Rating: 
Summary: Don't believe the hype
Review: ... I found this book contrived, the suspense artificially manufactured, with fake cliffhangers every couple of pages. I found the inevitable revelation was something I figured out right around page 50, so no big surprise, and I had to slog through a lot of bad writing and reams of factoids (some of them wrong, by the way). It's like the author thinks he'll snow us with Too Much Information. Plus a lot of the information was irrelevant mind game stuff, like the Fibonacci numbers and all that. Why he had to go pick on Opus Dei as a villain I don't know -- I hold no brief for them, but they're just not cartoon bad guys like he makes them out to be. And it makes no sense that the victim whose death starts out the book would put his granddaughter on this endless scavenger hunt -- that was what really felt contrived. How anyone can compare this potboiler to "Name of the Rose" is beyond me.
Rating: 
Summary: Dan Brown's THE DA VINCI CODE ...
Review: ... is the second of Brown's novels involving Harvard professor Robert Langdon, and no doubt the most popular - it's now been on the best-seller list for a year! I won't reveal any of DA VINCI CODE's plot, but I will say this: the novel deserves every bit of outstanding criticism it is receiving. Brown's writing style reminds me of Michael Crichton; he writes so as to make the book perfectly absorbing and extremely thrilling - THE DA VINCI CODE is the biggest page-turner I've ever read. Dan Brown has also brought Langdon to resemble best-selling author Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan character; hopefully Brown will be writing as long as Clancy has now. Enough good words cannot be said about this flawless masterpiece of modern fiction, full of mystery, suspense, and featuring a heavily-researched storyline; it is simply one of the best books I've ever read. If you haven't read it yet, I cannot emphasize how much you are missing. Ignore the pitiful, angry comments towards the book and buy it today. It is undoubtedly a decision you shall not regret. I am now officially a Dan Brown fan - keep writing, Mr. Brown. I can't wait for Robert Langdon's next adventure!
Rating: 
Summary: Dan Brown is no Umberto Eco
Review: ... The DaVinci Code rehashes a clever idea - but that's about all it has going for it. The characters are two-dimensional at best: the villain played by religious zealot albino, the angry French cop named "Fache" with a gaze that 'scorches the earth as he walks', the protagonist with little more to him than his description as "Harrison Ford in tweed". The plot is predictable from the first chapter, the suspense non-existent, the dialog tedious and pedantic. ... It's certainly not going to threaten any religious establishments. This book was borderline painful to read. Don't be fooled - at least read the first chapter before you buy it. You'll be able to tell in the first ten pages if it's for you or not.
Rating:
Summary: The Biggest Mystery ...
Review: .... Is how this book got on the best-seller list. The writing is wooden, the characters one-dimensional, the dialogue unspeakable. If you like expository writing, The Da Vinci Code is for you -- the characters talk like textbooks. A major theme is that the Grail is not a literal cup but an embodiment of feminine power, but Brown misses an anagram for "grail" -- "a girl"!
Rating:
Summary: If you like creative books ....
Review: ....you will find that Dan Brown's "DaVinci Code" is brilliant. It weaves a wealth of facts and non-facts into a great fictional mystery novel. This is one of the few books I have ever seen with such an unusual presentation. But, if you allow me to say so, if you really do put great stock in creative presentations, you would probably also like Norman Thomas Remick's highly creative "West Point...Thomas Jefferson". I certainly recommend Dan Brown's bestselling "DaVinci Code" (and also the less known Remick book).
Rating:
Summary: a book gone wrong - no facts - just a cheap thriller
Review: ...here is some of it Brown is right about one thing (and not much more). In the course of Christian history, few events loom larger than the Council of Nicea in 325. When the newly converted Roman Emperor Constantine called bishops from around the world to present-day Turkey, the church had reached a theological crossroads. Led by an Alexandrian theologian named Arius, one school of thought argued that Jesus had undoubtedly been a remarkable leader, but he was not God in flesh. Arius proved an expert logician and master of extracting biblical proof texts that seemingly illustrated differences between Jesus and God, such as John 14:28: "the Father is greater than I." In essence, Arius argued that Jesus of Nazareth could not possibly share God the Father's unique divinity. In The Da Vinci Code, Brown apparently adopts Arius as his representative for all pre-Nicene Christianity. Referring to the Council of Nicea, Brown claims that "until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet ' a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless." In reality, early Christians overwhelmingly worshipped Jesus Christ as their risen Savior and Lord. Before the church adopted comprehensive doctrinal creeds, early Christian leaders developed a set of instructional summaries of belief, termed the "Rule" or "Canon" of Faith, which affirmed this truth. To take one example, the canon of prominent second-century bishop Irenaeus took its cue from 1 Corinthians 8:6: "Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ." The term used here'Lord, Kyrios'deserves a bit more attention. Kyrios was used by the Greeks to denote divinity (though sometimes also, it is true, as a simple honorific). In the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, pre-dating Christ), this term became the preferred substitution for "Jahweh," the holy name of God. The Romans also used it to denote the divinity of their emperor, and the first-century Jewish writer Josephus tells us that the Jews refused to use it of the emperor for precisely this reason: only God himself was kyrios. The Christians took over this usage of kyrios and applied it to Jesus, from the earliest days of the church. They did so not only in Scripture itself (which Brown argues was doctored after Nicea), but in the earliest extra-canonical Christian book, the Didache, which scholars agree was written no later than the late 100s. In this book, the earliest Aramaic-speaking Christians refer to Jesus as Lord. In addition, pre-Nicene Christians acknowledged Jesus's divinity by petitioning God the Father in Christ's name. Church leaders, including Justin Martyr, a second-century luminary and the first great church apologist, baptized in the name of the triune God'Father, Son, and Holy Spirit'thereby acknowledging the equality of the one Lord's three distinct persons. The Council of Nicea did not entirely end the controversy over Arius's teachings, nor did the gathering impose a foreign doctrine of Christ's divinity on the church. The participating bishops merely affirmed the historic and standard Christian beliefs, erecting a united front against future efforts to dilute Christ's gift of salvation. go to the website to read the rest. ... Christ is the answer!
www.christianitytoday.com/history/newsletter/2003/nov7.html
Rating:
Summary: So-so : not much more than Clancy, certaintly not Eco
Review: ...and less readable. Behind the facade of learning that shows up here and there (enough to make this book a reliable source of crank theories about da Vinci), this book is a completely usual adventure story. Much as in his previous work, Angels and Demons, cardboard characters populate a novel replete with brand names and consumerist techno-orgasms. Tom Clancy writes about submarines in gory detail; look here for economiums on expensive Jaguar cars, Oxford graduates with lots of servants, and supertiny hard drives. One almost expects an amazon affiliates link after every paragraph. Dan Brown is also an incredible snob, which shows page after page as he displays a Harvard-worship that would make even the hardest of hard-core alumni cringe; his hero, in his finely graded tastes, reminds me of the worst bits of Ian Flemming's Bond (Bond, at least, was expelled from Eton; here, everyone graduates summa cum laude.) Umberto Eco did the intellectual conspiracy of silence novel far far better in Foucalt's Pendulum; read that first. However, once you've been exposed to Eco's playful intelligence, you'll probably find this a bit of a letdown. Dan Brown doesn't know how to write a mystery -- once you get the hang of his methods, which takes a few chapters, the remaining "puzzles" seems trivially obvious pages before they're revealed in rather long-winded scenes. The romantic moments are cringe-worthy in their woodeness, and while you don't read adventure novels for the finely drawn characters (usually a Sherlock Holmes is enough to carry the day), neither the hero nor his sometimes-fawning, sometimes-antagonistic friends become more than the carefully drawn up CVs Dan Brown produces for them An airplane novel, and not worth the attention and hype it's been getting. There should be a higher bar for this kind of popular intellectual puzzler novel, but perhaps our standards are much lower than when Poe or even Conan Doyle was writing.
Rating: 
Summary: Not up to the hype. It's only a page turner...
Review: ...because Brown ends chapters in the middle, without rhyme or reason. It's a chick book. No...a guilt-ridden Catholic girl chick book. Brown knows his stuff. The factoids are very interesting, but he front-loads the book with them. It's entertaining and full of rich detail for the first half. But, if you haven't figured out the plot's direction by then, you haven't been paying attention. A good book for the beach for those with lowered expectations who have been drinking. Can't wait for the movie (sic).
Rating: 
Summary: Maybe I just don't read enough...
Review: ...But I wasn't sidetracked (too much) by flat characters or formula writing. I admit I needed to hide inside a book, and this one was perfect. I had never heard of the Holy Grail theories, so that kept me going too. So I have to agree with most of the negative reviewers I read -- not knowing makes a big difference in enjoyment.
What *really* bothers me? Opus Dei has both bad and good sides presented, and gratitude expressed to both current and former members he was able to interview. Where is the mention of bad stuff by the cults? Where are the thanks? Does this mean Mr. Brown didn't need to *ask* people? His lack of objectivity on this really bothers me, given that his book is a best-seller! Lets just say I don't generally buy into conspiracy theories and I like to see fact supported by research (and I plan on learning more about so much in here), but far worse than this being a formula novel, I worry that it is a nice cult recruitment tool. And I am *not* a Christain so this isn't personal!
Rating:
Summary: Don't belive EVERYTHING you read in the book...
Review: ...But you can believe the research. There are many publications out on the market explaining the true roll of Mary Magdalene, the WIFE of Christ, and each one is countered by a book that goes against it. So it is all up to the reader to believe or not believe. I mean, we can't ask Jesus or Mary, can we? But just because you may not believe in what Dan Brown suggests in this book, doesn't make it automatically false, AND VICE-VERSA. It's all up to the individual reader to decide, but all I ask is that once you make up your mind, keep your opinion to yourself. Let others form their own opinion, and challenge their faith at will. Their faith is not for you to control. Live your life how you want to, but don't tell me what I can believe and what I can't. Now, Dan Brown decided to use the artwork of DaVinci in his novel. The same principles apply here as up above. There is no way for us to go and ask DaVinci himself, so even the ART HISTORIANS will NEVER KNOW 100% what was meant to be in his artwork and what wasn't. And the same goes for any other artist now deceased. Because of this, WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING EXCEPT WHAT WE BELIEVE. And what you believe may not be what I believe. So leave me alone. As far as the story goes, It's a page turner. Whether you acknowledge the research, or are tooooo close minded to even consider it a possibility, you have to agree. It may not be accurate, but the story keeps moving at a fast pace that keeps any reader interested if they are reading for the story and not for the facts. The one thing I didn't appreciate is that the begining of the story is almost a clone of "Angels & Demons." Anyone who read that book and this should know what I mean.
| 
