So I just finished "Breakfast of Champions" and while there's a lot to like, it did ultimately feel like more of the same. Literally, in the case of some of the characters and themes. Had I read this before "Slaughterhouse Five" I'd probably have enjoyed it more but as it came on the heels of that book, it seemed to pale into insignificance by comparison. Whereas Slaughterhouse Five felt strangely real and meaningful (despite the flights of fancy) Breakfast of Champions felt disjointed and directionless -- like a collection of ideas and thoughts that weren't connected in any meaningful (or entertaining) way. That all being said, Vonnegut is clearly a genius and the ideas he explores (and the manner in which they are explored) are fascinating, profound and funny (both ha ha and peculiar). I can't really criticise the book or say that I didn't like it, only that... it didn't quite punch me in the gut the way that Slaughterhouse Five did.
It may have been a mistake to read one after the other.