Albert BrooksRecensioni

An interesting book but it had an irritating habit of dumping large amounts of information instead of telling a story. I wish the story had been more important than the predictions of what the world might look like. This was closer to 2.5 stars than 3.

This was really interesting read about what The United States could look like in the year 2030. What's scary about it is that Albert Brooks depiction is pretty grim, but sad to say, obviously something that really could come to pass. This could have been a depressing read but there was a certain light hearted tone throughout the book and there is an encouraging and hopeful ending that doesn't come off has a cop out happy ending.

With a title like "2030," there's a good chance that many who read this novel will automatically draw comparisons to "1984" and its string of projected incidents which have become reality. And indeed, the premise of "2030" draws strongly on the indications of today American society -- financial chaos, the consequences of extended life through healthcare and higher standards of living, the shrinking working generation and the burgeoning senior and retirees. In this novel, one of the primary movements is amongst the young people, who are shouldering the burden of caring for the "olds" and are now rebelling against the costs of education, of healthcare, having been told that they must take out loans which can never be repaid in their current situations -- something that could have been lifted from the headlines describing any of the recent Occupy movements. Add into the plot a devastating earthquake which destroys the infrastructure and wealth of an entire coast; a push by a medical genius to solve problems of aging such that people could live to be over one hundred fifty years old; and a political system thoroughly broken by greed and egocentricism, and you have a pretty good picture of Brooks' fictional future America.

Reading this book is a little painful because it does reflect some of the current lines of thinking that I've heard tossed about, even in passing or in jest. Seeing how these ideas might play out, even in fiction, is horrifying. One interesting conversations in the novel is about halfway through, when the leader of the young organization Enough is Enough meets with an older Dr. Masters, who specializes in mercy euthanasia for the functionally brain dead and terminally ill. It is a fascinating book, and well worth reading.

I really really wanted to love this book. Great premise, characters have interesting bios, but something is off. Pacing is stilted, and author Albert Brooks does too much telling not enough showing -- making it hard to care about these people, who come off rather flat. Makes me realize how much it takes for an author to make characters really come alive. Brooks' view of the future is absolutely fascinating, however, and quite anxiety-provoking, because it's realistic enough to be...true? Could we be vulnerable to land-grabbing countries because the U.S. debt will be so out of control?

This was really a fun read. The year 2030 is recognizable but with differences that are really interesting. Communications are easier and cancer has been cured and people live long past their 70's and 80's. Younger people resent the 'olds' for the drain they cause on the country's resources. An earthquake nearly destroys L.A. Health care finally comes to everyone in the United States.

Brooks paints picture that is different, credible, fascinating, compelling and optimistic.

Fun.

What a creative read! This was a real surprise! It kept me going. Made me think about whether the young are going to have resentment about the older folk. Looking for another one like but cant find it. futuristic.

In 2030 young people are burdened by the cost of support and medical care for the growing number of "olds.' The problem has increased since a cure for most forms of cancer was discovered. The US goes into crisis when a massive earthquake destroys LA and the president's efforts to borrow money from China for rebuilding is rejected. The immediate crisis is met by an unexpected offer by China, but the larger question of a better future for younger generations is not resolved.

I hope I'm not the only heavy reader who occasionally finds himself deep into a book and wondering why he's still reading.
In this case, the reason was that the plot (a dystopian future America in which numerous medical advances have prolonged human life to the point where it's all the government can do to keep borrowing enough money to maintain entitlement commitments) was just interesting enough to keep me wondering how the story would turn out. The characters weren't particularly vivid for the most part, though I found myself heavily empathizing with the President, who seemed to be a compassionate and principled man.
The story finally ended with a blah-blah-blah conclusion. And I'll never get back the time I spent reading those nearly 400 pages.
Keep your day jobs, Albert Brooks. That's where your talent lies.

Good premise, weak execution.

I don't know why I finished this. Perhaps it was the 1.5x speed setting on the audiobook that helped. Barely. The one kick I got out of it was that the reader was Dick Hill, the same guy who reads Lee Child's Reacher books so well.
This book is just a series of one character after another giving speeches, which are received with thunderous applause by an unthinking, lobotomized audience. Every single character seems to be missing some core piece that would make them three dimensional and the narrative assumes its readers have very little knowledge or imagination (or perhaps is assuming that maybe they stopped paying attention to the story?) by hammering very banal facts about this future that's really not so far removed from our own present into our eyeballs.
I liked the cover.

This book tells the story of what the United States may look like in 2030. It is a very interesting depiction of what could happen if there are no solutions in the areas of national debt, health care, and Social Security/Medicare. In the year 2030, cancer and a number of other diseases have been cured and people are living longer than ever. The AARP has a massive amount of power. Few people have adequate health care, and if they do, they spend their entire lives trying to pay for it. China is the richest and most powerful country. The United States is in huge debt, and many younger people blame this on "the olds," who are using more than their share of federal money because they live so long. In the midst of all this, there is a massive earthquake in Los Angeles, and the government doesn't have the money to rebuild or supply any form of adequate relief.

That being said, the book has an interesting premise, and it is a quick read. The characters aren’t extremely interesting and there is a strange love story involving the president that seems kind of pointless. Overall, I am glad I read the book.

I really enjoyed this book. You can hear Albert Brooks wry sense of humor throughout. But the issues he brings up are worth exploring. These include: social security, aging populations, the medical industry, generational conflict, selling off the country and euthanasia.

While it doesn't seem like there could be humor in these issues, Brooks pulls it off. He has multiple story lines going and none of them lose any momentum as the book progresses. At some point, you can "hear" that the author has shifted gears and the wry humor drops off noticeably as he picks up steam discussing the issues the book raises in the various plot lines.

The characters aren't fully round but that doesn't seem to matter because the readers interest in the story overcomes the weaknesses in character development. For anyone interested in the issues of an aging population, this book does a great job of pricking your imagination and making you think.

I came across this book up at the dollar store. I enjoyed the story, found some areas a bit redundant or confusing due to all the characters. But, with the way technology and our governments are moving towards these days, much of what was written could very easily become true. A modern day "1984".

Like I said before, I think that Albert Brooks gives us real literature that will eventually end up on summer reading lists and college discussions.

For me there were too many characters (and you're looking at a girl who LOVES 'Catch-22') The whole Max/Kathy thing could be eliminated in the abridged edition and not make any dent in the real storyline. We get it. The olds are getting all of the money and the young people are pissed off about it/tired of supporting them. Max and Kathy are unnecessary. Additionally, I think that the character of Susanna Colbert and

the relationship/divorce of the president is extraneous.


Enough. This book is eerie. It's definitely the '1984' of our generation and a cautionary tale of what happens if we don't figure out what to do with the nat'l debt. It gives a 'reality' to the debt that many of us don't understand/think about ... at least *I* don't understand/think about.

I liked it. A good read.

A disturbing, but completely possible, look at the future.

Brooks, whose humor I have always enjoyed (who wouldn't love the man who once did a skit where he was an elephant trainer whose elephant had been lost in shipment, so did his elephant act with a frog?), has written a dystopian novel which may technically be a comic one, but it sure felt like a downer while I was reading it.

return to finish this when the reality of it might be slightly less!

Move over Jonathon Swift. Comedian and screenwriter Albert Brooks has written a compelling satire on our modern American life and political system that is both a fin and a thought provoking read.

Set in 2030, America has become what many have predicted, a debt-ridden society where the older generation (known as "the olds" by the young) lives well at the expense of their children and grandchildren. The situation has been exacerbated by finding cures to many diseases - notably cancer - which has radically extended the life expectancy of Americans.

When a massive 9.0 earthquake destroys Los Angeles, the country finds that it cannot afford to rebuild the city, nor is its main creditor (China naturally) willing to loan the trillions of dollars that the reconstruction is going to require.,

What transpires is a partnership like no other that will leave the reader both appalled and also wondering if some of the ideas proposed here are really not so bad.

The title of Albert Brooks novel, Twenty Thirty, refers to the year in which this dystopian tale takes place. I've enjoyed Albert Brooks since I first saw him almost 40 years ago on The Flip Wilson Show. In his first novel, Brooks tells a story which is both frighteningly realistic, and funny as hell. By the title year, cancer has been cured, removing the biggest predatory threat to mankind. Many other health advances have also occurred, and the result is that 80 is the new 50. There is great resentment for "the olds" among younger people, as the entitlement safety net stretches to the breaking point. Then, in 2030, The Big One finally hits LA. 9.1 on the richter scale. The city and its suburbs are demolished; and the Government realizes that the money to repair and rebuild simply doesn't exist. Hilarity ensues. The book reminds me a lot of Christopher Buckley. It is a low-level satire, and thoroughly enjoyable. I'm glad I read it.

2030 was amusing but a little far-fetched. After the first half it was no longer funny. It was overkill. Part of my disillusionment with the book is that I have watched umpteen shows on the Science and History Channels about the same issues that Brooks writes about.

In addition, I feel that Brooks has taken all of the doomsday stories that one hears on cable news programs and woven them into his book. Doomsday books are all the rage given the economic problems that we are dealing with. However, doomsday is never going to happen. History proves this and for this reason I do not approve of doomsday thinking. It only makes people upset.

I wonder why he wrote this story. Brooks is a comedian but 2030 is not comedy. The disconnect between young people and "the olds" that he presents in the book is not realistic. We all may joke about the generation gap but I do not believe that there is any real animosity between the young and the old. For those people of both generations who are having a hard time right now, 2030 might make them fearful or angry.
Brooks did a good job creating believable characters although there were too many to keep track of. I had to backtrack several times to remember who was who. 2030 is an OK book. It's not great but its not bad either.

I've read a lot of futuristic fiction and this is by far the most realistic hypothesis I've seen for what it will really be like in 20 years. It's pretty depressing and a little more mundane than what I usually read but still a good read. If you want zombies, or vampire aliens or killer robots this is not your book. If you want something that will make you think keep you entertained at the same time then this is for you

I enjoyed the vision that Albert Brooks created of the future. It actually seemed possible and especially the issues of young versus old. However, the writing was very flat. The book dragged and the ending was too simplistic. I probably would not read another book by Brooks but it was an easy read and kept me entertained. A book like this is okay as an occasional diversion½

Interesting books very economically written. I could really see how the even ts describe to the future could really happen, especially given the economic climate of today. We are a ageist society, worshiping youth but forgetting ages legacy. 2030 predicts just how bad it could get. Home grown terrorists??? For sure !

Set in the near future, a cancer cure is developed, allowing people to live far longer than before, which causes conflict between younger and older people, since many feel that the older ones are sucking up resources. The President has to deal with older people issues as well as a devastating national emergency, and many people in the U.S. are disenchanted with their lives and feel as if the quality of living is not the best it could be. The narrative is third-person omniscient and we follow the President, the cancer-cure developer, AARP, a Chinese health system administrator, and others as they maneuver through their lives. To be honest, I found the writing bland , boring and banal – many times the characters are boring and have boring conversations, especially the ones between Kathy and Max, almost like the author was playing make believe with himself and imagining scenarios with himself, which he was but without too much imagination. The writing was too one-dimensional, the tone too flippant and unrealistic. I did not like this style of writing, and unless it improves, will probably miss this author’s next book. It was definitely a task to finish this novel.

The idea behind Albert Brooks' 2030 is that in the not too distant future America will be so in debt that life as we know it will be completely changed. Medical advances, combined with the increasing power of Right to Lifers result in people living much longer lives (many on life support systems), draining all resources and money from the younger generation. Hate groups form, with increasing violence against "the olds." A thought provoking and somewhat believable premise.
But then, it was written by Albert Brooks, actor and comedy script writer. So it is not surprising that the novel reads like an unmemorable tongue-in-cheek movie. It's not even particularly funny, just silly. The characters (including the President of the United States and the scientist who found the cure for cancer) are flat and unintelligent. I had to read this book for my book club. Otherwise, I would not have been motivated to finish. At no time in the book was I particularly interested in finding out what would come next in the plot or what would become of the characters. This is not a book I would recommend to anyone.½