Rating: 
Summary: Not his best work
Review: As good - and compelling - a writer as HST later proved himself to be, 'Hell's Angels' is a let-down. Far from the hilarious and often insightful candor of 'Fear and Loathing', Thompson serves up a flat and frankly overly-sensationalist treatment in 'Hell's Angels'. Yet 'Hell's Angels' is an important book, not for any light it might shed on the club itself (which is dim at best) but as a glimpse into 1960's counterculture, of which the Hell's Angels were one expression. That 'mainstream' America accepted all of the horrors HST 'reported' with such acceptance is in and of itself telling. Just as telling is his neat sidestepping of any issues which might cloud the story (such as many of the Hell's Angels being veterans and saddled with regular, day-to-day jobs just like the rest of us). The problem with 'Hell's Angels' is that HST never really brings any authority to the tale. In fact, he often comes across as a bit pedantic - and strikes one as being quite out of his league (he is rather vague about how much time he really spent with the men he is assesing). That he elected to put an exclamation point on the story by getting himself beat up at the end is, for lack of a better word, embarrasing. I rated this book at three stars only for its value in any HST collection - for the casual reader, or anyone interested in a reliable account of the Hell's Angels, this is not worth buying (scour your local library for it instead).
Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating look into an underworld
Review: Hunter holds himself back and lets the story tell itself. That's is both good and bad. I am a big fan of his Gonzo-style and must admit I missed it. In "Hell's Angels" his writing style was supplanted by the lifestyle he adopted for a year in order to journalize the "trips" of the notorious California Motorcycle gang. Unless you were previously exposed to some (true) stories of the Hell's Angels, much of this book will be eye-opening for the gang did and didn't do. I hadn't been and only knew the myth perpatrated by the media. Hunter does his best to expose the NY Times, Time Magazine and others for their taget-picking, fear-baiting, if-we-printed-it-it-must-be-real style of reporting and de-myths many of the groups exploits. Hunter focuses his story of two or three "runs" the Angel's take. He captures the anti-social attitudes and behaviors of the gang without judging and relates the booze, pills, sex and thuggery stories without embellishment (or so it seemed to me). Read this book if you've ever wondered what the gang life was like for this group of misfits '60's drop-outs. Read this book if you enjoy HST and his eye for the real story.
Rating:
Summary: Year in the life of the Hell's Angels
Review: This was HST's first book after doing free lance journalism almost everywhere. It does not have his wit and style of his later works, but still offers insight and his interpretations of everything. How many writers, authors, and journalists would actually hang out with this group of "bikers" for a year? He did and lived to tell about it (barely), but some of it is redundant. It is not a bad book and HST's account of this year of his life makes for good reading and you don't want to put it down, because you want to know what happens next.
Rating:
Summary: not one of his greatest
Review: the summery of this story says its about the year hunter s. thompson spent with the hells angels, which anyone who read any of his later works would definatly want to read. unfortunatly this was written before hunter started using his sort of insane, chaotic style of journalism. its a pretty serious piece, and pretty dry i thought. Thompson seems to go over the same material over and over again (probably because he had to meet some sort of deadline but didnt have enough material). theres only a handfull of parts in the book where Thompson actually describes, in detail, his actuall experiences with the hells angels. The first half of the book is him just describing events that happend to the hells angels, without much of him in it. In the end it does pick up with him writing about actual parties and such that he was at. But overall id say this book is rather dry, and redundant. But if your not a thompson fan at all and just want to learn something about the angels, go ahead and read it.
Rating: 
Summary: Hunter's Angels
Review: I just gave this another read after having first read it in the seventies. It lacks Hunter's usual wit but offers a clear picture of those tumultuos times. This book was written before the fiasco at Altamont.Hunter takes us on a journey through his year long affiliation with the Angel's originally intended to get their side of the story. We see the human side of one of the most infamous and misunderstood groups of the era. This book held a few surprises for me such as the internal conflagrations between the Angel's chapters from Frisco, Berdoo, Oakland, et al. The book also describes the "love-hate" relationship between the Angel's and law enforcement, the Angel's and the peace-niks, the Angel's and the Beatniks and the Angel's and the Merry Pranksters. Hunter doesn't sugar-coat his experiences. In fact this work has an anti-Angel's sentiment for the most part. Perhaps because he winds up on the wrong end of an Angel's stomp-fest.
Rating:
Summary: A masterpiece of underground journalism
Review: Written before Thompson freaked out on drugs and went truly Gonzo, "Hell's Angels" is instead a great piece of reporting. The Angels were a fairly new phenomenon in the public mind when Thompson went riding with them and recorded all that he saw. It is a fascinating account of what has become one of America's most notorious criminal enterprizes. Thompson's description of an LSD rush (taken when the drug was still legal) is worth the price alone. For all his troubles, the Angels beat him half to death. This is a must read for anyone ineterested in criminology.
Rating:
Summary: "Holy Mary Mother of God! Thompson is genius!"
Review: I have read many a book...but so far this one takes the cake, and the birthday candles! Turned on to Hunter S. Thompson, after renting, "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", I bought the book, only to further my relationship with this brave and eloquent man. As most college kids would love his work only for the humorous style in which he writes, those same souls will be sure to be enveloped in his insanely descrptive stories. He captures the entire essence of The Angels, as he lived, rode, partied, was stomped with and by this, modern day group of Huns. My stomache litterally turned at the thought of some of the visual images that this book inflicted me. MUST HAVE IT, THAT MEANS YOU!
Rating:
Summary: Nice.
Review: There isn't much here to learn about the Hell's Angels if you're already familiar with them. If you're not familiar with them, and you want to learn about them, just about any other Hell's Angels book will tell you as much. The difference is in the storyteller. Gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson. Usually when you read or hear something like this, you're told by some raving pompous reporter, reminiscent of Robert Downey Jr.'s character in Natural Born Killers who tries to hit hard and scare you. Thompson plays it cool with his usual wit and insight. That's what makes this book worth a read. Thompson understood the Hell's Angels. He road with them, made friends. From Thompson, you always read the truth in its truest form you can read. What he found through his adventures with them made for what was indeed a strange and terrible saga.
Rating:
Summary: Best book on the subject
Review: I've read the other reviews and it seems like everyone is comparing this book to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, which is a mistake. They are 2 very different books, but still contain Thompson's wit and style. If you aren't intrested in reading about the more turbulent parts of the 60's, or seeing an inside look at one of the more mysterious and persecuted sect's or our society you are better off not reading this book. Hardly any other journalist could have written this book. Thompson and the Angels both share common intrest's and I'm amazed at how well they get along in the book, and even in the end the parting ,for the most part, is one of mutual respect.
Rating:
Summary: HELL'S JOURNALIST
Review: Feared by his superiors and sometimes colleagues. Loathed by the literary pundits who couldn't stack up against him. In 1965, Hunter S. Thompson shed light on one of the darkest subjects of the 60's. The Hell's Angels Motorcycle Riders. Thompson shows little remorse for infiltrating the place[s] where no other journalist dare tread, and even chronicling the experiences in a book he had to have permission to research and write, from the very subjects of the book. That permission went beyond legalities. Thompson was governed by another rule. The Hell's Angels' Rules. Readers will be shocked, surprised, and maybe sickened while they delve from the safety of time passed into the world of the most notorious two- wheeled gang in history. However, readers will also get a history lesson. A lesson obtained with real blood, sweat, and fears. Thom Ryan
|
