Rating: 
Summary: Superb
Review: Probably one of the best SF novels ever writte
Rating:
Summary: Glorious
Review: Another superb work by the Grand Master of the genre, co-written by another great author, namely Robert "Where Silverberg goes today Sci-Fi goes tomorrow" Silverberg. An ingenius plot, with seemingly unmatched detail. A six-sun world, where not a second is without the glow of light from at least one of the gleaming suns. Except one day where in a matter of hours the vail of darkness envelops the world of these sun-shoned creatures. Struck by sudden madness they tear their world apart, dooming civilization. The depth of thought and vision needed to contribute to the world of litterature in the way this book has done, is what makes Asimov the GRAND Master of Science Fiction.I was grasped by it when I read it the first time and I have enjoyed every single moment the other five times I've read it! Intense excitement and suspense makes it a worthy equal to "Nightfall": The short story, not to mention many other great works by this and the other masters of the genre.
Rating: 
Summary: half good, half bad
Review: This book is worth reading--for the ideas and themes if not for the story. I've read other Asimov works (The Foundation Trilogy is one of my favorite series of all time), but this one seemed stretched thin, possibly because it was co-authored. The first third of this book, up until Nightfall, is chilling and thrilling. The second half wanders, and though I don't want to give anything away, has a very anticlimactic ending. After finishing it, I felt the last section 'Daybreak" could have been left off almost completely and the novel would have actually benefitted. Some of the ideas in the novel should have been further developed, while others, especially a quasi-romance subplot, made the story drag in places. To sum things up, the first half or so is excellent, true to Asimov-form. The second half is boring, disappointing, and un-Asimov. For a 5 star start and a 1 star finish, I give 3 stars. I would be interested to know who wrote which parts of this book.
Rating:
Summary: An wonderful insight into an alternate world
Review: Nightfall is a great sci-fi novel which is expanded from the original short story by Isaac Asimov. The book sets itself in a star system where there are six suns shining on the planet of Kalgash. On this planet darkness is a concept that naturally scares people and severly effects their mental state. The book really delves into the topic of mental insanity related to the effects of darkness on these light-dependent people, and it makes you think how realistic it could be if our solar system was the same as theirs. I won't tell you any more than that about the story, but this is a very good book. The character development in the story is outstanding, and the book definitely has the feeling of being a thriller. I agree with some people that the book did seem a little drawn out at times and also seemed to fall off somewhat about two-thirds of the way through the book, but nonetheless, I thought it was fantastic. If you like sci-fi read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting read
Review: This very well written book is about people on a planet who have constant sunlight, thanks to their many suns, with atleast one and as many as four up all the time, but once every 2049 years, their suns are eclipsed and they experience total darkness... they experience the stars. While this may seem normal to an earthling who is conditioned to the concept of night, to the people on the planet who have never seen such a thing, this is a very bizarre and stressful experience. The book talks about how they deal with the situation and makes you wonder if we earthings would react in a similar fashion under such circumstances.
The book is divided into three sections - Twilight, Nightfall and Daybreak. The first two sections are very well written, the third, i thought, was a bit of a drag. The sudden ending was a bit disappointing, but after some reflection, it did seem realistic (not all stories in life have interesting climaxes).
Asimov with his great story-telling also delves into human psychology and religion. Interesting weekend read.
Rating: 
Summary: An uneven story.
Review: The beginning was interesting, the middle was fascinating and the end was a dud. Really, my main problem was the "madness" premise. My question is: Why would seeing the stars come out make everyone go insane? (I know, I know...it only happens once every 2049 years...uh...I think my question still stands.) This was simply too unbelievable. The story was basically over for me after that. Which was too bad because the "Nightfall" section was as thrilling a page-turner as I have ever read.
Rating:
Summary: half good, half bad
Review: This book is worth reading--for the ideas and themes if not for the story. I've read other Asimov works (The Foundation Trilogy is one of my favorite series of all time), but this one seemed stretched thin, possibly because it was co-authored. The first third of this book, up until Nightfall, is chilling and thrilling. The second half wanders, and though I don't want to give anything away, has a very anticlimactic ending. After finishing it, I felt the last section 'Daybreak" could have been left off almost completely and the novel would have actually benefitted. Some of the ideas in the novel should have been further developed, while others, especially a quasi-romance subplot, made the story drag in places. To sum things up, the first half or so is excellent, true to Asimov-form. The second half is boring, disappointing, and un-Asimov. For a 5 star start and a 1 star finish, I give 3 stars. I would be interested to know who wrote which parts of this book.
Rating:
Summary: Good stuff
Review: I love to read. I've loved reading science fiction for 30+ years. I like Asimov (very much). This book is mind-numbing garbage. By page 10 it was obvious where the various plot threads were headed. By page 100 the threads were wandering and the characters babbling aimlessly. With a yell, I threw the book across the room in disgust (something I NEVER do because I treat my books as close friends) and have not touched it since. I really should have known better. About 10 years ago I swore off all science fiction that was "co-authored". I read science fiction, not only because of the unimaginable and inventive concepts, but primarily because of the author's style. In my mind, the author's style is their personality in print. You can read any of their books, no matter what the theme or subject, and it's like meeting an old friend. In the co-authored books that I have attempted reading in the past, the imprint of either author is muddled. Style is virtually non existent or erratic. If all I want is concepts, plot ideas, and situations I'll read Cliff Notes. The premise of this book is so very much Asimov (I will definitely read the short story). The expansion of the premise is tedious, wordy, and throws your mind into a stupor. This book is totally devoid of any of the wry humor, the quirks of human nature and the clever wit that I associate with Isaac Asimov. No Asimov is better than watered down, faux Asimov.
Rating:
Summary: A good story, but why fix it?
Review: _Nightfall_, the book, is "Nightfall", the Asimovian short story, padded into a novel by Robert Silverberg. I enjoyed the original story very much, and apreciated Silverber's adaptation of _The_Ugly_Little_Boy_, but in this case, I think that Silverberg should have left well enough alone. His additions to the story include a huge novelette that could have been a sequel to "Nightfall", "Daybreak." Ugh. This section feels forced, like a movie that's trying desperately to have a happy ending, so it just keeps going until something less depressing happens. It is unneccessary, and detracts from the rest of the storyline as originally intended. In summary, I can't see why this version is any improvement on Asimov's original, and I recommend that original instead of this superfluous adaptation.
| 
