Was I the only one who thought that The Da Vinci Code was crap?

[CharlieH]

Now, i'm not going to lie, i haven't read the book fully. However, thats the reason i am making this thread.

I got the the part in the book when the main dude (i can't even remember his name) goes into an art gallery, with low level red lights, or something). It's quite near the beginning. Even that was after the third attempt. I just put the book down, and had no desire to pick it up again.

Now, i'm not knocking Dan Brown for a minute. I have his other book, Digital Fortress, and I loved it.

But I just can't under stand the hype over a book that spent something like 5 pages or something, describing a car journey.

Discuss/tell me that i'm a fool.

[Tweek]

I read the first page, and couldn't stand it.
I saw the movie, and it could barely hold my interest, mostly because of the shitty dialogue.

You are only a fool for liking his other book.

[CharlieH]

Hey, give his other book a chance. It's actually rather good.

[Oofie]

I hate Dan Brown. I didn't read the Da Vinci Code until my cousin made me read one of his other books, Angels and Demons (? I think that's the one). I read it, thought it was utter shit, then decided to read the Da Vinci Code to see if it was as bad. And it was worse.

There is no literary aesthetic in his work, just flashy bullshit. He is to literature what American Pie and Scary Movies are to film. Mindless entertainment for the masses.

[WerrWaaa]

Is it safe to say that a lot of contemporary literature that gains any kind of mass popularity is on par with Dan Brown? One of my literature professors said in reference to John Grisham, "He writes, and writes, and writes; and writes crap."

[timbot]

I did not read The Da Vinci Code. I just don't like the idea of "historical fiction." I once tried to read this book called The Kitchen Boy that was about the last days of Romanov family in Russia. They were the last royal family of Russia. The topic sounded interesting, but the whole time I was trying to read the book, I just kept wondering what parts were based on fact--if any--and what was just made up. I was afraid of the same thing with The Da Vinci Code.

Is it safe to say that a lot of contemporary literature that gains any kind of mass popularity is on par with Dan Brown? One of my literature professors said in reference to John Grisham, "He writes, and writes, and writes; and writes crap."

I don't know about all popular contemporary writers, but I wouldn't say your professor is totally off the mark. I've only read one John Grisham book and wasn't too impressed really. I'd say that if someone can crank out as many novels as Grisham or Stephen King or some others, then they probably aren't great authors. To put out books at such a high rate would seem to suggest that not a lot of effort is put into them.

[Quatroking]

I didn't read it, but I played the videogame. Its worser than playing tetris with one button.

USER WAS PUT IN TIMEOUT FOR THIS POST. (http://forums.explosm.net/bankamp/)
Reason: Report to the VGF. This forum is about literature.

[ultimacrom]

I don't know about all popular contemporary writers, but I wouldn't say your professor is totally off the mark. I've only read one John Grisham book and wasn't too impressed really. I'd say that if someone can crank out as many novels as Grisham or Stephen King or some others, then they probably aren't great authors. To put out books at such a high rate would seem to suggest that not a lot of effort is put into them.

To blanket all their work in with the crap is an injustice. Granted, the majority of the Grisham and King that I've read has been decidedly sub-par, there have been some that were entertaining, if not almost good.

As for Dan Brown, the Da Vinci Code is the only one of his novels I've had the misfortune of reading. I figured it was gonna be terrible, but it turned up with the bargain books at the local bookstore, so I picked it up. A week later, I wished I still had my $3. I read the book a while ago, and, as such, can't remember the specifics all that well, but I do recall feeling slightly nauseous when I saw the trailer for the movie the first time.

[Rob]

I didn't read it, but I played the videogame. Its worser than playing tetris with one button.
There's a Da Vinci Code video game? :bangkill:

[Lag]

I'm pretty sure you and every hard-core Christian hated the Da Vinci Code.

[Oofie]

I'm Atheist. It's still badly written and horribly derivative.

[John Travolta]

I thought it was okay. It wasn't as horrible as most of you are saying but it was still pretty bad.

[Jallen]

I loved the Da Vinci Code. When I read it, I thought it was one of the best books I've ever read. I liked it so much, I went and got the prequel, Angels and Demons. Read it, loved it more than the Da Vinci Code. "Man, this Dan Brown Guy's on a roll!" I thought. So I ventured into his book named Deception Point about some NASA discovery in the Arctic. It was an unbearably horrible read, but when I finished it, I realized something.

All of Dan Brown's books are EXACTLY THE SAME. No lie.

Big Secret that someone doesn't want to get out, so there is a mystery anonymous character (be that "The Teacher," or whatever the other names were in the other books) that wants to keep it a secret or have the secret to his/her own. The mystery character is revealed in the end, causing the the reader to go "HOLY CRAP I DID NOT SEE THAT COMING" and trick the reader into thinking the book was much better than it really was.

Granted, I still liked Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code. They did their job in entertaining me.

[Rogue]

Ok,

So Dan Brown's books are the same, for definite.

But the Da Vinci Code is still a good book. In much the same way that Scarecrow by Matthew Reilly is a good book. Approach it with a James Bond type reading in mind, you'll find it works much better.

That said,

It is a badly written book.

[INTUNEevolution]

Angels and Demons, Da Vinci Code, etc.

They're not good. But they serve their purpose. They're casually controversial while being light, insubstantial reads, with circuitous plot lines and dense, poorly worded dialogue.

They make the masses feel smart for reading it. Remember when it was popular? People read it so they could say they did. It's no longer popular, so you've missed the boat. Don't bother picking it up, you're not obligated to.

[charcoal]

I wrote a letter to Dan Brown, care of his publishers, asking if he could please return the hours of my life that I wasted reading that pile of utter drivel. Brown has the working vocabulary of an average ten-year-old, and the style and flair of your drunk friend who is retelling you a story she's told you eight times before after her fifteenth pint. The plot is transparent, plodding, and completelyl unengaging; the characters thoroughly two-dimensional. One of the worst books I've ever read.

[haza]

I've not read the book but the film is possibly the worst i've ever glanced at.

USER WAS PUT IN TIMEOUT FOR THIS POST. (http://forums.explosm.net/bankamp/)
Reason: If you haven't read the book, don't bother posting in the thread about it.

[Miss Freeze]

I had trouble making it through the first chapter. I was bored to tears.

[Godly]

I found the movie amazingly shite. I couldn't stand it.

USER WAS PUT IN TIMEOUT FOR THIS POST. (http://forums.explosm.net/bankamp/)
Reason: We're talking about literature here.

[Idioteque]

It wasn't that spectacular of a book, but please, not every book has too be a classic. We have Shakespeare and Tolstoy for that.

It was a good action-y book, the only thing I didn't like about it was the fact that he claims everything in his books is UNALTERABLE TRUTH. Which, of course, is total bullshit.

[INTUNEevolution]

?

No really, ?

I was under the impression that Brown said up front, "Not all of this is true."

[Oofie]

It wasn't that spectacular of a book, but please, not every book has too be a classic. We have Shakespeare and Tolstoy for that.

I hate to inform you, but both these people are dead. Yeah, we have their classics, but that doesn't mean contemporary writers have the excuse to write complete shit, which is essentially what Dan Brown does.

[INTUNEevolution]

I hate to inform you, but both these people are dead. Yeah, we have their classics, but that doesn't mean contemporary writers have the excuse to write complete shit, which is essentially what Dan Brown does.

I agree with this post.

People like Danielle Steele and Stephen King that just churn out non-stop, the same thing all the time. It is a testament to the degradation of literature.

But I write, so when I publish you guys can talk about how bad I am :P

[Oofie]

I've never read Danielle Steele but I'm with you on Stephen King. I never really understood what the big deal was, I read The Shining (among others) and thought it was great but it was so much longer than necessary. However, I think I was about 14 when I read it so it may have just been my complete lack of an attention span as opposed to bad writing.

(Also, ditto on the writing thing. I'll write something under a pseudonym and come here to talk up my novel :fmita:)

[NVM]

I thought it was alright.
Wasn't amazing, but it wasn't horrible. But the main character was pretty boring and the author didn't really develop him at all. But maybe that's because I never read Angels and Demons.

[Jallen]

And we have Khaled Hosseini to churn out great books.

[iFuchue]

I liked the Da Vinci Code. Not, 'HOLYSHITILOVEIT', but I liked it. It wasn't the best, but it wasn't worth bashing. Kind of ignorable, actually.

I liked the part with the prostitutes. :lol:

EDIT: Bah, NVM said the same thing.

MORE EDIT: Oi, I love Grisham. 'Double Cross' was great. And Stephen Kings '14 Dark Tales' was so whimsical, in a scary way. I'm even reading 'Black House' with Stephen King and Peter Straub right now.

But, does anyone remember that really bad series Steven did? It was so crap.

[JamesKPolk]

It's like Harry Potter, except boring. The first book I'll use to burn when ice age comes.

[jewishjosh]

But the main character was pretty boring and the author didn't really develop him at all. But maybe that's because I never read Angels and Demons.

Don't hold your breath. His books are by no means character-based, they are heavily plot-based and rely on a light story line to serve their purpose. Read them for what they're worth. You aren't supposed to read James Bond-type stories the way you would analyze quality media.

I rather enjoyed The Da Vinci Code et. al. for the conspiracy element. That's their only selling point. I preferred Angels and Demons because of the religion/science angle it took on. I found them entertaining enough. For some reason his exaggerations portrayed as facts, fiction written as non-fiction, worked. I don't know why. It's almost dirty and uncreative, now that I think about it, but I think the reason I was drawn to it was because I could relate to fabricated fantasy ideas on a real level. He does this in all of his books - in Deception Point infers that life originating from outer space is already a commonly held belief, and then elaborates on it as if he has scientific authority. Same as fake treasure maps in real paintings, or symbols that are actually meaningless.

Again, read them for what they're worth and you might get a kick out of it.

[Cob450]

All of Dan Brown's books are EXACTLY THE SAME. No lie.


I realized the exact same thing after I read Da Vinci Code. I had read Angels and Demons first, and I really liked it. I thought it had a complex storyline and I like the intrigue behind the historical fiction and I like entertaining the thought that stuff like that might be real. But after I read Da Vinci Code, and after I read the first five pages of Deception Point, I knew it. Some guy with some past gets called in to find out so and so and ends up figuring out some age-old secret blah blah blah.

[INTUNEevolution]

His stories are different like porn movies are different.

[Baani]

His stories are different like porn movies are different.

Haha, so true!

I liked Da Vinci Code at first, then I read all his other novels and could guess the plot and ending by the first few chapters. I finished them all though but I don't like any of them.

[Dresden]

I thought it was a great book. Not totally OMG AMAZING. But still good. I find it funny how mad Christians got over this book. That made it good for me.

[tunacake]

I thought it was a great book. Not totally OMG AMAZING. But still good. I find it funny how mad Christians got over this book. That made it good for me.

I don't see the humor in that. I'm pretty agnostic myself but if someone is passionate about any religious belief, why would you disrespect that? Granted people can get a little out of control, Brother Micah anyone? Off topic.
I don't take pride in admitting that i read Brown's four books. They were horrible but disgustingly readable. I got through them all no problem, but i really disliked them afterward.
These are the kinds of books for people who don't read.

[ComboMove]

I personally loved the Da Vinci Code, but i agree that all of his books are the same. And there are some good contemporary writers, such as Kurt Vonnegut, Who died only recently.