I have a love-hate thing with lists like this.

On one hand, there are some genuinely great books here that I've read, plus others I haven't gotten to yet—all perfect additions to my Goodreads list. On the other hand, it's slightly depressing knowing I won't live long enough to see my to-read list hit zero (currently sitting at a casual 1400+ books). Don't get me started on my Letterboxd

Some of these (Last Samurai, Austerlitz) I read so long ago, that I was at first convinced that they had made a mistake and included a couple of 20th century books. Nope, I'm just old, and we're already a quarter of the way into this century.

This list has some very questionable choices on it.

The most accurate list for the first 10 years of this millennium is from the Readers of The Millions (not the critics). Almost every book from The Millions list is still on the Kirkus list. (I probably got this list for The Millions from Kottke.) https://themillions.com/2009/09/best-of-the-millennium-pros-versus-readers.html

The Millions should update it every 5-10 years. Oh well...

I tend to ignore critic's end of year recommendations lists as too "literary" and not enough "enjoyability". Readers get it though. I would recommend basically every book that the The Million's Readers do (order doesn't matter), except for Austerlitz. I have never understood why people like Austerlitz. Someone please explain its appeal.

Similarly, the Pulitzer Prize winners and their runner-ups are generally very readable books and matches with the Reader's list from The Millions.

Apparently, I am the only person ever who read Gone Girl and Lauren Groff (multiple books) and went...meh. I agree with many other books on the list, though.