Rating: 
Summary: Almost
Review: What a brilliant opening! I loved that; bought it right away. I was riveted and disgusted throughout in various degrees, his apparent goal as a writer. I was moved and had my depression level knocked up a couple of inches one minute and then laughed out loud several times the next. But the ending! It might have shocked me had I not seen FIGHT CLUB. I was going to read that, and still may, but you have to wonder why the outlandish plot couldn't just have stayed twisted. I don't want to give it all away, but when I read the last page, I thought, "Didn't I just see that in the movie?" Disappointed. For a minute there I thought "I've got to read everything he's ever written!" From what I can tell from reviews of his other books, maybe I already have.
Rating: 
Summary: Highly Overrated
Review: There must have been a reason for being rejected by the publishers multiple times. Invisible Monsters tries to imitate post modernist literary technique of 'flash forward flash back' and attempts to stylize itself like a magazine about the lives of four charachters. The themes could have been contained in a much better written short readers digest story. Yes, it is about reinvention and liberation. You too can use lots of awkward grotesque imagery and descriptions, and cheap metaphors. Stream of consciousness is not for everybody. Sorry Chuck. Yes, even you fourteen year olds can write better than Chuck. Good luck. Disengage cranium from posterior.
Rating:
Summary: The Literature of the Illiterate
Review: The writing of children is interesting from a purely aesthetic point of view. Similarly, Chuck Palahniuk's INVISIBLE MONSTERS should be of interest to educators and researchers who wish to examine the writing patterns of the illiterate. Of course, INVISIBLE MONSTERS cannot be taken seriously as a novel. The "novel" is composed of more grammatical and stylistic errors than any other book that has ever been published. Nor does it even have a narrative that could be taken seriously by a grown-up or a child over the age of twelve or thirteen. It would be wrong to fault the author for this: he does not have the educational or intellectual background to know how to write well.I would recommend INVISIBLE MONSTERS for those who wish to investigate the scribblings of a man who is incapable of reading (there is no other possible explanation for his bizarre treatment of the theories of Michel Foucault) or writing (few sentences, if any, are coherent; most constructions are paratactic). INVISIBLE MONSTERS does not belong in the general literature categories of bookstores. It should be shelved under the "Special Interest" category.
Rating:
Summary: Give me overdone. Flash. Give me my money back. Flash.
Review: invisible monsters tries to be the female counterpart to fight club and even follows the exact same form (which is really sad and uninspired). the book is full of terrible dialogue and completely unrealistic characters, and palahniuk proves he knows very little about women. I have no idea how this book got a four star average.
Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining, yes, but sadly lacking.
Review: To start, I will admit one thing: I read most of this book in two sittings, captivated by Chuck's "rollar coster" (as the amazon reviewer put it) build-up of plot and theme. So I will give Mr. Palahuniuk credit where credit is due. _Invisible Monsters_ begins with interesting circumstances, and it manages to maintain a level of suspense/tension most of the way through. Yet by the end...I find this the equivalent of literary Doritos. The first few tastes are so good (thank you taste-addicting additives) that before you know it the whole bag is finished and you've nothing left for your trouble except a stomachache and bad aftertaste. _Invisible Monsters_ is very similar to Palaniuk's previous novel _Fight Club_...too similar. The writing technique is virtually the same, with numerous stylistic quote-interludes ("flash"), a nameless narrator reflecting on events in stream-of-conscious thought-patterns (written, of course, in fragmented form); and both books contain near identicle "points" to be made, being salvation through physical destruction/paradigm deconstruction. _Invisible Monsters_ is essentially a nilhillistic pop-culture satire using gender-bender characters/fashion enthusiasts as its primary protagonists/targets. The problem is, most of Palahuniuk's targets are easy ones; hunting this sort of game has been done better elsewhere (including Fight Club). Unlike some of the other reviewers on this forum, I did not find the ending, with its requisite "twists", to make the sum of this book more than its varied parts. In fact, the last ten pages seemed afflicted with a weariness: author or main character? Chuck's point was logical but I found the execution poor. The theme of beauty worship--and the desire to escape it, and the temptation to return--is a very good one, and could have become razor-sharp with more work and less stylistic [touches], but I find _Invisible Monsters_ to be far too OBVIOUS in content to effectively work as satire. Time and time again Chuck TELLS us rather than SHOWS us, and his biting, surreal stream-of-conscious technique that felt so fresh and forceful in FC now feels forced, weighed with the tedium of unnecessary repetition and some truly bad prose ([I would pay snakes to bite her]) That said, this is not a BAD book, as it evokes interesting themes and has a number of quotable gems. But neither is it a very GOOD book, either. Certainly not worth five stars. Or anything else than a library check-out, for that matter.
Rating:
Summary: OUCH!
Review: ... ok, this book might have been good... had it been told in some type of order... but as specified in the first few pages, it was going to be told like a fashion magazine, where everything kept getting switched and there was no chronological sense... this ruined the book for me, because it just ended up giving me a headache... sure there are the funny one liners Chuck Palahniuk's great at, but... the overall story just wasnt very involving... I've read all of his books, and this one is by far the worst... don't pick this one up till you've gotten all of the others.
Rating:
Summary: We're all products?
Review: This was a troubling, yet great novel - the cut-up style infuriating, the characters weak, the shock-obsession with consumerism and death tiresome. Palahniuk's self-immolating-as-style and crypto-misogynist fetish for fashion details is very much like an unsuccessful drag queen - he just doesn't seem to have the voice of the main character right. In fact, the problem is that the character doesn't fully develop until the last 20 or so pages, much the dialogue given to a biting observations or catty banter (most of which using language borrowed from fashion mags). The ending seemed like an awfully tidy way to overcome the 27 other chapters of senseless posing (like a fashion model) that the book comprises.
That said - something awful and equally wonderful about this book appealed to me. It could have been the fact that the biting, catty banter was actually pretty witty; the usual Palahniuk sense of nihlism set against some hypocritical aspects of our culture. Perhaps it's also the liberating outlaw road-movie sense of reclaiming humanity through unnatural means (gender reassignment, self mutilation). Perhaps even the infuriating flashback style fuels the plot and imagination. Whatever it was - I had a great time reading this novel, while at the same time, really wanting to hate it for those very reasons.
Rating: 
Summary: Wow.
Review: I must say that i thoroughly enjoyed Invisible monsters. Chuck Palahniuk is one of the best writers ive read. He has obviously mastered his style with his 3rd novel. I had previously read Fight Club and loved that too, but I can say with out a doubt in my mind that i like Invisible Monsters more than fight club. Invisible is a great satire. Satirizing our (human) needs to be loved, and get attention, Palahniuk manages to write great emotional passages without draging them out. Really nothing else can be said other than the fact the last 50 pages will blow your mind.
Rating:
Summary: good for what its worth
Review: This novel is the weakest of all Palahniuk's novels. I liked the whole transgender cover-up thing, and how most of the characters were not as they seemed. I thought this novel was the most nihilistic of Chuck's novels just because it deals with the subject so directly. I favor Chuck's satirical books more, especially his first "horror" novel- Lullaby. For first time readers, pick up Choke and then proceed to Survivor, Fight Club, and then this novel.
Rating:
Summary: twisted
Review: Palahniuk has finaly done it this is by far and wide the most twisted and insane book I have ever read. The ending I would have never imagined. Things that happened in the book are a snock every page is somthing new. Also, the style of the writing is quite unique by no means an ordinary book...
| 
