I read William Gibson's Sprawl Trilogy. Of the three books, I feel only Neuromancer properly cohered. There was a satisfying depth to Case's character, likely because the entire book is locked on him instead of splitting its 200 or so pages between 3 - 4 perspectives, which is how the other books work. They tend to devolve into sketches instead of portraits. His decreasing emotional numbness was also nicely mirrored by the final action in the plot. The plot itself seemed well crafted, building to a cumulative point logically. The incidental figures, like the sealed community of rastafarians, and the panther moderns, were delightfully weird. Gibson also writes prose that is a grade above your normal sci-fi, atmospheric and figurative, though he really over-describes outfits. Every time somebody shows up, their full outfit in detail.

If you intend to read any more of the books, or Neuromancer, spoilers ahead.

The other two books I was less thrilled by. Where Neuromancer stepped back at the point where the A.I became greater than human comprehension, Count Zero and Mona Lisa Overdrive revolved around AI past this point. It's hard to write a good novel about something when it is definition-ally beyond comprehension. The construction of the plot also struck me as rough, especially in Mona Lisa Overdrive; so much seemed incidental the climaxes of the books. The most interesting thematic stuff - "the street has its own uses for things" and the idea of using a "gestalt" to drive a single person in Count Zero, and in Mona Lisa Overdrive, the buyable versus the non-buyable, "at the base of the catfish's skull..." - didn't seem to drive the climax, and were sort of developed in a limp way on the side.

I did like that each book dealt with the consequences of the previous book using a new set of characters, showing the press of actions down on history. I wish it had squared better with that the books had to say.