Entertaining, but not his best by a long shot.
598585
One probably shouldn't expect Dan Brown to ever top the The Da Vinci Code, but even with unhindered expectations this 3rd Langdon / Symbology mystery-thriller is a bit of a snooze, although that's not due to a lack of setting and premise.  Those elements are as appealing as ever, more so since instead of the usual far-off locations and ancient history presented in both Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, here we have a locale and era much closer to home for Americans:  none other than our own Washington D.C., and the theory that America's history and her founding fathers are steeped in Masonic lore and mystical secrets.

When Langdon is summoned by old friend Peter Solomon, a powerful Washington figure as well as a modern-day Mason, he thinks he's simply being called on to do one of the things he does best - lecture to a rapturous audience about symbology, which I find a fascinating subject all by itself.  Soon after arriving in D.C., however, Langdon is yanked into the midst of a bizarre and sinister plot that threatens the security of the country and even the world, yadda yadda yadda.

It's vintage Dan Brown with its lightning-fast pacing and cliffhanger chapter endings, chock full of interesting tidbits along the way to keep us interested, and we're much like the doomed children of Hamelin as we follow Brown's Pied Piper out of the village and into oblivion.  Where the story falters is in the characterization.  It's never been Brown's strength to begin with, and I don't know that his characters - including Langdon, although he's slightly more compelling - are meant to be much more than tools to move the storyline along.  Still, we need something to sink our teeth into with these characters.  Brown's formula usually includes a bizarre, almost Bond-esque villain who either wants something only Langdon can deliver, be it knowledge or an actual object, or wants Langdon out of the way so the criminal's evil deed can be fulfilled.  The villain here, a physically and mentally freakish man we know only as Mal'akh, is so two-dimensional and unrealistic that he struck me as a comic book character, and I thought he detracted from the value of the story rather than enhanced it.

Still not a bad book, and certainly an entertainer for the beach or other casual reading.  Where Brown lacks in depth he makes up for with master craftsmanship in creativity and story structure, and his patent on the esoteric thriller is rock solid.
44027
I'm a big Grisham fan, but this is not his best work
3180081
There's some good stuff in here, as well as some pretty mediocre stuff. The writing starts to get pretty predictable after a while (not just what he writes, but how he writes it).
1157692
I am a rabid fan, so although Six Years disappointed, it will not deter me from reading more of Harlan Coben's work. I had issues with his timeline, the character's obsessiveness, the unevenness of who knew what when, and an excessively long drawn out search for clues. Not his worst but not his best.
2932220
I really like the characters that he developed in this series, but this book left a lot to be desired.  It was entertaining but when I finished reading it I wondered why.  I hope his next effort with these characters is better or I won't be buying any more of his books if he is just going to "mail in" the story line and the plot.
200552
I like the book but it is not his best. There were two parts of the book that was taking too much time and being not that much relevant to spend that much. For example, the pageant accident and the story of how he likes his wife. These two events in the book are not really about "jumping", or at least doesn't deserve 25% of the book. At some point, I was thinking that he was trying to justify his mistake at the pageant and to give a tribute to his wife instead of talking about taking a jump -- which he does the rest of this book. That being said, good book but not his best.
3603026
It was okay but not his best stuff. I also bought one of his books which, if you can get through the "accent" is much better.
2071276
This book did not hold my attention as well as some of his earlier books. I will continue to read, since I enjoy the characters, and places that the story line has.
4260968
Not his best, but certainly not his worst. A great tale of "sh*t-luck" that runs so much of our lives.
1223037
It was okay, but pretty predictable. I enjoy his later works better.
4096228
This private investigator certainly had his problems.  He had a disfunctional relationship with his parents who seemed to him to be old hippies stuck in the 60s , but highly successful in their lives.  He apparently cannot talk to them about his problems with his own life, as they seem to hear him, but not really listen to him. His office is on the brink of collapse but his office manager hangs on and provides him with much needed computer information while he investigates the cases he has taken on.  He does have a productive relationship with the local police which comes in handy, but I feel that he does not have a good sense of his own personal worth.  He just seems to float through situations without much effort to improve his lot and, as this story ends, he has not only solved crimes, but has given away much of the financial rewards he worked hard to receive. Finally, it is an entertaining story with was really quite fun to read.
3517718
Not his best work in my opinion, but still good for some laughs.  The last chapter about quitting smoking also drags on for quite a long time.
4115580
The Racketeer isn't exactly up to Grisham's standards.  He admits somewhere that he "just wrote it" and that it isn't well researched.  That shows, especially to discerning readers.  Outside of that, it IS a pretty good story, although much less of a finesse than most of his work.  Except for the many obvious failures of fact, it's a reasonably good read.
1958214
It's good, but not his best - which is a high bar. Mostly, it seems to transparently be the 'first in a series' and the ending is somewhat unsatisfying. Still, it is far better than most of the 'resting on their laurels' authors are producing.
2718988
Not one of his better efforts, but when a genius has an off day the result is still worth reading.
2840733
It was decent, but not one of his better novels
2803209
There is no question that Auster is a talented writer, but Timbuktu fails to add anything to his previous work.  The word play is common and sometimes embarassingly obvious (as when the protagonist's owner turns Santa into Satan, or Dog into God), and much of the story feels improvised.  In more than a few places you have to wonder if Auster knew where he was going at all.  Still, much of the story is entertaining, and if you are able to get past the idea of a story told from inside the mind of a stray dog you may very well enjoy this book.  For me it was a little bit predictable in its themes (there is more to life than material possessions among others) and felt front-heavy in its pacing.

Bottom line: If you are new to Auster, read the New York Trilogy instead.