibson wording is so dull it almost ruins a fine story.
| 
