Rating: 
Summary: Blasphemous
Review: Where to start? Well first of all, for all those "intellectuals" that think that Dan Brown has DICOVERED something, think again. This book has been written in various different forms by other people preceeding Dan Brown (Holy Blood, Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln; The Goddess in the Gospels: Reclaiming the Sacred Feminine and The Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalen and the Holy Grail, both by Margaret Starbird, and The Woman's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets by Barbara G. Walker). This in not to say that his crap is true, on the other hand, his references will show that his points are invalid. The references used for this book do not cite source documents from Jesus' time. Instead, the only real mention of the Mary Magdalene scenario is a kiss in the gnostic gospel of Philip, and a mention in the gnostic gospel of Mary. Both of which were rejected by the early Church fathers very early after the death of Christ (200 a.d.). Any research on the Church fathers will show that the canon of the bible surfased long before Constantine, and never contained anything about Jesus being married! Was it a "cover up?" Well, considering that the actual bible has been historically documented only decades after Jesus' death, while the gnostic gospels sprouted up hundreds of years after that, proves that they are likely false. If you have the desire to read this book, just remember that you cant believe everything you read. You owe it to yourself to research Dan Brown's claims before falsely accepting them. "It is just fiction." This has been heard before, and is quite ridiculous in that Dan Brown himself tells his reader that it is not all fiction. Although, I do agree that even the "facts" in this book are fiction, it is important not to blow this off as a meaningless fictional plot that has no intention of criticizing Christianity. To my surprise, Dan Brown has "discovered" that the Catholic Church killed five million women as witches. This is ridiculous, the actual number is historically estimated between 30,000 to 50,000 victims. Not all were executed by the Church, not all were women, and not all were burned. Perhaps the paintings of Leonardo are more appealing, in that Dan Brown has surely uncovered something there? Refer to the following from Crisis Magazine (Sandra Miesel. "Dismantling The Da Vinci Code." Crisis (September 2003): "Brown's revisionist interpretations of da Vinci are as distorted as the rest of his information. He claims to have first run across these views "while I was studying art history in Seville," but they correspond point for point to material in The Templar Revelation. A writer who sees a pointed finger as a throat-cutting gesture, who says the Madonna of the Rocks was painted for nuns instead of a lay confraternity of men, who claims that da Vinci received "hundreds of lucrative Vatican commissions" (actually, it was just one...and it was never executed) is simply unreliable. He presents the Mona Lisa as an androgynous self-portrait when it's widely known to portray a real woman, Madonna Lisa, wife of Francesco di Bartolomeo del Giocondo. The name is certainly not - as Brown claims - a mocking anagram of two Egyptian fertility deities Amon and L'Isa (Italian for Isis). How did he miss the theory, propounded by the authors of The Templar Revelation, that the Shroud of Turin is a photographed self-portrait of da Vinci? Much of Brown's argument centers around da Vinci's Last Supper, a painting the author considers a coded message that reveals the truth about Jesus and the Grail. Brown points to the lack of a central chalice on the table as proof that the Grail isn't a material vessel. But da Vinci's painting specifically dramatizes the moment when Jesus warns, "One of you will betray me" (John 13:21). There is no Institution Narrative in St. John's Gospel. The Eucharist is not shown there. And the person sitting next to Jesus is not Mary Magdalene (as Brown claims) but St. John, portrayed as the usual effeminate da Vinci youth, comparable to his St. John the Baptist. Jesus is in the exact center of the painting, with two pyramidal groups of three apostles on each side. Although da Vinci was a spiritually troubled homosexual, Brown's contention that he coded his paintings with anti-Christian messages simply can't be sustained." It is impossible for me to point out every amount of falseness in this book, however I urge anyone to research it and find out for yourself. Remember, ignorance is the opposite of intellegence. One reason so many "intellectuals" are buying into this crap, is that it makes them feel more intelligent than the "sheep" that buy into religious doctrine! It would be surprising if anyone could obtain the amount of knowledge in one life time that a religion has gained over the course of 2000 or more years!
Rating: 
Summary: Great read. Questionable truth? A few suggestions...
Review: Where to start?
I've decided to begin by "taking out the trash". I, for one, am sick of these bad reviewers blaming the author for "accusing" and "harassing" the Catholic Church. I even heard one reviewer claim all of his books were anti-Catholic! Obviously, someone read TWO out of his FOUR books, and took them the wrong way. When are these people going to learn that the author didn't invent these theories! That's like reading a biography about a terrible person and then blaming the author for the things that went wrong! He's just writing about one idea! And on the reviewers that claimed he was bad-mouthing the church for the molestation charges? He had NO implications on such things, and only mentioned the incidents in one line, where a guard was remembering the police chief's statement about the church! GIVE ME A BREAK! I also heard people blaming him for goals of national paranoia? Is this the Twilight Zone? My advice to people trying to understand what the book is really like is this: Ignore the truly paranoid people who can't go on with their lives ignoring a "bad" idea let alone consider it and look for REAL reviews (AKA positive criticism on the more important criteria of the book). Talk about stubborn! Now that we have that out of the way, let us continue. Whether the theory is real or not, I find it unimportant. People are also acting like this is the first book of it's kind. Wrong! You'd be interested how much you'd find out the book is more non-fictional past the author's claims just by reading the first chapter of a certain book (that's all you need, but you might as well read the whole thing). If you're starting give-up on this review, hear this. This book is not a novel or a thriller, if that's what you're trying to avoid. It's an informational book. The character Jacques Sauniere is also more real then you may have thought, and other character names and places in DVC are all names for other things that played huge roles in the original unearthing of this theory like mountain chains, factual people, and towns. This book is also good for mentioning one thing DVC did not about this subject: the large role in early cryptography. The book is called, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail". Keep in mind, this isn't another lone book, since there are hundreds of it's kind. This is just one that I recommend for it's impressive research (a team of English men personally might have been the first to follow the "clues" in southern France and piece together an interesting theory). It's was published in 1983, so it got no help from DVC. Whether you liked DVC or not, this is a good book for informational purposes and a pretty easy read. Happy reading!
Rating:
Summary: This is a work of fiction people!
Review: Whether Dan Brown intends to educate or entertain lies in the minds of each reader. I picked up this book to be entertained. I went in knowing it was a work of fiction. A good author can blend fact and fiction to present a plausible story. This story was compelling enough to keep my interest without wanting to put the book down. Others have commented on the one-dimensional nature of the characters and that is pretty accurate, however, it does not detract from the story. Religious zealots will hate this book because it presents a thoughtful alternative to the mindless following that is all faith. There is nothing wrong with faith. Just don't disagree with those who will not believe anything other than their own. These are some of the people that hated this book. Others who hated it are critics who aim to discredit the character development. I'm simply a guy who doesn't get a chance to read much because I lack the free time others might have. This book consumed most of my free time and kept my attention until I was finished. If you want a good story that entertains and sometimes amuses but clearly lacks some factual basis (and you recognize that as being OK), then read this book. It's not for the dimwitted or close-minded.
Rating:
Summary: A poorly structured novel
Review: Whether or not the alternative Grail theory is accurately presented, the novel's structure is dreadful. The organization is of the episodic, meanwhile-back-at-the-ranch variety; much of the action is tedious, unsuspenseful, and repetitious, e.g, by Chapter 10, the professor and the lady have made five escapes by motor vehicle; and excessive use of flashback, digression, and/or set-piece "lectures" in almost every scene (as if sidebars had been inserted into the narrative) stalls forward action. Then there is the author's seeming unwillingness to omit ANY of his research. The one redeeming feature for mystery fans: a well-sustained red herring. Deapite all the hype, Mr. Brown's tome is not worth the time required to get through it.
Rating: 
Summary: forget the abridged audio
Review: whether this book is as good or bad as some reviewers write, what is probably at least as interesting as the plot line is all of the esoteric information presented by the author. (i infer this from the reviews) the audio abridges too much of this and gives the skeleton of clues and lots of running around. read the book or wait for an unabridged audio.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent read that will keep you thinking!!
Review: Whether you believe the premise of this book or not doesn't really matter. You will not be able to stop thinking about it for a while. I was sucked into the book in the first 20 pages and couldn't wait to keep reading more. I was able to guess what was going to happen quite a bit, but that didn't really diminish the suspense all that much. There were several times when I was totally surprised and that made up for anything else. I have also found myself searching the internet and looking for the things that are in this book that are supposedly real. You can believe me when I say that there are several things in here that are definitely true!! I have found many references on the internet to whole groups and such that believe the same thing that this fictional book is based around. Definitely worth a read!!
Rating:
Summary: I couldn't put this book down!
Review: Whew, what a rush! I loved Mr. Brown's, "The Da Vinci Code!" If you are into page-turning suspense...I'm talking about the kind of stories that hold the reader literally captive until the last page has been read...then this is without doubt the book for you! Take "10" Dan Brown, you have certainly earned it with this write! Fabulous Book...Fabulous Writer, to be sure!
Rating:
Summary: It's OK reading if you're stuck at an airport...
Review: Which is why I bought this book. It does have a strong start, and at first, I thought that it was going to be very good. But, the self-conscious writing style, the short chapters (which give the book a newspaper feel), the annoying habit the author has of obviously withholding information, and the awkward dialogue combine to make this a very tedious read. In fact, I lost interest about halfway through.....just about the time my plane was ready to board. If you're curious about this book, wait for the paperback.
Rating: 
Summary: The Silliest Book I Couldn't Put Down
Review: While a bit formulaic, and saddled with inconsistent characters who are by turns unbelievably brilliant or completely obtuse, depending on the demands of the plot at any given moment, "The DaVinci Code" is undeniably a page-turner. Paced like an old Republic Serial, it is written in "real-time" and obviously meant to be read the same way -- in one long haul. The problem for some readers (myself included) will be prior familiarity with the "secret" upon which the book hinges: the true nature of the Holy Grail. Anyone who has read "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" (which is actually referenced in the story) or has prior knowledge of the "mystery" of Rennes le Chateau or the Priory of Sion, which was a big story about fifteen or so years ago that turned out to be a hoax, will find the revelation of the "shocking" secret about as surprising as the fact that winter follows fall. However, those who are not familiar with these earlier references, a category that includes all the main characters of "The DaVinci Code" -- when the plot demands it -- will probably be shocked and awed by this book. But it's best not to take it as seriously as the author seems to be asking us to.
Rating:
Summary: Sangreal -- The truth or fiction
Review: While a wonderful thriller in it's own right, the book brings modern historical research into the search for the Holy Grail to the forefront. Brown has obviously done his home work to write this book. I've read the books he lists on the mystery of Mary Magdalene, and her connection with Jesus. His portrayal of the importance of these books is magnificant.
Brown has woven these controversial books into a thought provoking novel. It gives the open minded person reason to think about the true history of the Christian Church, and in particular the Catholic Church. The book accurately presents the success of the early church leaders to mold the fledgling sect into what they envisioned that it should be, not necessarily what Jesus wanted people to believe. As a 32 degree Mason, I found the references to the origins of the Masonic Lodge as steming out of the Knights Templar fascinating, and very accurate. I would recommend anyone who reads this book to meditate on it's message about what is truth and what is historic fact, and read more about these subjects from unbiased history, rather than that which they are indoctrinated with in the traditional churches. Dr. Ronald E. Hestand
| 
