Rating: 
Summary: hmmm
Review: I've read so of the reviews and I recently read one someone saying all Catholics are evil. Well I'm sorry to say but Dan Brown's books aren't 'All True', but In order to know that you'll have to have had so historical backround. Dan Brown used people's ignorace of history to write a book that would cause Catholics to break away and people to hate Catholics for things they never did. The book is so obviously Anti-Catholic it's laughable. A few examples of his "impeccable" research: He claims that the motions of the planet Venus trace a pentacle (the so-called Ishtar pentagram) symbolizing the goddess. But it isn't a perfect figure and has nothing to do with the length of the Olympiad. The ancient Olympic games were celebrated in honor of Zeus Olympias, not Aphrodite, and occurred every four years. Brown's contention that the five linked rings of the modern Olympic Games are a secret tribute to the goddess is also wrong - each set of games was supposed to add a ring to the design but the organizers stopped at five. And his efforts to read goddess propaganda into art, literature, and even Disney cartoons are simply ridiculous. No datum is too dubious for inclusion, and reality falls quickly by the wayside. For instance, the Opus Dei bishop encourages his albino assassin by telling him that Noah was also an albino (a notion drawn from the non-canonical 1 Enoch 106:2). Yet albinism somehow fails to interfere with the man's eyesight as it physiologically would. -from ... ^^^. ~Little Flower~
Rating: 
Summary: Fun read, but it's certainly not fact.
Review: I was hesitant to read this novel, as cheap thrillers aren't generally my style, but I, like so many others, was coerced into reading it by my friends, who insisted that it is intellectual and fascinating. Immediately, I was turned off. Dan Brown's writing is horrendous - reminiscent of bad Nancy Drew novels of my childhood, except with more useless information thrown in every other paragraph. Seriously now -
"His usually sharp blue eyes looked hazy and drawn tonight. A dark stubble was shrouding his strong jaw and dimpled chin. Around his temples, the gray highlights were advancing, making their way deeper into his thicket of coarse black hair." (pg. 8)
gag. Along with a quick mention of his Mickey Mouse watch later on, this is the only characterization of Robert Langdon that is provided. However, I read on, as I generally give a bad book 50 pages before putting it down, and I've got to admit that it hooked me by that point, and I sucked the novel down quickly. What Brown lacks in writing skills, he makes up for in clever plot twists and gripping codes. I also was drawn to the subject matter, amazed that "everything" (in Brown's words during an interview) was true. A little research quickly showed that, while there is a good deal of truth in "The Da Vinci Code", and much of it is based on fact, the basic premises of the book are said to be absolute fact, when in fact they are no more than speculations based on rumors and oversimplifications of extremely complex stuff. First off, it is generally agreed upon that the Priory of Sion did not in fact exist, but was a hoax invented in the 1950s by a French Nazi named Pierre Plantard in order to proclaim himself the King of France, claiming that he was a direct descendant of Jesus. He made up a bunch of documents on the fictional Priory of Sion and planted them in various libraries. That Dan Brown takes the hoax as truth just shows his gullibility. Second, I really don't think you can say that women experienced something of a Golden Age before Christianity, and then, as Christianity was popularized, automatically became subservient. Although there were certain branches of paganism (not one unified religion, but various local traditions) that worshipped various goddesses, women certainly were not prominent in society - they have always been discriminated against, and there have been few female leaders throughout history, before and after the rise of Christianity. Nor can one claim that Jesus was never considered divine until after the Council of Nicaea - even if he was declared such during that council (which he wasn't, not exactly), there were always followers of Jesus that considered him such. My real problem with this book lies in Brown's assertions that it is all fact, when so much of it is inaccurate or oversimplified. I was also really annoyed by his making the main character a Harvard professor who was an expert in his field, when Brown is obviously nowhere near that status. I hate that so many people are reading The Da Vinci Code and accepting it as fact.
Rating: 
Summary: Scooby Doo Ending
Review: Secret societies, albino monks, murder, mystery... what more could I have asked for? I should have asked for more! The background or pseudo-history of secret societies and hidden religions was very facinating. The writing style was horrible, though. As each chapter passed, I found the formula of *answer a question* then *find a clue* then *ask another question* then *turn to the next chapter* tiring. I doubt this entire escapade took only a day and a half! And the Scooby Doo ending to boot!
Rating:
Summary: From "The Last Supper" on-- Properly categorized as Fiction.
Review: What a journey I've been on, as a result of this book. Earlier this week, a friend requested that I read it. Did so in one sitting at Barnes and Nobles; would typically purchase those books that I browse, but this would have been $25 illspent. My immediate reaction was that the author is by no means intellectual. His writing is blatantly elementary, as many reviewers have already pointed out- two dimensional characters, rampant cliches, predictable plot points. The man just doesn't have the imagination or intellect necessary for writing. My secondary reaction was that I was glad to have read it, for although his writing provoked many groans, the ideas [though not his own] were enticing. Ever the knowledge addict, I expressed my opinions to my friend, and we two went off on a quest for understanding. It is this quest that brings me here. There was no need, prior to it; I assumed most people would simply enjoy or dislike what they read, and my opinion would be inconsequential. However, at this point I feel it's somewhat necessary to share what we've discovered: that this book is, without question, a work of Fiction. Mr. Brown strikes me as the type of man who delights in the arrogant appeal of 'knowing more than other people'. The type of man who seeks higher education and book learning, so that he might re-introduce the concepts he's discovered to those "less knowledgeable"; the problem being, of course, that he presents the information as undeniable truth. The idea of challenging what he has been taught would not occur to him, as he is a passive learner. By writing the book as he did, he is not only promoting false information- he is encouraging a continued pattern of passive learning. Even his characters never question the information presented to them; no matter their degree of so-called 'intelligence', each consequently smiles and nods in agreement when they are presented with a new concept. I dislike the idea of passive learning, and consequently seek answers and information with a relentless passion. After reading the book, my first experiment in understanding involved the suggested theory of PHI; after some scattered research, I conducted a series of measurements that time and again proved the 'ratio phenomenon' to be false. After searching more, I learned that most individuals attempted this same experiment after reading the book; and, as with myself- were consistently disappointed. PHI is not a natural phenomenon. While I am not a mathematicean, I enjoy the study of numbers; PHI isn't much more more than a representative variable along the lines of 'i' or 'pi'. So. Although my friend and I acknowledged this theory to be untrue, we also recognized that it was one of the lesser ones mentioned in The Da Vinci Code- and continued to explore some of the other concepts presented. Our first involved the much-discussed idea that Da Vinci had painted Mary Magdalene into The Last Supper. Our journey became prolonged due to confusion of names, but in the end came to this result: John the Apostle was, in fact, effeminate. Most artists depicted the man similarly to Da Vinci [you're welcome to do an image search on google for "John the Apostle"]- long hair, youthful features, no facial hair. Coinciding with this is the fact that Da Vinci simply struggled with depicting the male form; during our search we viewed a massive amount of his work, and portraits of men are quite noticeably absent. Those that we did find were undeniably effeminate, or depicting older men; The reason for the former might have something to do with Da Vinci's rumoured homosexuality, as well as his preoccupation with female beauty- and the latter, as I explained to my friend- is that it's easier to draw what you're familiar with. [In this case, men who looked like himself.] This said, I'd imagine that the depiction of John the Apostle is strikingly effeminate, not only because of his natural features- but quite simply, because Da Vinci got 'carried away' with the idea of portraying the man as meek and delicate, and inadvertently incorporated his adoration of the female form. As for Peter leaning across to whisper in his ear, as well as the mysterious dagger; it is said that Peter is informing John of Judas' plans to betray Jesus. [Matthew 26: 14-16; in the painting, Judas is seated in front of the two figures, and turned towards]. Small symbolic subterfuge on the part of Da Vinci, but nothing quite as overwhelming as the author would have us believe. This is not to say that there isn't some truth to the idea that Mary played a larger part than she is credited for- nor is it to say that Jesus absolutely did not have children. Certainly possiblities, [and in the case of Mary Magdalene, becoming increasingly undisputed]; but this book does not provide any particularly compelling evidence in the case of either. As for the "Priory of Sion", our research is incomplete. So far it's not looking too good, and I would be entirely unsurprised if it didn't amount to yet another mistruth on the part of Dan Brown. It's unfortunate that this book has become the bestseller that it is; especially given that most will read his words as reality, and go no further. Please do not let yourself be lulled into complacency. You have been played for a fool, by a fool. Suggested reading: "Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously But Not Literally", by Marcus. J Borg "King James VI and I and the Reunion of Christendom" "In the Beginning : The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language,and a Culture" "New Revised Standard Version: Study Bible"
Rating: 
Summary: Well, I was proven wrong
Review: I am a devout science fiction fanatic and when my friends, who have bought and read "The Da Vinci Code", kept after me to read it, I finally gave in believing I would hate it. I was dead wrong! This book was so absolutely fascinating that I almost could not put it down to even sleep or eat! I don't want to be another "spoiler", there are plenty of reviewers doing that already, but I did want to urge all other science fiction and cyberpunk fans out there to get this book...you won't be sorry. I have now added it to "Childhood's End", "Foundation and Empire", "Stranger in a Strange Land", "Puppet Masters", "Neuromancer", "Snow Crash", and "Darkeye: Cyber Hunter". It's nice to be proven wrong sometimes.
Rating:
Summary: A Borrowed Idea, So-So Writing, and a Gaping Plot Hole.
Review: As other reviews have pointed out, the basic foundation for this novel is taken straight from the idea that the Holy Grail is actually Mary Magdalene in her role as Jesus's wife, carrying his child. Brown adds nothing new to this legend (which is covered in detail in the book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," by Michael Baigent, et al), but uses it as the stage upon which his characters act out their parts. The plot for the "Da Vinci Code" revolves around exposing some secret documents that will prove the legend true. Unfortunately, the action is more Keystone Cops than adventure-thriller, and the writing is a bit tortuous in places. One thing an author owes his readers is to make sure the plot devices work. In this aspect, Brown fails miserably. Central to the story is a gadget designed by Da Vinci called a "cryptex." It is a hollow cylinder (picture a tennis ball can) made of several cylindrical sections, each engraved with a series of letters. The whole thing is held together in a mechanism so that the individual sections can rotate like a giant bicycle combination lock. When the letters are aligned to a particular secret word, the device can be opened and the contents extracted. Inside is a parchment scroll with the hidden information. As it turns out, vinegar quickly dissolves parchment; so to safeguard against anyone just smashing the cryptex, the parchment is wrapped around a glass vial of vinegar. Smash the cryptex, the vial breaks, the parchment dissolves, and the secret message is lost. Much of the plot is built around attempts to decipher the code on the cryptex so it can be safely opened. At various times in the novel, both the hero and villain have full possession of the cryptex, and engage in odysseys and research to try to figure out the code. There is, however, a far easier solution than unscrambling the cylinders or smashing the cryptex. All one would have to do is take a Dremel power tool with a small circular saw on it, and cut through the cylinders without breaking the vial within (a more high-tech solution would be to cut it open with a laser). Why the "brilliant" characters never thought of this is a plot hole the Louvre could fall through. But then, had they thought of it, the book would have been over far (and mercifully) sooner.
Rating: 
Summary: It's All True
Review: The great thing about this awsome book is that it is ALL TRUE! It's great being able to get educated and entertained at the same time. I now know that Catholics are evil and the one true religion is paganism! These are just two of the eye opening facts revealed in this great work of literature.
Rating:
Summary: Amazefully, stunntastically stupid
Review: The arrogant hero uses every breathless adverb in his arsenal and invents a few to tell us all he knows about the Louvre on his way to a murder. He is stunned and amazed so many times in the first 40 pages, I kept wondering why author was trying so hard to boost the juice in the narrative. Would you just get to the murder and stop telling us that three Eiffel Towers laid on their side equals . . . (Sorry, that's a cliffhanger.) But I admit I was already turned off by this story in the first two pages. Because the albino villain (and fear not, Brown will stop his story, just as I am stopping mine to explain the origin of the word, villain) went to the murder scene intending to commit murder with only one bullet in the clip of his pistol. That was so he could shoot his victim only once in the stomach and not use the second shot to the head to finish him. Because if he finished him, the guy wouldn't have time to leave behind all his clues for the arrogant hero to find. Please. Not another Dan Brown story in which every major plot point turns on the stupidity of a major character. (Digital Fortress was another one. In that story a brilliant guy lets himself get deked by another brilliant guy who . . .) Sorry, that's another cliffhanger. Get used to it in this guy's books. So then, although he has a second clip on him, the villain still does not finish the job. He just walks away like one of those villains in the campy Batman TV shows. Please, please. By page fifty, I was wishing the villain wasn't so stupid. That he had used a second bullet to put this book out of its misery right from the start. I haven't walked out of a novel in a long time. I'm just glad I borrowed this turkey from the library. It's going back unread.
Rating:
Summary: Less Erudite But Intriguing
Review: The Da Vinci Code bleeds research revealed by the erudite Umberto Eco's Foucalts Pendulum and that of other novels. Written in Hollywood style, the character development is minimal and language was used in an uninteresting style. I should disclose that while reading the novel, I cared less about the characters than I did about the information being revealed. It was a indeed intriguing and a must read.
Rating:
Summary: A must read book!
Review: This is an extremely well written book with alot of interesting information. I found it very difficult to put it down!
| 
