Rating: 
Summary: Stumbled in and Stayed
Review: I stumbled onto "The Da Vinci Code" in a rather odd way. I had recently read "My Fractured Life" and loved it. I asked the person who had recommended that book to me for another recommendation. That recommendation was Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code". As I started reading I had many reservations. The reason I wanted a recommendation from my friend was because I had enjoyed "My Fractured Life" - a brilliant, slice of life trip into the hallows of Hollywood. "The Da Vinci Code" was nothing like it. This is a mystery, and a religious themed mystery at that. What had my friend been thinking? At 11 PM with no other new book to read though, what could I do but keep reading? I am so glad that I did. By the third chapter I understood why my friend had recommended it. "The Da Vinci Code" is a superb book. (I watch LAW & ORDER which is a crime show, that doesn't mean that I can't also love FRIENDS and ER which are different genres. So it stands to reason that I can love books from two different genres.) This is more than a mystery. It is a brilliant book. Some mystery authors can only write mysteries. I think Dan Brown is a brilliant writer who just happens to choose to write mysteries.
Rating: 
Summary: Great subject, lousy execution
Review: I suppose Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" has to get one star because most of the words are in the right place and the cover's pretty. I enjoyed Brown's previous novel, "Angels & Demons," and was really looking forward to this one because I just love all the crackpot nonsense about the Priory of Sion and Mary Magdalene. Unfortunately for Mr. Brown, my writing partner and I already did this story on television in 1998, so I know a thing or two about how far you can push this story. Also unfortunately for Mr. Brown, he just isn't a very good writer. In the hands of someone like Tim Powers, this story would be spine-chilling. Powers would be able to pass along the fascination with this story to his readers. But Brown is so impressed with the dis-information he's "discovered" that he either doesn't make an effort to weave a story, or he simply isn't capable of it. Instead, he copies straight from "Holy Blood Holy Grail" and "The Woman With the Alabaster Jar." What's shocking is that this is essentially all the research Brown does, and he treats it like it's never been mentioned before. This subject is a cottage industry. Brown did not invent it. And really, he hasn't done a very good job at all with his story, relying instead on the WOW factor to carry his simplistic prose and juvenile story along. It's difficult to tell whether Brown believes this story. He didn't do a lot of research so he may have bought into the whole thing. That's a problem. And then Brown "cleverly" names the curator Sauniere. For those who are familiar with the Priory story, this induces a great amount of eye-rolling. Someone like Tim Powers can easily get away with this because Powers tells dense, organic stories. Brown does not. We move from set piece to set piece, the readers already miles ahead of the simple story even if they aren't previously familiar with it. Brown uses his "research" (i.e., thieving from the aforementioned books) as a smokescreen for complexity. The info-dump the villain constantly gives our heroes (and what's up with that?) truly doesn't further the thin story Brown has constructed. This information also doesn't jibe with the characters Brown presents. I mean, Sophie doesn't know what her NAME means? Two cryptologists can't figure out the Newton clue? This is a well-trod story that, if you're going to tell it, has to contain some surprises. And a conspiracy of such magnitude, that's been around for so long, had better be air tight. Our heroes had better be frickin' geniuses. With Brown's book, it doesn't make sense that this conspiracy has been held for so long. The clues simply don't measure up. From the beginning of the book -- where NEITHER LEAD CHARACTER can figure out that THE HEAD CURATOR OF THE BLOODY LOUVRE has been posed like the Vitruvian man -- to the end of the book, where the descendants of Christ are at Rosslyn Chapel -- THE FIRST PLACE ANYONE WITH ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THIS CONSPIRACY WOULD LOOK -- Brown lets down his audience and this potentially fun, fascinating story. I'm just thankful that he didn't visit Paimpont Forest, Glastonbury or especially Rennes-le-Chateau. God only knows how he would have mucked that up. As someone who has done this story, I know and appreciate how difficult it is to distill this subject down. There are many, many fascinating roads to take and you do end up with an awful lot of information that you want to deliver to your audience. Discovering this story for the first time is electrifying and being able to tell this story in your own way is very rewarding. But it's a shame that this is the public's first real exposure to this topic. For a much better novel by a much better writer, check out Jim Houghan's "Kingdom Come." And although it also has problems with the static nature of the narrative, Katherine Neville's "The Magic Circle" is a better book by a better writer as well. Don't buy into the hype. Dan Brown is a pretender.
Rating:
Summary: best book you ever read??
Review: I suppose if you have read 2 books in your life, one was the Da Vinci Code and the other one was, I dunno, let's say Nancy Drew and the Hidden Decoder Ring, well then I guess DVC might be the best book that you have ever read. Sorry to sound so condescending, but Dan Brown started it. The Da Vinci Code is juvenile level writing. At least Carolyn Keene never pretended to be anything more than pure pulp entertainment for the preteen set. If you are under the age of 13 or have nostagia for the days when a good mystery required minimal brain effort, then this Code's for you.
Rating:
Summary: It [stinks]
Review: I swore to never read anything off the best seller list again, so I got what I deserved. It started off with some interesting premises, meant to make the reader think he/she must be rather clever to understand the seemingly arcane knowlege possessed by the characters. By about page two hundred I realized that this book had gone nowhere, that the "hidden knowlege" was a bunch of pseudointellectual bull, and that the reason I kept falling asleep every time I picked it up was because it was deadly boring. I kept trying to continue but it was impossible. Phooey. Stick with independent publishers. What a bunch of tripe.
Rating:
Summary: The Da Vinci Code
Review: I think 1 star is a little bit too high a rating for this book that is a non-stop sermon on the merits of Goddess Worship. We are told in the beginning that all of the facts are accurate. Really, Mr. Brown, you couldn't find one real source to list for your gullible readers in a bibliography? We are expected to ignore 4500 manuscripts of the New Testament pre-dating Constantine, just because your make believe Harvard professor tells us to trust him? I hope your readers who have no previous knowledge of church history will be led to begin educating themselves. I would suggest A Case For Christ by Lee Strobel, or The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell; two good historians rather than a novelist with an agenda. Reading from their list of source materials will keep one busy for years and hopefully away from trash like The Da Vinci Code. I would also recommend C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity; there is a real Oxford University professor for you. Funny how the fictitious professor never does find the evidence that everyone, even supposedly the big bad church knows exists. I'm waiting for the sequel, Mr. Brown.
Rating: 
Summary: A Definite Must Read
Review: I think a true example of a talented author is one who can deliver a serious message while wrapping it inside a most entertaining story. Dan Brown has achieved exactly that. This is the best mystery novel I have read in sometime, and the revelations that Brown submits are fascinating. It has encouraged me to study Da Vinci, The Bible, The Templar Knights and everything Renaissance. This is one book that everyone, especially Christians, need to read. The story DOES NOT lag in the middle, that is where all the good stuff is. I promise you will not de disappointed.
Rating: 
Summary: Just like movie blockbusters!!
Review: I think overall the book contains a lot of educational information but the attempt for suspense failed. I was able to read it and put it down for a number of days. The suspense parts were ok but they are so mainstream and not original, it is all something that we have either seen in movies or read in other books. And of course, the mass appeal it is not very attractive.
Rating:
Summary: it's fiction!
Review: I think that people are forgetting that this is a novel. This is fiction, not fact, it's just something fun to read, and in that respect it is wonderful. Dan Brown does not pretend that everything that he presents is sound fact, rather he includes a page in the beginning outlining what is fact. Do not confuse this with a historical document, but along the same lines, don't expect this to be historically accurate. What is historically accurate anyway? It is good read, hard to put down, and I loved it.
Rating:
Summary: Runs out of steam
Review: I think the book does a good job of gripping you early with a lot of unknown trivia about Da Vinci, Mary M, etc., but eventually runs out of steam...Left me with a sense of what was this all about
Rating: 
Summary: Somewhat Engaging
Review: I think the core problem is that once you figure out what the puzzle is, you lose interest. It's not a very captivating object of mystery for most people. And the repetition of everything--the endless puzzles, chases, clues, villain/hero determinations. Yawn. Best part was the first 30 pages. Last few pages were hardly an ample reward for enduring this long, twisted, predictable tale. Quel surpris! The Sophie's entire family REALLY didn't die in a car accident? What moron couldn't have foreseen that? Get out of here? Sophie, the gorgeous code expert, and Robert, the warm-hearted, lonely, academic live happily ever after?
| 
