Rating: 
Summary: How did this cliche ridden tripe ever get published?
Review: There must a million fourth-graders out there writing better sentences that this: "As he stood up, Langdon was beginning suspect it was going to be..." - wait for it everybody - "a very long night." Cue: End of Chapter. Dark and stormy, too no doubt. Why are uni-dimensional-characters-in-a-spot always suspicious of the nocturnal dimensions? I guess if they knew the date and their latitude they could work out the actual length of the night for themselves, and so could we... And why don't readers ever find them in the middle of suspecting it, or even just a little after they have completed suspecting it? Did that sentence make you just want to keep on reading? Yeah, but something else... Does his editorial review team at Doubleday have no shame in allowing that miscarriage of a sentence to see the light of day? And that's just the worst of a thousand other bland and featureless cliches.
This book should have been an ironically humorous footnote in Eco's Templar book, Foucault's Pendulum. In fact I think it was - the bit about vanity publishers for any text that mentions the Templars and the Holy Grail. And the "cryptology" is risible. You want to read about codes, try Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. Or The Times crossword. Can anyone tell me what any of the characters actually look like other than the, sigh, albino? There is just no description and absolutely zero development of these flat cut-out characters; its all plot, plot, plot. I assume that Dan Brown (or his editorial team) had anticipated us imagining Harrison Ford as Langdon and Julia Roberts as Sophie, and so didn't bother any further with that tedious stuff. Oh, what a silly plot this book has. It really is nothing more than a MacGuffin movie, say Frantic, mixed with Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Exceptionally unimaginitive. I had just finished Vernon God Little when I started on this. What a contrast! There no code in this review and none intended. Vernon was a dance in language by a unique and humorous voice. Da Vinci was B-grade movie outline dashed of by a hack writer. The one star is for correct spelling - thanks for that, editorial team!
Rating: 
Summary: There's a reason
Review: There's a reason this book has stayed on top of the bestseller list for so long--it's a good, fun read, full of interesting facts and a lot of fiction. Okay, the writing is not going to win Brown a Pulitzer, but I don't think that was what he was going after here. Basically, Da Vinci is one big car chase and it's great fun. Couple this with the interesting tidbits (some of which I knew, some I didn't) and you can't go wrong. And part of the intriguing aspect of this book is that you'll want to go look up some of what Brown is saying (actually what Langdon, the character, is saying) to see for yourself what is what. This book is what it is: a thriller that's entertaining and a fun read--nothing more, nothing less. Also recommended: "The Last Juror" and "Bark of the Dogwood" by McCrae
Rating: 
Summary: Dense and disappointing
Review: There's far too much math, codes and cryptology, art history, and religious history in this book, and far too little thriller. The writing is pedestrian, and the characterization is nil. That said, the premise is very intriguing -- but unfortunately the first review, above, gives away the big secret! So you lose that suspense -- you already know what they're going to find out. So I'm mixed about this novel. The author is clearly smart, and it's original, but it doesn't really live up to the hype.
Rating:
Summary: Awkward and Uneven
Review: There's no arguing that books on and about Da Vinci's hidden clues and Knights Templer are not only very pertinent but very compelling as well. Dan Brown's approach to the subject is via a story line which is stilted and awkward. Sadly, The Da Vinci Code's disjointed narrative detracts from Brown's great personal wealth of knowledge on the subjects. Author Brown would have been far better served to have written a direct treatise on the facts as they exist rather than try to string them all together via a plot line which, for the most part, was trite and forced. But hey, he's a published author and I'm not.
Rating:
Summary: Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse....
Review: These two limited 1/2 dimensional characters, no more developed than a school boys first attempt at creative writing, receive a special key to a Swiss bank safe deposit box and wander off to the bank to find the next secret in their silly trek of Holy Grail gobbledegoop. When they initailly found the key it was tied to a scrambled number that, shockingly like a cold night in December not in Miami, turned out to be the Fibonacci sequence. Oh, my, and upon their arrival at the bank they, low and behold, realize they need an account number. They were shocked in their 1/2 dimensional ways, "We need a accouint number at a bank?" "Oh my, what will we do?" "What could it possibly be?" "You will have to leave if you don't have the number," says the bank manager. "We have to leave, but we have a key?" But wait, just then one of the two brain cells these characters share in common fires and they realize the Fibonacci sequence is the account number. Duh! Are you dumb as a box of rocks? Is this plot really this bad? Is America really dumb enough to take this trivial book, that should have never gone to print, and make it into a huge best seller? We are lost. The characters, the plot, the writing, everything is horrid, cheap, plastic and dull. This book is akin to seeing a lousy movie and then wishing you could have your two hours back.
Rating:
Summary: Don't read, just think
Review: Think about reading something worthwhile, that is. This book is the most amateurish fodder that I have read in years. . If your preference is to fast food for the brain, maybe you will enjoy this MacThriller.
Rating:
Summary: Don't think, just read!
Review: Think about this book as a work of fiction. Great book. easy read and fast paced.
Rating: 
Summary: Engaging mystery read -- quasi history
Review: This an excellent mystery book, combined with a dose of controversial historical perspectives, including confluence of ideas related to biblical themes (Jesus and Mary Magdalene); the Crusades (the Grail and the knights Templar); and conspiracy theories (masons; world domination, etc.). In my opinion, this book is best suited either for: (1) those interested in the topics enumerated above; or (2) by those looking for an engaging mystery book. I found that I knew many of themes and theories in the book, and therefore the real was not as surprising as it is apparently for others.
Rating:
Summary: Comic Book for Adults
Review: This author loves number riddles and in this book he adroitly discovers the lowest common denominator. But what's more important, how many books Dan Brown sells or the legacy of great individuals? (He should be imprisoned for what he did to Bernini in Angels and Demons - but, heh, heh, not too many lawyers around representing 17th century sculptors) This is Spiderman in the Louvre, Batman gallavanting around Europe. The plot is intricate and the background semi-interesting, but the characters are flat and the dialogue laughable. And the author REALLY needs to fess up in his little "Fact" sections as to what's not real regarding important historical figures. Can anyone name an Oliver Stone movie since JFK? Coming soon to a theater near you, America!
Rating:
Summary: Lousy history, dangerous conspiracy-theory storyline
Review: This badly informed book would have been less annoying if the author had avoided such outdated stereotypes as the supposed role of 'the Inquisition' in persecuting witches, or conspiracy-theory-type accounts of imaginary secret Christian societies and mysteries. This is all so derivative, and so wrong, and so boring. I don't care if historical novels are inaccurate--after all, they are not MEANT to be accurate, they are meant to be entertaining, and this book succeeds on that score. But I do care when heavily biased and badly outdated scholarship informs a novelist's view of the past--such as the nonsense about 'the Inquisition' persecuting witches. Dozens of good books on the history of witch-hunting have been published over the last three decades, and looking at one or two, instead of an older encyclopedia or Western Civ. textbook, might have pushed the author to avoid this old (Protestant) slur. The Catholic Church per se had little to do with witch-hunting, though many individual churchmen (and Protestants too, BTW) were guilty of all kinds of nasty things. I should also mention that a substantial portion of those persecuted as witches were men--in some parts of Europe, they were the majority of 'witches'! Anyone interested in this can read more in Andrew Gow and Lara Apps, Male Witches in Early Modern Europe (Manchester University Press, 2003). It'll be clear enough by now that I am a professor of history. However, I am not a Christian of any kind, so I don't have a particular warm spot for Rome--I'd just like to see less in the way of outdated views and vicious bias in books like this.
| 
