The average user rating for this Book is 6.1 out of 10 (based on 29 Votes).
Prudence M gave it a0: This is by far the worst load of self indulgent dribble I have ever e been forced to read. Bravo for Steve Almond. It was repugnant why should an author of such lurid filth be celebrated. The writer in me is deeply offended and quite frankly appalled.
gary e gave it a0: really a bad book. if you must, read the first chapter and the last three pages, which aren't completely terrible. otherwise, ugh.
[Anonymous] gave it a0: What a waste of time. Nothing more that the egotistical rantings of a lunatic.
Big Jim gave it a9: Superb. The balance of faux autobiography, thriller, 'son to father' character transition and genuine regret for actions that cannot be undone, not to mention another exciting glimpse of the horror that is Patrick Bateman all go to make this his best novel yet.
[Anonymous] gave it an8: In addition to being a biting and humourous satire of modern times, it was the first of his novels that really seemed to have a heart.
[Anonymous] gave it a10: Bret Easton Ellis directly targets at our society's illnesses. Highly recommendable, great literature.
alex gave it a1: pondering, turgid prose, alternating with slipshod meanderings into high-school sentimentalism. unbelievably bad writing that no creative writing professor would have ever let out of the classroom. i haven't read as pathetic a book as this in a long time. i loved glamorama and american psycho, but this is just horrible. i feel sorry for bret, it's as if he's come to regret who he once was, and needs to write a john irving novel as repayment to society. i wish he'd disappear back into the heroin and write something interesting. opening chapter is quite good though, so go spend twenty minutes in barnes and nobles and crouch against a wall.
rd r gave it a9: I hope the Boston Globe isn't paying too much for Steve Almond to review books. If Lunar Park is "the worst novel" he's "ever read," he hasn't read very many novels.
jacob gave it a3: As a big BEE-fan, I found this a very disappointing, uninspired read. First chapter is brilliant though.
Scott P gave it a10: his best work
Jared S gave it a9: Fantastic. It falls just short of Glamorama and American Psycho, but I personally don't think you can even compare this to those two. Ellis really branched out into a completely different field with this book, in every possible way. Emotionally, structurally, stylistically. The final two pages contain the most beautiful passages I think he's ever written. Oh, and when it's aiming to scare, boy does it do its job.
Mick gave it a5: Cluttered with herrings of every color and stripe. Metaphors pile up until everything becomes either literal or meaningless or both. Coupland covered much of the same ground more touchingly in 'Hey Nostradamus,' without inviting comparison with Shakespeare. Still, some keenly observed satire.
Ras S gave it a10: While not his best (which to be completely honest I don't know which one is) it is definately a great one. A fantasticly morbid look into the relationships of an author with his past work and life.
Stuart B gave it a7: This novel certainly is not Ellis's best; indeed it is only marginally better than the novel which most critics and readers agree to be his worst, Rules of Attraction. Whilst it contains much of the satirical force of his earlier work (as well as the graphic violence and over indulgence in drugs and booze and sex) it lacks any real orginality. Much of the 'horror' elements are ripped of from the Chucky films and Steven King novels. I got the impression that I had read all this before, from the theme of fathers and sons to the bloated nihilism and narcassism of the characters. For all its post-modern trickery - the narratot is a character called Bret Easton Ellis, Patrick Bateman makes an appearance - the novel seems rather dated. Having said that, the passages on the main charater's relationship with his children, and the satirical stuff about modern parenting works well. Again, as with American Pyscho the reader must decide if the events described 'really happened' or are merely a product of the narrators imagination. Overall, Lunar Park is entertaining enough but this reads more like a parody of his earlier work rather than a great Bret Easton Ellis novel.
Lavender Orchid gave it a10: Simply incredible. The most entertainingly written book I've read in quite sometime. Hooked me from the very first page, and continued to boggle my mind every page on. He's underrated as a writer. "Less Than Zero" was very Joan Didion-ish, "Rules of Attraction" is kind of like his James Joyce/William Faulkner-esque novel, "American Psycho" was compared to Dostoevsky by Norman Mailer, thematically, but still, the comparison is very valid, Glamorama is (supposedly) his "Palahniuk-esque" novel, and now Lunar Park is his Stephen King-ish novel. Covering that much ground with 5 novels, and a book of shorts he wrote BEFORE Less Than Zero that are pretty damn good...He's incredibly gifted.
Jay R gave it a10: Fantastically written, very funny, extremely entertaining, and surprisingly poignant.
User Comments 
