There was way too much going on in this book. I'm still not sure what the first part of the book has to do with the ending. Also, the ending is like he just got tired of writing so he abruptly stopped and had it published. I would not recommend it. ( )

Crichton's book "Next" is decent, but far from great. He, as always, focuses in on science and the morality issues surrounding it. The subject matter, in this case, is genetic engineering.

Crichton includes plenty of scary possibilites: genetically-modified fish grown with ads on them. Young girls using fertility drugs so they can sell their eggs for doctors to use. People pursued by bounty hunters because a company technically "owns" their cells. And people denied medical insurance because of genetic predispositions to diseases. There's no shortage of content there. I absolutely love how he presents these perverse scenarios that can happen when science is solely used for profit, and ethical behavior is thrown completely to the wind.

However, the storyline just kind of bounces aimlessly from character to character. There is no focus, and the plot feels very disconnected until near the very end. There simply isn't a main character.

Sex is pervasive throughout the book. Every last woman is described as "attractive" and is available. Nearly every major character has been divorced, and if not, is adulterous. This gets redundant after awhile.

Also, some of the "open loops" in the book aren't ever closed up. Who was modifying the turtles in Costa Rica? Who created the swearing dutch orangutan in Sumatra? Who was responsible for stealing the cell line at the beginning of the book? Perhaps I'm missing something. I also wish he wouldn't bend certain details. For instance, he mentions Cedar Point in Sandusky, Ohio, which is a real life amusement park. Then, he talks about riding "Mighty Kong!" which is not an actual ride there. Perhaps this is a trivial example, but I'm hoping he doesn't take the same liberties with scientific "facts." ( )

terrible.

As the last book published before he died in 2008, Michael oviously was torn between creating a novel or a non-fiction treatise on clonign and cellular usage. As a result of this dichotomy, he tried to do both, and wound up doing neither, putting out what arguably could be called the worst work of his life. ( )

Um livro panfletário com boas histórias, entretanto peca por um excesso de personagens e uma clara linha narrativa deixando o leitor confuso em alguns momentos. ( )