I didn't think this was a bad book, unlike other reviewers online here who think it was terribly written and the pacing was slow. I enjoyed it. I thought it was written just fine. It was a compelling story using characters from Philip K Dick's Blade Runner world and adding to that mythology. I welcomed the additions and felt the author did an admirable job at keeping to Dick's vision. Where I had a problem, however, was late in the book when a seemingly minor character from early in the book who we don't see again at all suddenly appears out of nowhere to talk to the protagonist Deckard in a bar. Deckard's been in a mystery world with so many questions about so many things, like what's in the briefcase he's been wandering around with for one. This character tells him EVERYTHING like he's an omniscient god-like being. He even knows about Deckard's recent drug induced virtual reality trip to visit a "deity" in his own mind. Now how could he possibly know that? Indeed, how could he possibly know half of what he shares with Deckard about the UN, the replicants, etc., et al? He couldn't. And before we're told how he knows all this stuff, he's killed, shot to death in the bar. It just seems like an awfully convenient plot device for the author to use to fill we readers in on things he couldn't otherwise explain in the book, and it's kind of pathetic. Other than that huge hole, it's an enjoyable book and I do want to read its predecessor. Yeah, I'd read this author again, unlike others, so I guess I cautiously recommend this book. The reason I'm knocking it from four down to three stars is because of the omniscient bar encounter.
Based on the reviews I had read before starting this book (and finishing Edge of Human), I almost decided not to read this book. I am glad that I overrode my reluctance. It is true that portions of the book deal with the plot of the movie Blade Runner. However, that is what most sequels do, is build on the material that they are developed from. I was expecting a bunch of retread, and every chapter I read, had a little trepidation of that. For the most part, my trepidation's were unfounded. I found this to be an introspective discovery of the meaning of humanity (much as I found the 2nd book). Despair, madness, even love are threaded through this book in a method that I found meaningful. That said, it did take me some time to complete this book. Some portions moved rather slowly, other portions I was able to read through quite quickly.
Do You like book Replicant Night (1997)?
Awful, long and hard to read...I have a funny story about this author. I was pretty young when I read this book and I never looked at authors. I struggled with this book for weeks. It left me drained. A few months later I started to read the first Star Trek DS9 novel based on the TV series. 1/3 of the way into the book and I could not help but think that this Star Trek book was just as awful as the Blade Runner book. Sure enough I looked at the authorship and what would you know??? yup, same guy! Never again Mr. Jeter...never again will you take my time from me! Shame on you, I will never get that time back. I love Star Wars and I have read about 70 of the books...but I will not read the ones you wrote. Never. You have already taken all that you will get from me, sir.
—Joey
I didn’t realize I was reading the third and final book of the Blade Runner series. The Blade Runner movie is the first. Jeter then wrote Blade Runner 2 which falls between the movie and this book. There's enough back fill to keep me in the story, however would've preferred to have read them in order. I liked the first 1/2 to 3/4 of the book because it was creatively extending the story beyond the movie however I found the ending a bit confusing and lacking in a clear moral or feeling that accompanies many movies. This book seemed like a screen play in that the imagery was very aligned with the original movie and you didn't really get to add your own interpretations. That was good for the true fan, but also a bit confining, I thought.
—Scott
i wish i hadn't wasted my time reading this. It's a tacked-on hack job of writing to the movie plot of the great Blade Runner film. Remember how in the lame ending of the theatrical release (removed from the director's cut) Deckard rides off with his robot lover to live happily ever after? Well, this book is the happily ever after... or not so happily.The book's plot is a ridiculous contrivance where someone shoots a movie about Deckard and blah, blah, blah. Stay away.Read the original Blade Runner screen play by Bill Burroughs. It's much more interesting, though not at all related to what Ridley Scott did with the movie. Scott just ripped off the interesting-sounding title. In Burrough's version, Blade Runner actually means something.
—Paul
