The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown Published by Doubleday Review by W. R.

Greer The mystery thriller is a genre replete with potholes where the unwary author ca n stumble again and again, bringing their novel to a disillusioned halt before t he reader ever reaches the end. There can be problems with characters who are mo re clich than realistic, plot devices that require an inordinate amount of suspen sion of disbelief, obvious facts that everyone can ascertain except for the char acter who needs to know it the most, important information left out of the story and then conveniently placed at the end to provide for the surprise twist, and not all plot lines being brought to a successful conclusion by the time the stor y is over. Not only must the author avoid those traps, but he must provide a pro tagonist whose skin we can comfortably inhabit, a mystery that challenges our in telligence, and enough believable twists and turns to keep the reader turning th e pages. The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown does all this just right. This is how a mystery thriller should be written. Robert Langdon (first introduced in Angels and Demons) is a Harvard Professor of art history and religious symbology. He has spent a lifetime exploring religion s and theology and explaining the use of their symbols in art and history. He is a veritable gold mine of information about the Catholic church, pagan religions , and religious mysteries. As The Da Vinci Code begins, he is in Paris to give a speech and to meet with Jacques Saunire, the curator of the Louvre, although he' s unaware of why Saunire wants to meet with him. Unfortunately, Saunire is murdere d in the Grand Hall of the Louvre and the French police get Langdon out of bed, ostensibly to help them understand the information and symbols Saunire left at th e murder scene. Actually, Langdon is their prime suspect and they want to see if he inadvertently gives incriminating information before they arrest him. Trappe d within his own gallery, Saunire had enough time to leave clues to his killer an d to the information for which he was murdered. Langdon, however, cannot underst and the clues left behind and the captain of the French police, Bezu Fache, is c ertain that they point to Langdon as the killer. They are interrupted at the murder scene by Sophie Neveu, a police cryptologist who claims to have broken the code of the seemingly random numbers left next to the corpse. Unknown to Bezu Fache, Sophie is also Saunire's granddaughter and she is certain the clues he left behind were meant for her and that Langdon is not only innocent, but the key to helping her understand it all. She manages to help Langdon fake an escape from the Louvre which sends Bezu Fache away long enough so Langdon and she can study the clues left behind by Saunire. The dead body is n aked and lying spread-eagle with a circle around it. They realize that Saunire wa s duplicating Leonardo Da Vinci's famous painting, "The Vitruvian Man." They qui ckly decipher the information which leads them to different paintings by Da Vinc i, and Sophie finds the item left behind for her by her grandfather. She then un derstands why he didn't want it to fall into the hands of the police. She and La ngdon hit the road, one step ahead of the police and the people behind Saunire's murder who want what they've discovered. All that occurs in the first few short chapters and it sets a pace which never w anes for the rest of the book. Sophie and Langdon manage to barely escape from m any dicey situations, but never in an unbelievable way. They continue to solve e ach ensuing puzzle and riddle they encounter, leading them deeper into more myst eries they must comprehend. Jacques Saunire was much more than just the curator o f the Louvre; he raised Sophie after her parents died in an accident and he cons

tantly entertained her with puzzles, riddles, and secret information. Sophie and Langdon soon realize that he was also a member of a secret society called the P riory of Sion, which over the centuries had included men such as Da Vinci, Botti celli, Victor Hugo, and Isaac Newton. Langdon is more familiar with the Priory, and he tells Sophie the story of their long history and that they purportedly ke ep hidden documents concerning the truth about the early Catholic church that th e church never wants revealed, and that they also allegedly know the hiding spot of the Holy Grail. Without giving more of the plot away, suffice it to say that everyone in this bo ok is in the hunt for the secrets hidden by the Priory of Sion including the Gra il. Some want to protect it, some want to expose it, and some want to destroy it . With the information provided to them by Jacques Saunire, Sophie and Langdon ar e ahead of everyone else, but police, assassins, and churchmen aren't far behind . The race is on, the tension is high, and the puzzles to be solved seem incompr ehensible. Along the way, Langdon educates Sophie as well as the reader in large amounts of information concerning religions, symbols, history, and the story of the Holy G rail. Dan Brown is crafty enough to have Langdon present this in a way that come s across like a professor (which Langdon is) passing it on to his class without a lot of moralistic overtones. His explanations for clues and tricks hidden with in Da Vinci's paintings make you want to go look at them all and see if it's tru e. His comments about the early church, the origins of the gospels, and the assi milation of pagan rituals and symbols into the church's practices and holy days makes sense when he tells them and they come across as easily understood histori cal facts, whether true or not. The pages turn quickly as the information is pre sented, the latest puzzle is solved, and the next escape is done by the skin of their teeth. The characters in The Da Vinci Code don't play second fiddle to the storyline. R obert Langdon is one of those highly intelligent people who doesn't use it to lo rd over those with inferior educations. He's even-tempered with a touch of sardo nic wit and quick to admit when he doesn't know something. Bezu Fache is the har d-driving police captain, smart, thinking one step ahead, and always aware of th e political implications of what he's doing. Silas, believing everything he's do ing is for God, is an albino Opus Dei monk who murders by instruction from The T eacher, an unknown man who directs the search for the Priory's secrets. Leigh Te abing is an affluent and eccentric Englishman obsessed with the quest for the Gr ail and disparaging of most things French. Dan Brown uses each of these characte rs to poke fun at their own culture and bring realism to the international scena rios necessary when dealing with secret societies, religious conspiracies, and t he quest for what might be the ultimate mysteries of Christianity. The character who ties everything together and brings the proper sense of humanity and morali ty to the story, though, is Sophie Neveu. Dealing with the death of her beloved grandfather, coming to understand more of her past, and being the possessor of i nformation that could change history and religion, she strikes the right tone of strength and vulnerability to make everything else in this novel believable. The chapters in The Da Vinci Code are short, usually not more than a couple page s. Most of them end with a cliffhanger that immediately catapults you into the n ext chapter. So grab this book, sit back, and prepare to be entertained and educ ated. It's well-written, it's intelligent, and best of all, it's fun. Try Putting This Book Down "Like the Arabian brotherhood of hashishim, the legendary Knights Templar waited for the Desired Knight to rescue the world from tyranny and establish the benev olent rule of the Grail." Barbara G. Walker, The Women's Enclopedia of Myths and Secrets

Whenever I read a 454 page book in one sitting, it's probably a safe bet for me to think that other people will like the book. Not that my criteria for excellen ce necessarily matches that of the literary masses -- but the words "breakout th riller" certainly apply here. Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is going to make pub lishing history. Trust me. There are already tables at the local Barnes & Nobles featuring books about the Freemasons, biographies of Leonardo Da Vinci, guidebo oks to the Louvre and Renaissance art, all centered around Brown's book. And the book has been out less than two weeks. It's good, damn good. The Da Vinci Code has all the right ingredients to create a massive market share of the fiction sold during the next year. The characters are believable, the fictional premise intriguing, and it has two major component s to insure sales -- the Knights Templar and the search for the Holy Grail. The book received the kind of "push" from Doubleday usually reserved for the lik es of John Grisham and Daniel Steele. They're extremely pleased by the advance c opy sales and overwhelming support of retailers for the book. Brown, who quietly moved from Pocket to his new publishing house Doubleday when senior editor Jaso n Kaufman, (publisher of Brown's two previous books) moved to there in 2001. Bro wn received a small advance, a boon to Doubleday who can now spend money on a li terary show of force, pushing the book with sales incentives and an extensive ad vertising campaign. According to publishing pundits, many houses held back their spring releases because of the February 2nd laydown of John Grisham's latest Ki ng of Torts. Brown's book received a slam dunk response from advance copies to r eviewers and booksellers sent out months ahead of publication (Doubleday gave ou t 5,000 advance reader copies at regional shows and in the field last year). Dou bleday reps devoted themselves to making sure the book received prominent displa y space, something not usually reserved for breakout books. The house will even launch a website where readers can attempt to "break the code". Brown has also c ommitted to a six-city promotion tour, but as the response for this book will pr obably multiply exponentially, I suspect he'll be going to more than six. When publishing houses throw books at us, often we, as reviewers are disappointe d. The writing lacks substance; the plot fails to hold our interest; or perhaps the characters aren't fully developed. Then, after writing a review of the book, an honest take on what we consider an inferior book, we see the book on the New York Times Best Seller List. We can't help but wonder about the effect of massi ve advertising campaigns upon sales by the reading public. Take heart, reviewers and readers, The Da Vinci Code will be on the list and it belongs there. You all deserve a quick plot summary. Know that there can't be one here -- the b ook is a thriller and details will destroy it for you. I just had to delete the next 250 or more words I'd written, because I realized it would destroy the susp ense in the book. I'd defined the Holy Grail in terms of Celtic, Moor (pick your pagan) traditions. Then I wrote about the myths surrounding the Knights Templar , the persecution of Jews, the relationship between Jesus and his love, Mary Mag dalene, and more. What I can tell you without ruining the book, is that Brown's book takes myth and reality and combines it in just the right way. He appears to be right on target with his many of his conclusions, and while the book is "fic tion", one can't help but believe much of it. Brown doesn't insist you believe h im, in fact, he's almost apologetic about how strange and unusual his conclusion s may sound. In a subtle way, he warns the reader that everyone is allowed their own belief system and whatever gives someone spiritual comfort should be respec ted. But Using Will and Ariel Durant's The History of Civilization, Francis and Joseph Gies' Women in the Middle Ages, and Barbara Walker's The Women's Encyclop edia of Myths and Secrets to confirm Brown's facts, I learned that when he puts two and two together, it's amazing what he comes up with. This book will have what is probably an unintentional effect. The Da Vinci Code counteracts the WalMart best sellers by Tim LaHaye. Brown presents an intellectu

al and fact-based suspense thriller that will hopefully start a trend toward deb unking the misquoted myths and errant Biblical interpretations perpetuated to fi nancially support LaHaye's ministry, encourage the arrogance of born-again Chris tians, and scare people into "being saved". One can't help but wonder when the f anatics of the religious right will rise up in defense of the End Times series a nd call for a boycott of The Da Vinci Code. Go ahead and start your indignant en gines. Such publicity will only increase sales for Doubleday and Brown. The Bottom Line The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown is a fast paced thriller where the main character s have to decipher clues in artwork, architecture and riddles to get to the bott om of a murder and save themselves. As a thriller, it is an O.K. pick, but not a s good as Brown's Angels and Demons. The main characters discuss unsubstantiated religious ideas as if they are facts (and Brown's "Fact" page implies that they are). This may offend or annoy some readers. Compare Prices Pros * Fast paced * Interesting riddles * Unique idea for suspense novel Cons * * * * ve to Predictible outcome if you have read other Brown books Unbelievable story Misleading "Fact" page Characters propose unsubstantiated religious theories that will be offensi some

Description * Robert Langdon, a Harvard symbologist, gets caught up in a murder investig ation in the Louvre * Secret societies, family secrets, clues hidden in artwork, and a Church co nspiracy * A suspense novel that is easy to read, if not believable Guide Review - Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown - Book Review I read The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown years after its initial release, so my rea ction is probably different than those who discovered it before the hype. To the m, perhaps, the ideas were novel and the story exciting. For me, however, the st ory was so similar to Brown's Angel's and Demons that I found it predictable and was able to guess some of the twists early on. As a thriller, it definitely kep t me reading at points, but I never got as lost in the story as I would have lik ed. I would only rate the mystery as O.K. and the ending as somewhat disappointi ng. The Da Vinci Code is a thriller, and should be taken as such; however, the premi se of the story undermines the tenets of Christianity, thus the novel has stirre d up a lot of controversy and spawned several nonfiction works debunking the the ories discussed by characters. Does Dan Brown have an agenda other than entertai nment? I don't know. He certainly set the stage for controversy with the "Fact" page at the beginning of the novel, which implies that the ideas discussed in th e novel are true. (Brown has since backed off the implications of the Fact page on his official Web site. Click here for more on what the Fact page means). Ther e are also several points where the tone of the novel is sort of condescending i n the presentation of its religious and supposedly feminist ideas. For me, the c ontroversial ideas just came across as annoying in light of the mediocre story. Compare Prices

User Reviews Write Review Overall Rating: 1 out of 5 1 out of 5 What was all the hype about?, September 17, 2009 By starwarssteve "OK so I read this because of all the hype...but seriously I don't know why I bo thered. As a Christian I wanted to read the book and have my own view. Apart from being totally heretical the story just wasn't gripping at all. Yes it s fast paced and yes their are places where you need to read the next chapter... but I just couldn't get gripped. I didn't care about any of the characters and d idn't really care who lived or who died. And as for the the nonsense about about Jesus...you only have to read the Old Te stament to understand the truth. In my opinion if you want a good read...don't read this rubbish...whether you a Christian or not." 2 of 16 people found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Blinded ignorance does mislead us O!Wretched mortals open your eyes These words were said by the famous painter LEONARDO DA VINCI, the creator of the world famous paintings like The Mona Lisa , the Last Supper, the Vtruvian man etc. He was an expert in many fields. It is said that Da Vinci has left many codes in his paintings. In the year 2003, a novel by DAN BROWN established that Da Vinci has cert ainly left many secrets. The book was none other than THE DA VINCI CODE. It is a fiction fe aturing Robert Langdon, a symbologist and Sophie Neveu, a cryptologist who deals with nu merical code breaking. The story starts with a murder. The curator of The Louvre Jacques Saunere s murder and the message left by him Langdon and Neveu towards a new world of thousands of years old secrets. Although the number of characters are limited,each one plays a definite ro le. The language and style of writing is incredible. The main theme of the book is the journey towards the Priory keystone which leads one to the Holy grail and many other well hidden secrets. According to the myth, only the members of the Priory of Sion, a secret society knows the exact location of the Holy grail. Da vinci being one of the grandmasters of the secret society wanted the world to know the truth and hence left many clues in his paintings. One such striking trait is visible in The last supper. Da vinci has assigned certain feminine char acters to disciple John seated next to Jesus Christ. Holy grail happen to be the cup in which Jesus had wine during The last supper. Mary Magdalene is also refe rred to as The Holy Grail. It is said that Da Vinci has painted John as Mary Mag dalene to show Jesus s intimacy towards her. Mary Magdalene, a prostitute who joined Christ and later became of h is favorite disciple. In the book the author establishes that Jesus had relation ship with Mary Magdalene

and that their bloodline exists to this century. A huge uproar was roused by this very book. The church and many disciples of the church launched protests against the book and movie alike. In many place s the authorities were forced to ban the book. The reason put forth was that The Da Vinci Code hurts their religious sentiments. To be more precise, in the book it is said that o The Christians overpowered the Pagan religion to establish Christian ity all over the world. o Jesus Christ was selected as Son Of God by mutual voting o Jesus relationship with Magdalene proves to be a major point of contr oversy. o In the book a monk named Silas murders the members of The Priory of Sion with the help given by a bishop. Despite many controversies the book happen to be a best seller throu ghout the world. Anyone who thinks a fiction can never affect your religious bel iefs may go ahead and read the book without hesitation. The Greatest Story Never Told This is the headline that should precede every review of The Da Vinci Code which c ould possibly be the biggest box office disappointment since King Kong . In spite o f the millions spent on advertising, I suspect that by next weekend the negative word-of-mouth reviews will sink the movie faster than the Poseidon is currently t anking at the box office. First, for those unfamiliar with the book, here s the plot. Robert Langdon (Tom Ha nks) is a professor of symbology who stumbles onto a 2,000 year old conspiracy. In the process, he s accused of murder and goes on the run with the lovely Sophie Ne veu (Audrey Tautou). They seek out Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen), an expert in th e Gnostic gospels and all things conspiratorial. Their investigation carries the m from France to England. The revelations they unearth there plunge them ever de eper into the mystery of the true origin of the Holy Grail. Cinematically, the film looks good, but Ron Howard depends too much on documenta ry flashbacks to fill the backstory. Sometimes we re in ancient Rome, sometimes we r e in France, sometimes we re in England. Consequently, one of the problems with th e movie is that the whole is less than the sum of its too many parts. The scenes lack narrative and personal tension. The most exciting and best filmed sequence in the movie ensues when Sophie careens her mini car in reverse down a crowded street . Other than that, the pacing slavishly imitates the book but lacks the book s ten sion. Furthermore, Howard fails to substitute a cinematic cleverness sharp enoug h to entertain the audience. For all practical purposes, the movie is nothing mo re than a lecture about how Christianity stole the real Jesus visually pretty, but d eadly dull. Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon is a disaster. It s difficult to say whether it s Hanks s interpretation of the role or Ron Howard s stifling direction. Whatever the reason , Hanks looks bad, acts robotically, and remains at arm s length from Tautou. In t he book, the two end up having sex. In the movie, Robert Langdon acts as if he i s Sophie s teacher, or her older brother, or simply knows that he is too old to fl irt with her and is embarrassed to show any manly feelings whatsoever. There are no compliments, no wisecracks, no arch glances. His behavior is so politically correct one is tempted to think that the movie is really The Invasion of the Body Snatchers and raises the question of who stole Tom Hanks and left the pod? This is what critics mean when they complain of the lack of chemistry between the two and describe the movie as humorless. What they neglect to point out is that

Hanks and Neveu never laugh and rarely smile. Consequently, without any casual s exual flirtation, or any evidence whatsoever that they are attracted to one anot her, the movie is emotionally flat and completely humorless. By comparison, Ian McKellen brings depth to his role by the revolutionary expedient of smiling and even chuckling. He takes charge of his character and animates Teabing beyond the two-dimensional cardboard cutout found in the novel. Hanks and Tautou lack the talent or the insight or the sheer acting brio to do this with their characters. Howard is to blame also. There were plenty of opportunities for him to depart f rom Dan Brown s dull gospel and inject some Hollywood sparkle, but the relationshi p between Langdon and Neveu is so mechanical they appear to be acting with a gla ss wall between them or to have filmed their parts separately in front of a blue screen. Psychologically, they re just not in the same cinematic frame. The one bright spot in the movie is McKellen as Teabing, a scholar intent on rev ealing the fraudulent nature of Christianity. Teabing denies the divinity of Jesus and rejects the truth of the gospels. His life s purpose is to broadcast the trut h about the Catholic church s duplicity and he does so with energy and passion. Te abing s animus to Christianity and Judaism emerges when he says, As long as there h as been one true God there has been killing in his name. It s a laughable line, as if humanity in its pagan state (Genghis Khan et. al.) or in its political state (Communism, Nazism, Baathism) are innocents abroad, or that the actions of any C hristian can be compared with Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, or Saddam Hussein. B ut McKellen shows why he is probably the greatest role player in film today. Interestingly, just as Jehoiakim cut and burned the words of God (Jeremiah 36), McKellen claims to rip out the pages of Leviticus that condemn homosexuality whe never he finds a Bible in a hotel room (http://www.family.org/cforum/briefs/a004 0550.cfm). It would be difficult to find a better metaphor for the movie: God ou t; sex in. McKellen is well-known as a gay activist and has complained about his role in the new X-Men movie because he wanted there to be a gay sex scene. He s ays, It would be wonderful if the camera hovered over Magneto s bed, to discover hi m making love to Professor X (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21042006/364/mckellen-want s-gay-sex-scene.html), a statement that will make next week s release of the X-Men i nteresting to view. The lovely Audrey Tautou is wasted in this part. She has the thankless job of ha ving everything explained to her for nearly 149 excruciating minutes. She does w hat she can, but there s nothing less credible than dumb beauty. Rather than enhan cing the role, the role diminishes her. Even an ancient actress like Judy Dench would have been more believable because the role, as enacted in the film, calls more for the authority of smarts than it does for the authority of beauty. Havin g an unlovely actress play Sophie would make the final premise laughable, since divine sex ( hieros gamos ) is what the book ultimately celebrates, but the movie do esn t elaborate on that thesis. For all its talk about sex, the movie is perversel y puritanical. Sex becomes religion and religion becomes sex and the movie manag es to make both boring. It appears that Ron Howard got so caught up in the pompous material that he forg ot that it is fiction, that he works in Hollywood, and that his primary responsi bility is to entertain not to preach. If it were only dull, I could recommend it to Christian audiences without reservation. One would have to be an absolute bl ockhead to lose one s faith as a result of watching a film so dim and convoluted. However, there are two extremely offensive scenes in the movie. These occur when Silas (Paul Bettany), the albino, stands naked in front of a crucifix of Jesus and violently flagellates himself. The homoerotic overtones in the scenes are so obvious that the intent to offend is itself offensive. It s as if Hollywood wante d to pay Christians back for the excessive lashing of Jesus in The Passion with a sadomasochistic lashing to suggest a gay-themed Jesus, as in the Off-Broadway pr oduction, Corpus Christi .

Because of those scenes, I cannot recommend the movie for conservative Christian audiences. For those who can tolerate male nudity (albeit not frontal), the gre ater danger is the naked boredom they will have to endure for two and a half hou rs. The lesson that Christians can derive from the film is this: Jesus isn t just a story or a set of facts; he s a way and, more importantly, he is a life (John 14 :6). The reason that the Gnostic gospels disappeared into the dustbins of history is because they are lies they have no true life to animate them. In the case of The Da Vinci Code , the book has patched together nearly two dozen b izarrely connected elements ranging from the yin yang of iambic pentameter (303), to silly interpretations of Da Vinci s paintings, to heated ruminations on the mea ning of circles, pentacles, roses, Gothic architecture, the Star of David, trian gles, etc., and woven one big lie. It would be amusing if so many people didn t ta ke the book seriously. Fortunately for Christians, it will be difficult for anyo ne to take the movie seriously. Because the The Da Vinci Code is boring, because it is offensive, because it earne stly tries to deceive people and promotes vicious lies about the Christian faith , it would be best if no Christian saw it. Believe me, you won t miss a thing. Addendum As of opening night, review ratings at Rotten Tomatoes are running 127 negative to 25 positive, an astonishing 84% negative with an overall rating below average . In other words, the movie is generating leaden reports of disappointment and d erision rather than sparks of controversy and excitement. The buzz is all about the torpor of its reception rather than the stimulation of its transmission. The Da Vinci Code is a major flop for reasons which I ll try to explain in order below. There are no major spoilers in what follows, but viewers who have not read the b ook will have a difficult time understanding the movie without some preparation. The following points constitute the major assertions that are either explicitly stated or alluded to. (I ve referenced their corresponding page locations in the book in parentheses): 1. Jesus was viewed as a prophet by his followers, not as the son of God, unt il Constantine and Council of Nicaea declared him divine in 325 A.D. (233). 2. Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, uniting two Jewish royal lines (244 , 248). 3. Jesus intended for Mary Magdalene to lead the church after his death (248) . 4. Mary Magdalene escaped to Gaul (present day France) and gave birth to a da ughter, Sarah (255). 5. Mary Magdalene is the real divinity, not Jesus. She is the Holy Grail whic h is a metaphor for woman and represents the ancient goddess and the sacred feminin e (238). 6. The Knights Templar were ordered to retrieve the documents of proof and to protect her tomb. (They were later exterminated by an evil Pope.) 7. The Priory of Sion (a secret organization) worships Mary Magdalene as the G oddess, the Holy Grail, the Rose, and the Divine Mother (255). 8. The Priory of Sion is dedicated to preserving her secret, as well as prote cting the descendants of Magdalene and Jesus, and the documents which prove thei r story, including Jesus own diaries (258). 9. The Catholic Church naturally wants to destroy all evidence in order to rew rite history (268). What is not explained in the movie about the points above, but made clear in the book, are the following key pieces of information: 1. Sex is a spiritual act through which spiritual knowledge ( gnosis ) is achieved

(308). The followers of the goddess (Mary Magdalene) viewed Orgasm as prayer (309). 2. The Jewish Temple was served by female priests whose duty was to have sex with male seekers who then experienced the divine in the Holy of Holies through or gasm (309). 3. The Star of David is actually a composition of two triangles superimposed on one another and representing the male and female genitalia. Something like th is: ^ and v. 4. The Catholic Church saw the ability of individuals to experience the divin e on their own, with women, as a threat to its existence and demonized women (i. e. the sex provider) and persecuted everyone having anything to do with the Knig hts or the Priory. Now, if you ve read to this point, you re ready to see the movie and actually unders tand it. But if you skipped reading all the above points, you can understand why the movie is a tedious experience for those who did not read the book. The expo sition is too frequent, it s too long, and it s too boring. As a counter to the misinformation given in the movie and book, I recommend read ers visit one of the many sites which debunk in detail each assertion. Here are two excellent sites: Protestant site: http://www.markdroberts.com/htmfiles/resources/davincifaq.htm Catholic site: http://www.catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp Violence: Extreme / Profanity: Minor / Sex/Nudity: Heavy See list of Relevant Issues questions-and-answers. Viewer Comments Click here for Christian Answers Photo copyrighted. Photo copyrighted. Photo copyrighted. * CHURCH ATTENDANCE Why should Christians go to church? How important is it? * STARDUST Are you made of stardust? * HYPOCRISY Why would I want to become a Christian? Churches are full of hypo crites! * BIGAMY If bigamy is sinful, why did King Solomon have so many wives? * KJV WORDS Confused about the true meaning of hundreds of archaic and obscur e King James words? Find answers easily. Negative Negative - I do not wish to comment on the quality of filmmaking itself. Rather, I regret to confirm that everything that was said about the book is true about t he movie. Distortion of history, which was easy to denounce in the book is at wo rk in the movie, too. In the opening scene, Langdon is giving his conference on religious symbols and exclaims : How can we sift history from centuries of distor tion? This will be our task for tonight. (quoted from memory) Of course, Ron Howa rd would like you to believe that the movie itself is going to accomplish just t hat for you. The fantasies and lies upon which Dan Brown has built his story hav e already been largely exposed. Allow me to remind you that he has drawn a lot f rom Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Henry Lincoln, Michael Baigent, and Richard Leigh . (The name of the character Leigh Teabing was created by blending Baigent and L eigh s names). This book belongs to the esoteric genre, (a line of thought according to which a h idden lore gives the key to power) and its unreliable ideas are now being spread into the general public, thanks to Dan Brown. While lies are always a sin in th e sight of God, my guess is that this maybe an opportunity for Christians to dee pen their sometimes insufficient knowledge of the history of Christianity, and f ind out that our faith has in truth nothing to fear from historical investigatio

ns. Concerning the spiritual content of the movie, I have to underline that we a re of course! faced with pure blasphemy. Near the end of the movie, we are treated t o a dialogue between Hanks (Langdon) and Tautou (Neveu / Saint Clair) which reve als the purpose of the whole story: Jesus, says Hanks, was an inspiring man, (rea d: nothing more than a mere man) (quoted from memory). Fools! If Christ was a me re man, he did not rise again, and as Paul said, our faith is vain My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 2 Eric, age 30 Negative - The book says that it is based on historical evidence and facts. Thes e are not true by any means; both Christians and Catholics have tested these fact s, and most if not all have been shown to be lies. Many of the facts in the book ar e made up and made up in such a way to look as if they exist; however, one shoul d dig a little deeper before believing this movie. My Ratings: Extremely Offensive Daniel Shepherd, age 27 Negative - As a book, it was mediocre at best. It s very hard to get into a story that takes place over a single 24-hr period. It s very hard to get to know charact ers, it s very hard to see them develop. I think the only reason why Dan Brown s fou rth and most recent novel (by the way they ALL take place over 24 periods) put h is name on the map is because of the controversy it sparked. (More on that in a moment) There wasn t an ounce of truth to the story which is why I liked it. For onc e I could hang my brain at the door and not be bothered by reality. However, while the book was mediocre, the movie was downright HORRIBLE! It was b oring and contained virtually none of the plot exposition that the book had. The only point of the movie I did like was when Robert and Sophie were at the home of Sir Lee Teabing. When Sir Lee was explaining the Grail mythology, Langdon act ually spoke up and defended Christ s divinity and kept trying to say that the mind sees what it wants to see. Basically, the story poses the theory that Jesus had children with Mary Magdalen e and that their bloodline continues to this day through certain French nobility . Hence, the chalice that caught the blood of Christ was quite literally Mary Magd alene s womb. Mary Magdalene is/was the Holy Grail?! The secret was passed down fr om generation to generation by a secret society known as the Priory of Sion. Kin g Arthur s knights went on crusades to search for the Grail and their search alleg edly turned into goddess worship as they revered Magdalene as The Sacred Feminine . Some famous Grand Masters of the Priory have included Sir Isaac Newton and (of course) Leonardo Da Vinci. Da Vinci has apparently included hints to this truth in his work. Does the disciple to the right of Jesus (leaning away from Him) in th e painting of The Last Supper look feminine? Only because someone pointed it out t o me. Could it be Mary Magdalene? I dunno. I didn t know we were given a seating c hart for the Last Supper. How am I supposed to know who s sitting where? But like the movie points out the mind sees what it wants to see. Once again, I ll leave this thought the book was mediocre and the movie was worse. I really despise movies that are based on books where you have to have read the b ook in order to understand the movie. That s very poor and uncreative directing. I would have expected better from Ron Howard. My Ratings: Offensive / 1 Pete, age 27 Negative - Boring, overblown, stupid, obvious, blasphemous. Very disappointed in Ron Howard and Tom Hanks. My Ratings: Very Offensive / 2 Chris, age 46 Negative - Having not previously read the book but sitting in on multiple discus

sions of the lies included, I felt compelled to see the movie if for no other re ason than to defend the Truth. (Which I won t go into here.) I found many plot poi nts used in the movie laughable-which were difficult to contain in a 60% full mo vie house. I was looking forward to discussions with some non-believers about th e movie, but, like the reviewer, believe most who have not read the book will se e through the lies created. (Some plot points were so contrived and far-fetched I heard others suppressing laughter as well.) I didn t even hear discussions about the story while leaving the theatre! My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 2 Brian, age 39 Negative - What a waste of time to see this over rated movie! This movie will no t affect the cause of Christ because only Truth sets the heart free, and this mo vie has little truth in it. Even it s power to deceive seems to me to be way overrated. It is a dark movie and leaves the viewer with a sense of what am I doing h ere and what is all the concern about? . All the concern about this movie being da ngerous felt a bit like Y2K revisited. At one point, when Tom Hanks was running away from his would be captors through the halls of the darkened museum (early i n the movie), I found myself hollering out Run Forest Run which seemed to me to ap propriately fit the poor quality of this movie that delivers nothing to the hear t but emptiness. What a disappointment! There are better things to do with your time and money. Don t believe the hype that this movie will rock your world or you r walk with the Lord. My Ratings: Offensive / 2 Paul, age 53 Neutral Neutral - So much controversy over a film that has been said over and over again to be fiction (as is the book). I understand that many a non-believer might vie w this film and start to wonder if the story is true. What an amazing opportunit y God has given us as believers in opening a door to talk to our unsaved friends , neighbors, co-workers, etc. Many a believer are not able to view any type of fi lm (or read a book) that is offensive to their faith. Just as God uses his child ren that he has delivered from drugs, alcohol, or a life of immorality to talk t o non-believers going through the same things, I believe God uses some of his ch ildren (who can go see films of this nature) to use films and books as witness t ools. If you are one of these people, go see this movie so that you can discuss it with the unsaved in your life. As a fiction story, the movie is actually quite amazing. Filmed very well, and i n many beautiful locations. The acting is also done very well. The characters ha ve a good chemistry together. Please understand that the PG-13 rating should be strictly applied. This movie s hould be seen by those of us who can establish the difference between fiction an d non-fiction. Children (hopefully over 13) should be talked to by their parents after the film. Please go see this film if you have been given peace in your he art from God to do so, and use it to explain the true story of Jesus life on this earth. My Ratings: Average / 5 Scarlett, age 27 Neutral - This movie definitely blasphemes Christianity. The movie itself was no t all that engaging. I d probably not see it unless you had a compelling reason to use it for witnessing. My Ratings: Very Offensive / 2 Joe Smith, age 30 Positive Positive - I watched the movie yesterday. I don t think Christians should be afrai

d of it. It was a good movie. I like conspiracy theories, and it was well paced. Honestly, it was a work of fiction, parts of it were silly, but its nothing wor se than something like X-men. There are plenty of conspiracy films out there tha t if true would change the world. They are not true. If anything, this movie sho wed me how important Christ is to the world. My Ratings: Offensive / 4 Bob, age 33 Positive - a popcorn chase movie based on a cheesy novel. Is it a great movie? Go odness gracious, no. Is it an abomination before God? Of course not. The DaVinci Code is what it is, a 2 hour Saturday matinee for grown ups. Much has been made of Tom Hanks s performance (and hair), I found him to be perfectly competent here. I an McKellan brings a lot of fun to his role, as does Paul Bettany as the villain ous monk Silas. Director Ron Howard keeps things safe and mainstream, but does a dd a lot of big budget flourish, with sweeping crane shots and CGI flashbacks to ancient Rome. The story is ludicrous and hardly blasphemous, and can be best en joyed as a North By Northwest -esque chase through exotic locations. Because of the hype, the movie is a box office sensation. Similarly to Mel Gibson s Passion film, what we have here is a decent, heavily flawed piece of cinema transformed into piles of gold because of a feeble minded public My Ratings: Good / 3 Peter Davis, age 36 Positive - First and foremost this is a work of fiction, both the movie and the b ook. Just watching the Discovery Channel and A&E on the DaVinci Code tell you th at the facts in the book and movie are not true. There are numerous places in the b ook and movie where anyone who has done any study of the Bible and Christian his tory has to say Where did they get that stupid idea? They are both works of FICTIO N. Yes, Fiction. It is not a comedy so you will not find humor in the movie. It is not an action movie so there is not a lot of car crashes or chase scenes in t his movie. It is a conspiracy theory thriller and that is what we get. Tom Hanks is portraying a bookworm not an Indiana Jones and does a good job of it. The bo ok and movie take place in less than 48 hr. There is little place for sex and a blooming love affair. The book ends with the sexual innuendo the reviewer compla ins about but the movie does not. While the movie does talk much about the pagan sexual rituals it does not get into many of the things talked about in the book . What is shown in the movie is not glorified nor graphic. I enjoyed the movie, it is a good work of fiction that keeps you thinking and pay ing attention to it. When we came out of the movie everyone was saying that they thought it was great. No one was saying that they believed the lies against Chr istianity. If anyone leaves this movie thinking that Christianity is all a lie it is our failure as followers of Jesus for not reaching this generation with the truth of Scripture and the Love that sent Jesus to the cross. People will only b elieve the lie out of ignorance and fear, not because of Brown, Howard or Hanks. My Ratings: Average / 3 Robert Klueg, age 54 Comments from young people Negative - This movie is the most horrible and offensive film I believe I have e ver heard of. I know what you re thinking, this girl is only a child, what does sh e know? Well, I would be delighted to tell you exactly what I know, I know that this film is extremely offensive to my religion. As a Christian, I believe in Go d and I live to serve Him and I know for a fact that this movie is fraud. My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 1 Ashley, age 14 Neutral - This movie was very well done. The acting was amazing. Paul Bettis did a wonderful job of portraying the Albino Monk. Although the film had very good acting and a very creative plot, however, there is a lot of breaking down of Chr

istians. The movie basically portrays Catholics as evil people who are trying to cover up a lie. This movie rips Christianity and Catholocism up, chews it up, an d spits it out. They base the their theory on Davinci s painting The Last Supper. Th ey act like the painting was a portrait of the last supper, as if Davinci was th ere painting it. The fact is, Davinci was born over 1,300 years after the death of Christ. The painting was Leonardo s interpretation. And, where in the Bible doe s it say that Mary Magdalene was Jesus wife? It says that she was his companion, bu t the book that they referred to was not written in Greek, but in Aramaic. The G reek translation of companion literally means Spouse. But, the Aramaic translation a ctually means friend. I think that when Leonardo painting the female-looking perso n in his painting, he was painting John. The Bible said that John was a beautifu l man. A beautiful man possesses feminine traits. Also, in the picture, how many people were there? The answer is 13. That means that if Jesus and all twelve di sciples were there, there would be no room left for Mary. Again, this movie was very well done, and it brings up great spiritual topics to discuss, but I encour age you; unless you are strong in your faith and cannot be moved, do not see thi s movie. It will challenge you a great amount. My Ratings: Offensive / 4 Zach Carlson, age 14 Negative - I went to see this movie with my Dad as a chance to witness to others who would be told numerous lies. To tell you the truth it was a lot worse than we thought it would be. The beginning of the movie has a scene of a nude man who beats himself because of the guilt of his murders. One of the murders is a man. After the man was shot, later in the film, their is a part where he is closely viewed. He is not dressed at all, and his body has many severe markings of tortu re. The whole movie makes you question a number of things especially non-Christians. O ne of the topics was a painting of Da Vinci s The Lord s Supper. The man to the right is said to be a woman in the movie, Mary Magdalene. Which is not true. Leonardo Da Vinci himself stated that they were all men my Mom had known being a profession al artist. The whole movie is based on the fact that Jesus and Mary Magdalene ha d a sexual relationship. Example, when Jesus was on the cross they led you to be lieve that she was pregnant with a daughter from Jesus. She falsely gave birth a fter his death, and the blood line carried on until now. The woman in the film f inds out that she is the last descendant of Mary the wife of Jesus. Which is why the man who was beating himself wanted to kill her. This is found out after act or Tom Hanks and the woman break the code. They are constantly being chased by t he man who I previously mentioned. He tries to kill them but along the way he ki lls a nun, a priest, and others. I would recommend for you only to see this movie as a chance to witness to those who have believed Hollywood. Tom Hanks has claimed to be a Christian after he g ot saved, so this makes people wonder even more. I wouldn t watch this movie again , but if you decide to see this film then as a warning, it is very serious, and I strongly encourage you as a devout Christian to read the Christian book on The Da Vinci Code. I got a CD from my pastor that made me even more solid and prepa red to explain my faith My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 3 Brooke, age 15 Negative - When the book came out, I decided to read it so that I could defend m y faith better. Dan Brown brilliantly wove history and great storytelling and wr ote a great page turner. However, he made many heresies, and I hope that someone can reach him and make him a follower of Christ before it s too late. (All things are possible, just remember Paul!) I expected the movie to blow me away since t he novel is soo good, but I was VERY disappointed. It didn t stick to the book ver y well, and the changes were definitely not in its favor. I wondered how people could understand what was going on if they hadn t read the book. Plots moved to qu

ickly and they didn t explain things thoroughly enough in my opinion. If you want to understand more about the gnostic beliefs, read the book. It s way more enjoyab le anyway. Just remember to have your Bible with you! Most of the accusations ma de by Brown can be proved false by scripture alone. My Ratings: Extremely Offensive / 3 Katie, age 19 Neutral - I really did not like this movie, and that s saying it nicely. Well, comp ared to a lot of movies nowadays, it wasn t that bad. I ll start with what I didn t li ke. First, there were two nude scenes with the monk in the movie, when he is doi ng self-mutilation because he thinks after killing a person, God will forgive hi m if he inflicts pain upon himself. I know that really happens in the world, and I think it is a very sad, sick thing. Secondly, the whole Mary Magdalene thing is just really stupid. We all know that didn t happen, why even try? I just starte d laughing, and shaking my head in the theatre. By the way, THIS MOVIE IS NOT FOR CHILDREN! I wouldn t even let a 14 year old see it. I myself had no business watc hing that. I will admit I liked the mystery stuff, you know, like the clues and all that. I think everyone does. But it doesn t mean it makes everything right. Th is is a movie to skip-trust me. My Ratings: Offensive / 3 Preciousjewl, age 15 Negative - This movie was extremely boring, because it went on and on. The book is much more interesting. much more thrilling and includes more details. There ar e also many differences in the book and the movie. The Da Vinci Code is a lie and is definitely fiction. Mary Magdalene was never married to Jesus Many people try t o disprove the Bible, and this is another attempt that has been made to persuade and discourage many Christians. My Ratings: Very Offensive / 3 Bonnie, age 17 Movie Critics small, surprisingly ordinary movie Ron Howard, it turns out, was precisely the wro ng person to bring Dan Brown s best-selling novel to the screen. Boston Globe ludicrous and the ridiculous race demands suspension of beliefs, and not just reli gious ones Following its labyrinthine absurdities is like listening to a convolut ed story on a cell phone that keeps dropping out. Ed Blank, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review The surprise, and disappointment, of The Da Vinci Code e religious detective story now seems. Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly is how slipshod and hokey th

Ron Howard s stilted Code is hardly a masterpiece Although it is guaranteed to stir de bate, the film itself is never stirring. It is like a cilice itself, confining a nd constraining the characters, the story and, finally, the audience The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel visually static and wearying The Da Vinci Code can be summed up in one line, spoken by its earnest protagonist after a pal is kidnapped: I ve got to get to a library! B e still my beating heart. A library. Next, we ll all compare flavors of dental flo ss. the drama feels more like melodrama, especially with the heavy-handed music The Arizona Republic The holiest event of our time. Perfect for their return. The Da Vinci Code Do a million little fabrications point to one large truth? The Da Vinci Code

Others have documented in excruciating detail, the many factual errors and fabri cations in Dan Brown's thriller. So this review of the book (and movie) asks a d ifferent question. What is it about Brown's exciting story that has captivated s o many readers and viewers? In this context, there is a strong comparison to be made between The Da Vinci Code and The Passion of the Christ. Both works were pa ckaged with emphasis upon the seriousness of the research behind them. In the ca se of Mel Gibson, an entire staff of consultants was engaged to insure that the movie did not depart in significant ways from the New Testament texts on which i t was based. (Yet, for all that, Gibson's movie is largely a personal fabricatio n.) And while The Da Vinci Code is clearly labeled as a work of fiction, Brown's publishers emphasize the amount of scholarly research invested in the book. (In deed, to give a sense of credibility to his hero, Robert Langdon, a Harvard prof essor, establishing this character's intellectual acumen was essential.) The book's opening claim that "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, docume nts, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate" has led some to consider The Da Vinci Code as an intentional expose of orthodox Christianity's secret past. The same claim of factuality has resulted in a generally negative response from Roman Catholic and other Christian authorities, as well as from some historians who argue that Brown has willfully distorted the facts in the service of his sto ry line. Others, including Brown himself, note that the "fact" statement does no t claim that the theories articulated by characters in book regarding Jesus, Mar y Magdalene, and Christianity itself are accurate. To be sure there is a tone of defensiveness in many of the articles published on various "Christian" websites. For example ... From Christianity Today (a leading Protestant magazine): The Da Vinci Code has taken the world by storm. This fictional book challeng es our views of Jesus and the historical church. Because Brown uses so many genu ine historical facts, it makes his outlandish claims sound more plausible. Many Christians have become confused because of his assertions. How does the author of this article know that Christians are "confused" by Brown 's book? Clearly many are entertained. Some may go away with a heightened sense of curiosity about such questions as whether Jesus was ever married, ever had ch ildren, or put forward a view of God that included the dimension of the "sacred feminine" that was later repressed in the official doctrines formulated by patri archs of third and fourth century Christianity. From Crisis Magazine (a Roman Catholic publication): Brown s lack of seriousness shows in the games he plays with his character nam es Robert Langdon, bright fame long don (distinguished and virile); Sophie Nevue, wis dom New Eve ; the irascible taurine detective Bezu Fache, zebu anger. The servant wh o leads the police to them is Legaludec, legal duce. The murdered curator takes hi s surname, Saunire, from a real Catholic priest whose occult antics sparked inter est in the Grail secret. As an inside joke, Brown even writes in his real-life e ditor (Faukman is Kaufman). But since when does using meaning laden names in a work of fiction indicate "lac k of seriousness" on the part of a novelist? Tell that to Charles Dickens. I hav e always thought that playing games with names in works of fiction was part of t he fun. This critic piles on detail after detail on the fabrications and "errors" in Bro wn's fiction, suggesting that his criticism:

demonstrate(s) the utter falseness of Brown s material. His willful distortion s of documented history are more than matched by his outlandish claims about con troversial subjects. But to a postmodernist, one construct of reality is as good as any other. Of course, serious postmodernist thinkers do NOT allege that "one construction o f reality is as good as any other," but rather that all ideas, theories, and wor ks of art must be analyzed in their context and are contingent upon the influenc es of time and place. Post modernist analysis does not make Hitler's Mein Kampf "as good as" William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. Nor does it equate The Da Vinc i Code with the New Testament as equally important sources for knowledge of the history of Christianity or as sources of wisdom. What both Gibson and Brown are very, very good at is verisimilitude, that is, cr eating an illusion which appears both realistic and believable. Good fiction dra ws the reader into a state that literary critics refer to as "the willing suspen sion of disbelief." Gibson did this in The Passion of the Christ by creating an imaginary world fill ed with scenes and characters that closely matched the viewer's preconceptions o f what might have happened in the final hours of the life of Jesus, while adding to those preconceptions powerful new images of the suffering Christ that were e xperienced with great emotion by many who saw them. What Brown does in The Da Vinci Code is to tell a very good story that builds up on a number of widely circulating impressions about religion in general and Chri stianity in particular. Among these are the suspicion that many of the official teachings of the church are themselves fabrications of the truth; that religious leaders often know this to be the case, but refrain from letting the truth be k nown for fear that people will abandon institutional Christianity, and that a re ligion created largely by male patriarchs has tended to suppress dimensions of r eality that women have always been aware of and would be incorporated into tradi tional Christianity were women allowed their rightful role as leaders. The critics that have spoken out so sharply against The Da Vinci Code on behalf of organized Christianity -- like the two quoted above -- do a very good job of pointing to factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies in Brown's text, while miss ing the larger picture that has resulted in this book's huge success. In additio n to his skill as a story teller (and this my be the primary reason for the popu larity of Brown's book), a major factor at work in his success is that Brown has picked up the strong undercurrent of skepticism about organized Christianity th at is afoot in popular culture. For even as evangelical Christianity has capture d the imagination of the news media in the past two decades, people both within and outside the circles of organized Christianity have come to distrust traditio nal authority even more sharply than before, and the ascendance of evangelical C hristianity in places of power such as the White House, has raised currents of a larm within the large majority of people who have difficulty with various aspect s of traditional Christian doctrine and teaching. For better or for worse, the public is now more willing to suspend disbelief whi le reading a work of fiction, or watching "reality television," than when listen ing to a sermon or a political speech. Because of this, one can get away with fa r more fiction in various forms of entertainment today than one can get away wit h in the world of politics or organized religion. Thank God! Brown may have buil t The Da Vinci Code out of a million little fabrications, but it conveys one hug e truth: God is far too wonderful to be the sole possession of any individual or institution. Synopsis

While in Paris on business, Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon receives an urgen t late-night phone call: the elderly curator of the Louvre has been murdered ins ide the museum. Near the body, police have found a baffling cipher. Solving the enigmatic riddle, Langdon is stunned to discover it leads to a trail of clues hi dden in the works of Da Vinci clues visible for all to see and yet ingeniously disgu ised by the painter. Langdon joins forces with a gifted French cryptologist, Sophie Neveu, and learns the late curator was involved in the Priory of Sion an actual secret society whos e members included Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Da Vinci, amon g others. The Louvre curator has sacrificed his life to protect the Priory's mos t sacred trust: the location of a vastly important religious relic, hidden for c enturies. In a breathless race through Paris, London, and beyond, Langdon and Neveu match wits with a faceless power broker who appears to work for Opus Dei a clandestine, Vatican-sanctioned Catholic sect believed to have long plotted to seize the Prio ry's secret. Unless Langdon and Neveu can decipher the labyrinthine puzzle in ti me, the Priory's secret and a stunning historical truth will be lost forever. Perhaps a better title for The Da Vinci Code might be Much Ado about Nothing. Wh en you boil away the hype and hysteria, all that remains is a pedestrian murder mystery that isn't sufficiently challenging or scandalous to raise anyone's hack les. It's preposterous, overlong, and saddled with a sloppy denouement that defi nes the term "anti-climax." The film's two big "surprises" are telegraphed early , and the ease with which they can be guessed (using the "conservation of charac ters" process) leeches the movie of a large measure of its suspense. Individual scenes are entertaining in their own right, but the production as a whole is a l umbering mess. I intentionally avoided Dan Brown's novel before seeing the movie (and don't int end to read it now that I have sat through the adaptation), hoping to provide a fresh perspective. Presumably, the book, which is often referred to as a "compul sive page-turner," is more riveting that its cinematic counterpart. The Da Vinci Code (the movie) is a mediocre thriller, with too few thrills and too much pred ictable action. A murder in the Louvre sends Professor Robert Langdon, a visiting "symbologist" from Harvard, on the first steps of a dangerous journey that leads him into the heart of "the greatest cover-up in human history" - one that involves Opus Dei, the Knights Templar, cults, artwork, and a lot of things than happened 2000 year s ago. His companion on the trek is French police officer Sophie Neveu (Audrey T autou). They have been framed for the Louvre murder, and Captain Fache (Jean Ren o), a humorless cop who's hiding something, is hot on their trail. Recognizing t hat they have uncovered the tip of a conspiracy that involves warring factions o f the Catholic Church and the Holy Grail, they seek "Grail expert" Sir Leigh Tea bing (Ian McKellan), who joins their quest. (Sadly, the Monty Python troupe coul dn't make it.) But the pursuit of Fache isn't the only thing they have to worry about. A murderous albino by the name of Silas (Paul Bettany), the "pet" of Bish op Sringarosa (Alfred Molina), has orders to eliminate them and take into custod y an artifact they have in their possession. The Da Vinci Code has strange rhythms for a thriller. Bursts of action are inter rupted by lengthy periods of exposition. The crime is essentially resolved aroun d the two-hour mark, leaving the movie nearly 30 minutes to muddle through to a drawn-out and predictable conclusion. Oddly, the "talky" parts of the film are m ore interesting than the kinetic ones. That's because, when it comes to explaini ng the conspiracy, The Da Vinci Code does an impressive job of blending fact, sp eculation, and pure fiction into a mix that is intriguing (albeit outlandish). T he action sequences, on the other hand, are too straightforward to be more than distracting.

The scenes that really shine are those in which director Ron Howard brings his s kills as a visual director to bear. When we first meet Langdon, he is lecturing on the meaning of symbols. The brief excerpt Howard provides of this talk is fas cinating. Equally compelling is Teabing's dissection of "The Last Supper" and hi s explanation of the nature of the Holy Grail. And there's a little inventivenes s in the way Langdon's visualization of Issac Newton's tomb is employed to break a code. Sadly, as a director, Howard also makes a major misstep with an unforgi vable continuity gaffe (it involves a phone call). Although (I am told) this is explained in the book, the explanation is not provided in the movie, and it beco mes an instance of slipshod misdirection. Is The Da Vinci Code blasphemous or sacrilegious? It certainly takes a negative view of Catholic doctrine and Church policies. (Poor maligned Opus Dei.) And it calls into question cornerstone aspects of Christian faith. Some may find this d istasteful, but the movie does not go out of its way to be insulting or condesce nding. The story is so outlandish as to be obviously fabricated, with a minimal basis in fact. The Da Vinci Code is fanciful enough that it requires no debunkin g - that much should be obvious to anyone attending the film. The cast is impressive, and is headlined by megastar Tom Hanks, French beauty Au drey Tautou (Amelie), and respected British thespian (and everyone's favorite mu tant or wizard) Ian McKellan. All do the best jobs they can with paper-thin char acters. No one is given much of an opportunity to stand out. Paul Bettany brings a little menace to his role as the most visible bad guy, but he's never truly f rightening. In fact, there are times when Jean Reno is more intimidating. The ch emistry between Hanks and Tautou is lukewarm at best. If there's anything other than mild affection between them, it doesn't make it across. The Da Vinci Code i s ultimately too plot-heavy to allow much in the way of character development, a nd that means it's not an actors' feature. Hanks is familiar, Tautou is lovely, and McKellan is eloquent - and that's all they have to be. The prosaic story does not warrant the film's epic length. Two-and-one-half hour movies are supposed to be something special. This one is merely overlong. I can 't help but wonder whether a shorter, sharper cut of The Da Vinci Code might hav e resulted in a more suspenseful production. The muddled ending is part of the p roblem, but so is the "treasure hunt" aspect of the journey. It becomes tedious when breaking a code or solving a puzzle merely uncovers another puzzle or code. After a while, this pattern becomes tiresome. Maybe it's fun to "play along" wi th characters in a book, but the movie experience isn't engaging. At least The D a Vinci Code is better in this respect than National Treasure. In terms of its appeal, The Da Vinci Code isn't appreciably better or worse than its two summer 2006 big-budget predecessors, Mission: Impossible III and Poseid on (although it will likely score a higher total at the box office than either). Like those earlier releases, it's a relatively mindless affair that offers adeq uate entertainment value while displaying obvious, and often irritating, flaws. The controversy has made seeing The Da Vinci Code a more desirable night out tha n it might otherwise have been, but it won't take long before potential audience members recognize that the Emperor has no clothes. One could classify The Da Vi nci Code as diverting, but it has sidestepped greatness by a wide margin. The term "godawful" should be used sparingly in connection with motion pictures. With Angels & Demons, however, it seems oddly appropriate. Not only does this p requel-turned-sequel to The Da Vinci Code make its predecessor seem like a maste rwork of pacing and plotting, but it may represent a nadir for director Ron Howa rd and is probably the worst instance of acting from star Tom Hanks since back i n the days when he was struggling out from under the shadow of Bosom Buddies. In terestingly, this is also the first sequel with which Hanks (as a live-action ac tor) and Howard (behind the camera) have been involved. Book's Fans to Decide if `Da Vinci' Is Dud `Vinci'

May 18, 2006|Rachel Abramowitz and Robert W. Welkos, Times Staff Writers CANNES, France Hoots of derision. Snickers at a key climactic moment. And early negative reviews. None of it was a deterrent to Andres Steffens, who waited in l ine at 7 a.m. Wednesday outside the Grand Palais at the Cannes Film Festival to buy advance tickets for "The Da Vinci Code." "I care what critics say -- it's part of my decision-making," said the 49-year-o ld from Kiel, Germany, adding that there are extenuating circumstances in this c ase that require two tickets no matter what the arbiters of culture have to say about it: "My girlfriend read the book." Da Vinci Code I. The Movie: The Da Vinci Code (PG-13) Movie web site: www.sonypictures.com/movies/thedavincicode Sony/Columbia Pictures, 2006, Directed by: Ron Howard; Starring: Tom Hanks, Audr ey Tautou, Ian McKellen The long awaited block-buster movie is finally here, but is it really deserving of the title, or is it a bust , or maybe something in between? Maybe it is just good o r very good . The 40 million best-seller book created an impossible task for the m ovie director, writers & stars. Is it really possible to satisfy all the fans o f the book and stay true to the original story line, without further alienating millions of Christians, who view the work as an attack on their faith & their Go d? No, not really! The book was fast-paced and full of suspense. The movie is prodding, predictabl e, and indecisive, with no real resolution. The book is full of ancient codes & cryptic symbols which must be solved along the way. The movie just floats from one site to the next with very little effort. The characters in the book are m ulti-dimensional & full of surprises, while the character development in the mov ie is quite minimal. The representatives of the Church are the bad guys, of coa rse. The movie really tells us nothing about Robert Langdon, and there is no re lationship developing between Robert and Sophie Neveu. The movie gives you very little reason to care for any of these people. One interesting contrast in the movie however, is Leigh Teabing s insufferably long diatribe against Christianity , with Robert Langdon s half-hearted anemic defense of the Church. This was reall y not in the book, but probably some sort of tiny bone thrown for the benefit of C hristian critics. In the end, there is no real convincing climax, only an improbable possibility s hown, in order to come to some sort of resolution. If you had never read the bo ok, the movie might be good, even very good. The one really good thing about th e movie, you were able to actually see all the sights portrayed in the book, and that was awesome. If you are a serious Christian like myself, the movie is over the top offensive in Teabing s incredibly long attack, you just want to scream- no, no, no way! That is not correct! Not even close! If you are a Catholic Christian, be prepared, beca use in the Da Vinci Code world view, all evil emanates from The Church. The most developed characters in the movie, are the killer monk & his Bishop. The movie ac tually succeeds in being more anti-Christian than I ever expected it to be. This was a surprise. When you read the book, you can put it down and scream a little , and come back to it several days later. But with the movie, you are subjected to all the negative propaganda in 2 1/2 hours. It manages to present, or mentio n nearly all of the Top Ten- False claims made in the Book , that I cited in a prev ious article. (Below)

II. The Book-Review & Commentary The Book: The Da Vinci Code , by Dan Brown (New York: Doubleday, 2003)

Anyone who has read the book, knows that it was a real page turner . I have enthus iastically read all of Dan Browns novels. All of them keep ones interest at a fe ver pitch, from page one through to the end. He is an expert at bringing a few characters together and placing them in a limited time-line of non-stop action, and sustaining the story line at such a high level that the reader rarely wonder s about the plausibility of the background material. I had no intellectual problems with Deception Point & Digital Fortress . These were n on-stop fun; after all, I am a technophobe who took only a couple of science cla sses in college over 30 years ago, I had no verifiable facts to get in the way. An gel & Demons , did cause me to pause occasionally, but The Code sent me over the top every couple of pages or so, with one historical inaccuracy and one conjecture a fter another. You see, I have actually read all the early Christian & Gnostic b ooks referred to in the book; and I have also read several of the works of fictio n that Dan Brown heavily relied upon. I gave it all a pass though, since The ..Co de itself was suppose to be fiction. But then, Mr. Brown went on the talk circuit, and claimed during radio & TV inte rviews that the background material about Christianity was all true . This of coar se, caused a major uproar! When Dan Brown was challenged by critics, with docum ented historical facts to the contrary, he stated that it is the winners who writ e the history . I guess since he is a winning writer, this means he is free to rewr ite & distort the history of the Christian Church? NOT!! Nevertheless, a great deal of water cooler conversation will be generated by this movie, creating a good opportunity for Christians armed with the real historical facts, concerning the origins & documents of early Christianity. *Top III. Da Vinci Code : Top Ten False Claims Made in the Book -The following are 10 major false claims made in the book: There are hundreds of historical mistakes made by the Dan Brown in The Da Vinci Code. None of it would be particularly important in a work of fiction , except th at Brown claims that all the background material is true . He continues to maintai n that view even in the face of numerous assaults by historians, art experts, & religious scholars. There are numerous historical problems; also, art & archit ectural blunders were made in the book. However, my top ten will key in on false religious/historical claims (included: page numbers for where the claims are ma de in the book): 1. Sex Ritualism played a major part in early Jewish & Christian worship. (p.309)

There is no factual basis for this claim. In fact, the people who surrounded an cient Israel all had religions which had some form of sexual ritualism, but the ancient Hebrew faith had numerous teachings and prophetic pronouncements against their people participating in those false religions. The early Christians lived among the Greeks & Romans who had numerous sexual cults, temple prostitute priestess es, and city-wide official orgies. The early Christians were expected to reject those practices when they converted to Christianity. 2. The Sacred Feminine was part of the early Jewish & early Christian faith.

Again, totally false. The early Hebrew religion was monotheistic, they believed

in only one God. The early Christians were a continuation of the Hebrew faith. There was never a godess in either religion, although the surrounding cultures w ere dominated by matriarchal paganism. 3. The Jewish sacred name of God YHWH, is derived from the name Jehovah , a combinat ion of the masculine Jah and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah . (p. 309) Totally false. YHWH, is derived from the Hebrew verb- to be . 4. Jesus was viewed as a prophet & just a man, before he was deified by the Co uncil of Nicea in 325 AD by a close vote. (p. 233) The four gospels that taught the divinity of Jesus were written between 50-90 AD. The NT epistles were written in the same time frame, and also taught that Jesus was divine. All within the lifetime of the original observers of the ministry of Jesus and the Apostles. Numerous writings of the early church Fathers (1st-4 th century writings) also supported the divinity of Christ. The Counsel of Nice a didn t debate the divinity of Jesus, that was considered a given. The Counsel w as convened to come to an understanding about the Eternity and eternal nature of J esus. The final vote was 300-2, in favor of recognizing the co-eternal relatio nship between the Father & the Son. 5. Jesus married Mary Magdalene, it is a matter of historical record. (p. 244) There is no record or early reference of Jesus marrying anyone. The reference c ited by Brown is the so-called Gospel of Phillip an apocryphal gospel of the 3rd c entury, written 200 years after the fact. Also, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene is c ited coming from the same time period. No historical scholar would contend that there are any historical facts, of the 1st century, contained in these two late references. 6. The New Testament is based upon fabrications & lies of the Church (p. 267,34 1,407). It is the other way around, the church is based upon the teaching of the New Tes tament. The authentic New Testament writings were written in the first century by the Apostles or those who were close to them. 7. Over 80 gospels were written, but only four were included in the Bible. (p. 231) There were around thirty so-called gospels written, however, only four were actual ly written in the first century by those who were Apostles or close to Apostles, & actual observers of the ministry of Jesus. It was only those four, came to b e recognized as authoritative by early Christians, and later were included in th e New Testament. The other gospels were written in the 2nd, 3rd, & 4th centuries. 8. Constantine upgraded Jesus to divine and tried to destroy thousands of docum ents which chronicled his life as a mortal man . (p. 234) He chose the New Testamen t books. Early Christians from the 1st century on believed in the deity & the humanity of Jesus. Constantine did not originate any Christian teaching, nor did he attemp t to destroy early Christian writings. Constantine had nothing to do with the co mposition of the New Testament. 9. The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1950 s, containing writings which Constan tine attempted to destroy. (p. 234) The Vatican tried to suppress the release o f these scrolls. 9p. 234)

The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947. They did not contain Christian writings & t he Vatican did not try to stop their publication. They were Old Testament & ear ly Jewish cultic writings. 10. The feminine looking person next to Jesus in Da Vinci s Last supper was Mary Magdalene. There is no basis in fact for this claim. John the Apostle was close to Jesus & was characterized as quite young or effeminate in numerous paintings of that ti me period. (major source: The Da Vinci Code Fact or Fiction?, By Hank Hanegraaff & Paul L M aier. Da Vinci Code page references were found in this book, pg. 2-40.) MGD *Top **Main Page IV. Books & Materials That Challenge The Da Vinci Code Background Facts :

A. See the Christianity Today magazine web sight for a slew of good articles abo ut the real historical facts about Jesus & early Christianity: www.christianity today.com/history/special/davincicode.html. B.**New from Josh McDowell: BookThe Da Vinci Code: A Quest for Answers , 128 pages The Da Vinci Code: Companion Guide to the Movie

Mini-Mag-

**Both are good sources the book for your preparation, & the Mini-Mag for distribu tion to friends with questions. Available now at: www.josh.org or at a bookstore near you. C. - The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction? , By Hank Hanegraaff & Paul L. Maier, (Whe aton, Ill:Tyndale, 2004) 81 pgs. D. - The Da Vinci Deception , By Erwin W. Lutzer, (Carol Springs, Ill: Tyndale, 200 6) 167 pgs. E. - Cracking Da Vinci s Code: You ve Read The Fiction, Now Read the Facts , By James L . Garlow & Peter Jones, (Colorado Springs, Col: Victor, 2004) 252 pgs. F. The following book is written by a noted New Testament Textual Critic, & an acclaimed scholar of early Christian documents and history. Author of, Lost Chri stianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew , Lost Scripture s: Books that Did Not Make It into the New Testament , and Misquoting Jesus . Though I disagree with many of the conclusions in his books; I include him here because he is an agnostic (self proclaimed in one of his radio interviews), and not reall y a friend or believer of Christianity. However, he points out the historical e rrors in The Code : - Truth & Fiction In The Da Vinci Code , By Bart D. Ehrman, (Oxford Press, 2004) The Da Vinci Code is a 2003 mystery-detective fiction novel written by American author Dan Brown. It follows symbologist Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu as they investigate a murder in Paris's Louvre Museum and discover a battle between the Priory of Sion and Opus Dei over the possibility of Jesus Christ of Nazareth ha ving been married to and fathering a child with Mary Magdalene.

The title of the novel refers to, among other things, the fact that the murder v ictim is found in the Denon Wing of the Louvre, naked and posed like Leonardo da Vinci's famous drawing, the Vitruvian Man, with a cryptic message written besid e his body and a pentacle drawn on his stomach in his own blood. The novel has provoked a popular interest in speculation concerning the Holy Gra il legend and Magdalene's role in the history of Christianity. The book has been extensively denounced by many Christian denominations as an attack on the Roman Catholic Church. It has also been criticized for its historical and scientific inaccuracy. The book is a worldwide bestseller that sold 80 million copies as of 2009[update ][1] and has been translated into 44 languages. Combining the detective, thrille r, and conspiracy fiction genres, it is Brown's second novel to include the char acter Robert Langdon, the first being his 2000 novel Angels & Demons. In Novembe r 2004, Random House published a Special Illustrated Edition with 160 illustrati ons. In 2006, a film adaptation was released by Sony's Columbia Pictures. Plot summary This article's plot summary may be too long or overly detailed. Please h elp improve it by removing unnecessary details and making it more concise. (Nove mber 2009) This book describes the attempts of Robert Langdon, Professor of Religious Symbo logy at Harvard University, to solve the murder of renowned curator Jacques Saun ire of the Louvre Museum in Paris. A baffling cipher is found near his body. Saun ire's granddaughter, Sophie Neveu and Langdon attempt to sort out the bizarre rid dles and are stunned to discover a trail of clues hidden in the works of Leonard o Da Vinci. The unraveling of the mystery requires solutions to a series of brain-teasers, i ncluding anagrams and number puzzles. The ultimate solution is found to be intim ately connected with the possible location of the Holy Grail and to a mysterious society called the Priory of Sion, as well as to the Knights Templar. The story also involves the Roman Catholic organization Opus Dei. [edit] Details The story starts off with the murder of Jacques Saunire (the Grand Master Of Prio ry of Sion, although virtually no one knows that at the time) by Silas (acting o n behalf of someone known only as The Teacher) to extract the location of the "k eystone", an item which leads to the Holy Grail. The police summon Robert Langdo n, who is delivering a lecture in Paris, to the murder scene and ask for his hel p in deciphering the code Sauniere left on and near his body. Bezu Fache, the Ca ptain of the Central Directorate Judicial Police, believes Langdon is the prime suspect in the murder. Sophie Neveu shows up at the murder scene as a police cryptographer and quickly gains Langdon's trust. Jacques Saunire was Neveu's grandfather and they were very close to each other until she discovered him participating in a pagan sex ritua l (Hieros Gamos) at his home in Normandy, when she made a surprise visit there d uring a break from boarding school. (That she had observed something is mentione d and hinted at several times throughout the story, but what it is that she saw is revealed to no one, including the reader, until near the end when she tells R obert). Langdon and Neveu find a baffling cipher near Saunire's body. These clues were me ant to lead to a second set of clues. By deciphering her grandfather's clues, Ne veu finds the painting which had a key hidden behind it and an address and symbo ls of the Priory of Sion were written on the key. Working together, Langdon and Neveu trick the police, flee the scene and figure out the secret of the key.

The key opens a safe deposit box at the Paris branch of the Depository Bank of Z urich. Saunire's account number at the bank is a 10-digit number listing the digi ts of the first eight Fibonacci numbers: 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21. Inside the safe deposit box they find the keystone which is actually a large cry ptex, a cylindrical device supposedly invented by Leonardo Da Vinci for transpor ting secure messages. In order to open it the combination of rotating components must be arranged in the correct order. If the cryptex is forced open an enclose d vial of vinegar ruptures and dissolves the message, which was written on papyr us. The rosewood box containing the large cryptex contains clues to the combinat ion of the cryptex, written in backwards script in the same manner as Leonardo's journals. The instructions that Saunire revealed to Silas at gunpoint are actually a well-r ehearsed lie, namely that the keystone is buried in the Church of Saint-Sulpice beneath an obelisk that lies exactly along the ancient "Rose Line" (the former P rime Meridian which passed through Paris before it was redesignated to pass thro ugh Greenwich). The message beneath the obelisk simply contains a reference to a passage in the Book of Job (38:11a) which reads in part "Hitherto shalt thou go and no further."(KJV) When Silas reads this, he realizes he has been tricked. Still being chased by the police, Langdon and Neveu take the keystone to Sir Lei gh Teabing (an expert in the Holy Grail and Langdon's friend). They flee the cou ntry in Teabing's private plane, and on the plane figure out how to open the cry ptex, but the large cryptex actually contains a second smaller cryptex with a se cond riddle that reveals its combination. The riddle, which says to seek the orb that should be on the tomb of "a knight a pope interred," refers not to a medie val knight, but rather to the tomb of Sir Isaac Newton, who was buried in Westmi nster Abbey, and was eulogized by Alexander Pope (A. Pope). It turns out that Teabing is the Teacher who assigned Silas to kill Jacques Saun ire and he also had information on the identities of the leaders of the Priory of Sion who then bugged their offices and had Silas assassinate them. Rmy is his co llaborator. It is Teabing who contacted Bishop Aringarosa, hiding his identity, and tricked him into financing the plan to find the Grail. He never intended to hand the Grail over to Aringarosa but is taking advantage of Opus Dei's resolve to find it. Teabing believes that the Priory of Sion has broken its vow to revea l the secret of the Grail to the world at the appointed time. He plans to steal the Grail documents and reveal them to the world himself, ruining the church, wh ich he blames for the event. It was he who informed Silas that Langdon and Sophi e Neveu were at his chateau. He did not seize the keystone from them himself bec ause he did not want to reveal his identity. He summoned Silas to seize the keys tone in his house, but himself thwarted Silas, in order to gain Langdon and Soph ie's further help with decoding the cryptex. Subsequently, the police raid the h ouse, having followed the tracking device in the truck Langdon had stolen while escaping from the bank. Teabing led Neveu and Langdon to the Temple Church in Lo ndon, knowing full well that it was a dead end, in order to stage the hostage sc ene with Rmy and thereby obtain the keystone without revealing his real plot to L angdon and Neveu. In order to erase all knowledge of his work, Teabing kills Rmy by giving him cogn ac laced with peanut powder, knowing Rmy has a deadly allergy to peanuts. Thus, Rm y dies of an anaphylactic shock. Teabing also anonymously tells the police that Silas is hiding in the London headquarters of Opus Dei. In a showdown with Teabing in Westminster Abbey, Langdon secretly opens the seco nd cryptex and removes its contents before destroying it in front of Teabing. Te abing is arrested and led away while fruitlessly begging Langdon to tell him the contents of the second cryptex and the secret location of the Grail.

Bezu Fache finds out that Neveu and Langdon are innocent after Bishop Aringarosa contacts him privately to confess. Fache then cancels the warrants for the arre st of Neveu and Langdon. Silas accidentally shoots Aringarosa outside the London headquarters of Opus Dei while fleeing from the police. Realizing his terrible error and that he has bee n duped, Aringarosa tells Bezu Fache to give the bearer bonds in his briefcase t o the families of the murdered leaders of the Priory of Sion. Silas dies from hi s fatal wounds. The final message inside the second keystone actually does not refer to Rosslyn Chapel, although the Grail was indeed once buried there, below the Star of David on the floor (the two interlocking triangles are the "blade" and "chalice," i.e ., male and female symbols). The docent in Rosslyn Chapel is Sophie's long-lost brother. Sophie had been told as a child that he was killed with her parents and grandmother in a car acciden t. The guardian of Rosslyn Chapel, Marie Chauvel, is Sophie's long-lost grandmother , and the wife of Jacques Saunire. She is the woman who participated in the sex r itual with Jacques Saunire. It is revealed that Sophie is a descendant of Jesus C hrist and Mary Magdalene. The Priory of Sion hid her identity in order to protec t her from possible threats to her life. Even though all four of the leaders of the Priory of Sion are killed, the secret is not lost, since there is still a contingency plan (never revealed) which wil l keep the organization and its secret alive. The real meaning of the last message is that the Grail is buried beneath the sma ll pyramid (i.e., the "blade," a male symbol) directly below the inverted glass pyramid of the Louvre (i.e., the "chalice," a female symbol, which Langdon and S ophie ironically almost crashed into while making their original escape from Bez u Fache). It also lies beneath the "Rose Line," which is similar to "Rosslyn." L angdon figures out this final piece to the puzzle in the last pages of the book, but he does not appear inclined to tell anyone about this. See La Pyramide Inve rse for further discussion. [edit] Characters These are the principal characters that drive the plot. Some have names that are puns, anagrams or hidden clues: * * * * * * Robert Langdon Jacques Saunire Sophie Neveu Bezu Fache Silas Manuel Aringarosa

* * * * * *

Andr Vernet Leigh Teabing Rmy Legaludec Jrme Collet Marie Chauvel Saint-Clair Pamela Gettum

[edit] Secret of the Holy Grail Detail of The Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci

In the novel Leigh Teabing explains to Sophie Neveu that the figure at the right hand of Jesus in Leonardo da Vinci's painting of "The Last Supper" is not the a postle John, but actually Mary Magdalene. In the novel, Magdalene was the wife o f Jesus Christ and was pregnant with his child when Jesus was crucified. Leigh T eabing says that the absence of a chalice in Leonardo's painting indicates that Leonardo knew that Mary Magdalene was the actual Holy Grail and the bearer of Je sus' blood in the form of the child she was carrying. Leigh Teabing goes on to e xplain that this idea is supported by the shape of the letter "V" that is formed by the bodily positions of Jesus and Mary, as "V" is the symbol for the sacred feminine. The absence of the Apostle John in the painting is explained by knowin g that John is also referred to as "the Disciple Jesus loved", code for Mary Mag dalene. The book also notes that the color scheme of their garments are inverted : Jesus wears a red blouse with royal blue cape; John/Mary wears a royal blue bl ouse with red cape perhaps symbolizing two bonded halves of marriage. According to the novel, the secrets of the Holy Grail, as kept by the Priory of Sion are as follows: * The Holy Grail is not a physical chalice, but a woman, namely Mary Magdale ne, who carried the bloodline of Christ. * The Old French expression for the Holy Grail, San gral, actually is a play on Sang ral, which literally means "royal blood" in Old French. * The Grail relics consist of the documents that testify to the bloodline, a s well as the actual bones of Mary Magdalene. * The Grail relics of Mary Magdalene were hidden by the Priory of Sion in a secret crypt, perhaps beneath Rosslyn Chapel. * The Church has suppressed the truth about Mary Magdalene and the Jesus blo odline for 2000 years. This is principally because they fear the power of the sa cred feminine in and of itself and because this would challenge the primacy of S aint Peter as an apostle. * Mary Magdalene was of royal descent (through the Jewish House of Benjamin) and was the wife of Jesus, of the House of David. That she was a prostitute was slander invented by the Church to obscure their true relationship. At the time of the Crucifixion, she was pregnant. After the Crucifixion, she fled to Gaul, w here she was sheltered by the Jews of Marseille. She gave birth to a daughter, n amed Sarah. The bloodline of Jesus and Mary Magdalene became the Merovingian dyn asty of France. * The existence of the bloodline was the secret that was contained in the do cuments discovered by the Crusaders after they conquered Jerusalem in 1099 (see Kingdom of Jerusalem). The Priory of Sion and the Knights Templar were organized to keep the secret. The secrets of the Grail are connected, according to the novel, to Leonardo Da V inci's work as follows: * Leonardo was a member of the Priory of Sion and knew the secret of the Gra il. The secret is in fact revealed in The Last Supper, in which no actual chalic e is present at the table. The figure seated next to Christ is not a man, but a woman, his wife Mary Magdalene. Most reproductions of the work are from a later alteration that obscured her obvious female characteristics. * The androgyny of the Mona Lisa reflects the sacred union of male and femal e which is implied in the holy union of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Such parity be tween the cosmic forces of masculine and feminine has long been a deep threat to the established power of the Church. The name Mona Lisa is actually an anagram for "Amon L'Isa", referring to the father and mother gods of Ancient Egyptian re ligion (namely Amun and Isis). A number of different authors also speculate about the possibility of Jesus beco ming a father. There are at least three children attributed to him, a daughter T

amar, born before the Crucifixion, and two sons Jesus (the Jesus Justus from the New Testament) and Josephes, both born after the Resurrection. Although their n ames are now part of the common culture of conspiracy writers, only two decades ago, when The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail was written, the names were not ment ioned. The royal descents that lie at the heart of The Da Vinci Code mystery cen tre on the family of Josephes, who is supposed to be the grandfather of Aminadab del Graal, first of the "Fisher Kings". However the genealogies that are quoted in Grail lore appear to record too few generations, with children regularly bei ng born to fathers in their 40s. [edit] Reception Brown's novel was a major success in 2004 and was outsold only by J. K. Rowling' s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.[2] It won Book Sense's 2004 Book of the Year Award in the Adult Fiction category. It spawned a number of offspring works and drew positive reviews from The New York Times, People,[citation needed ] and The Washington Post.[citation needed] Additionally, The Da Vinci Code has inspired a number of novels very similar to it, including Raymond Khoury's The L ast Templar and Steve Berry's The Templar Legacy.[citation needed] In a 2008 sur vey of more than 15,000 Australian readers, the book came in fourth in a list of the 101 best books ever written.[3] The book was not generally well received by critics, however, and it has been th e subject of numerous negative appraisals concerning its literary value and its portrayal of history. Its writing and historical accuracy were reviewed scathing ly by The New Yorker,[4] The New York Times,[5] and Salon.com,[6] among others. [edit] Criticism [edit] Historical inaccuracies Main article: Inaccuracies in The Da Vinci Code The book generated criticism when it was first published, due to its inaccurate description of core aspects of Christianity, the history of the Catholic Church, and descriptions of European art, history, and architecture. The book has recei ved mostly negative reviews from Catholic and other Christian communities. Many critics say that Brown should have done much more research before publishin g this book. On February 22, 2004, an article titled "The Last Word: The Da Vinc i Con" appeared in the New York Times by writer Laura Miller.[5] Miller attacks the Da Vinci Code on multiple levels, referring to it as "based on a notorious h oax", "rank nonsense", and "bogus", as she points out how heavily the book rests on the fabrications of Pierre Plantard (including the Priory of Sion which did not exist until Plantard created it) who in 1953 was arrested and convicted for just such frauds. Critics accuse Brown of distorting and fabricating history. For example, Marcia Ford wrote: Regardless of whether you agree with Brown's conclusions, it's clear that hi s history is largely fanciful, which means he and his publisher have violated a long-held if unspoken agreement with the reader: Fiction that purports to presen t historical facts should be researched as carefully as a nonfiction book would be.[7] Richard Abanes wrote: The most flagrant aspect is not that Dan Brown disagrees with Christianity b ut that he utterly warps it in order to disagree with it to the point of complet ely rewriting a vast number of historical events. And making the matter worse ha s been Brown's willingness to pass off his distortions as facts' with which innum erable scholars and historians agree.[7]

The book opens with the claim by Dan Brown that "The Priory of Sion a European s ecret society founded in 1099 is a real organization". The Priory of Sion itself was actually a hoax created in 1956 by a Mr. Pierre Plantard. The author also c laims that "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret ritu als in this novel are accurate"; but this claim is disputed by almost all academ ic scholars in the fields the book discusses.[8] Numerous works have been published that explain in detail why any claim to accur acy is difficult to substantiate, while two lawsuits have been brought alleging plagiarism in The Da Vinci Code. The first suit for copyright infringement was f iled in February 2006 in a British court by the authors of The Holy Blood and th e Holy Grail, a purportedly nonfiction account of Mary Magdalene's role as the w ife of Jesus of Nazareth and the mother of his child, was found in Dan Brown's f avor. No verdict has yet been rendered on a second suit, filed in August of the same year, in the United States by Jack Dunn, the author of The Vatican Boys. A third author, Lewis Perdue, alleged that Brown plagiarized from two of his nov els, The Da Vinci Legacy, originally published in 1983, and Daughter of God, ori ginally published in the year 2000. He sought to block distribution of the book and film. However, Judge George Daniels of the US District Court in New York rul ed against Perdue in 2005, saying that "A reasonable average lay observer would not conclude that The Da Vinci Code is substantially similar to Daughter of God" and that "Any slightly similar elements are on the level of generalised or othe rwise unprotectable ideas."[9] Perdue appealed, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appe als upheld the original decision, saying Mr. Perdue's arguments were "without me rit".[10] Dan Brown himself dilutes the suggestion of some of the more controversial aspec ts being fact on his web site: "The "FACT" page makes no statement whatsoever ab out any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader".[11] However, it also says that "these real e lements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters", "it is my belief t hat some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit." and "the secret behind The Da Vinci Code was too well documented and significant for me to dismiss." It is therefore entirely understandable why there would continue to be confusion as to what is the factual content of the book. Brown's earlier statements about the accuracy of the historical information in h is book, however, were far more strident. In 2003, while promoting his novel, he was asked in interviews what parts of the history in his novel actually happene d. He replied "Absolutely all of it." In a 2003 interview with CNN's Martin Savi dge he was again asked how much of the historical background was true. He replie d, "99% is true ... the background is all true". Asked by Elizabeth Vargas in an ABC News special if the book would have been different if he had written it as non-fiction he replied, "I don't think it would have."[12] More recently Brown h as avoided interviews and has been rather more circumspect about the accuracy of his claims in his few public statements. He has also, however, never retracted any of his earlier assertions that the history in the novel is accurate, despite substantial academic criticism of his claims. In 2005, UK TV personality Tony Robinson edited and narrated a detailed rebuttal of the main arguments of Dan Brown and those of Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln, "Th e Real Da Vinci Code", shown on British TV Channel 4. The program featured lengt hy interviews with many of the main protagonists cited by Brown as "absolute fac t" in The Da Vinci Code. Arnaud de Sde, son of Grard de Sde, stated categorically t hat his father and Plantard had made up the existence of the Prieur de Sion, the cornerstone of the Jesus bloodline theory - to quote Arnaud de Sede in the progr am, "frankly, it was piffle". The program also cast severe doubt on the Rosslyn Chapel association with the Grail and on other related stories like the alleged landing of Mary Magdalene in France.

[edit] Portrayal of early Christianity According to The Da Vinci Code, the Roman Emperor Constantine I suppressed Gnost icism because it portrayed Jesus as purely human. The novel's argument is as fol lows.[13] Constantine wanted Christianity to act as a unifying religion for the Roman Empire. He thought Christianity would appeal to pagans only if it featured a demigod similar to pagan heroes. According to the Gnostic Gospels, Jesus was merely a human prophet, not a demigod. Therefore, to change Jesus' image, Consta ntine destroyed the Gnostic Gospels and promoted the gospels of Matthew, Mark, L uke, and John, which portray Jesus as divine or semidivine. In fact, Gnosticism did not portray Jesus as merely human.[14] Some Gnostic writ ings do depict Jesus interacting with his disciples in a wholly human way, one e xample being the Gospel of Mary,[citation needed] but the general Gnostic depict ion of Jesus is not clear-cut. Many Gnostic writings depict Christ as purely div ine, his human body being a mere illusion (see Docetism).[15] Some Gnostic sects saw Christ this way because they regarded matter as evil, and therefore believe d that a divine spirit would never have taken on a material body.[16] The Da Vin ci Code also portrays the Council of Nicaea's decision to recognize the fully hu man and divine aspects of Christ as being a close vote, while some authors dispu te this.[17][18] [edit] Literary criticism The novel has also attracted criticism in literary circles for its alleged lack of artistic or literary merit and its allegedly stereotyped portrayal of British and French characters. Salman Rushdie claimed during a lecture, "Do not start me on 'The Da Vinci Code, ' A novel so bad that it gives bad novels a bad name." [19] Stephen Fry has referred to Brown's writings as "complete loose stool-water" and "arse gravy of the worst kind."[20] In a live chat on June 14, 2006, he clarifi ed, "I just loathe all those book[s] about the Holy Grail and Masons and Catholi c conspiracies and all that botty-dribble. I mean, there's so much more that's i nteresting and exciting in art and in history. It plays to the worst and laziest in humanity, the desire to think the worst of the past and the desire to feel s uperior to it in some fatuous way."[21] In his 2005 University of Maine Commencement Address, best-selling author Stephe n King put Dan Brown's work and "Jokes for the John" on the same level, calling such literature the "intellectual equivalent of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese."[22] The New York Times, while reviewing the movie based on the book, called the book "Dan Brown's best-selling primer on how not to write an English sentence".[23] The New Yorker reviewer Anthony Lane refers to it as "unmitigated junk" and decr ies "the crumbling coarseness of the style."[4] Linguist Geoffrey Pullum and oth ers posted several entries critical of Dan Brown's writing, at Language Log, cal ling Brown one of the "worst prose stylists in the history of literature" and sa ying Brown's "writing is not just bad; it is staggeringly, clumsily, thoughtless ly, almost ingeniously bad."[24] Roger Ebert described it as a "potboiler writte n with little grace and style," although he did say it did "supply an intriguing plot."[25] [edit] Parodies 2005 The book was parodied by Adam Roberts with The Va Dinci Cod, and by Toby Clement s with The Asti Spumante Code. A telemovie spin-off of the Australian television series Kath & Kim parodied the film version as Da Kath and Kim Code in late 2005.

2006 The BBC program Dead Ringers parodied the Da Vinci Code, calling it the Da Rolf Harris Code. Popular South African political cartoonist Zapiro published a book collection of his strips entitled Da Zuma Code which parodies the former deputy president Jac ob Zuma. 2007 The book was parodied in the South Park episode "Fantastic Easter Special" and R obert Rankin's novel The Da-Da-De-Da-Da Code. The characters Lucy and Silas are parodied in the film Epic Movie. The movie sta rts with a scene similar to the opening of the The Da Vinci Code, with Silas cha sing the orphan Lucy, a parody of Sophie Neveu, in a museum. Throughout the movi e, Silas speaks in Latin. However, the translations for his speech are intention ally false for the sake of parody (e.g. Silas says "Et tu, Brute?" to Aslo, when the film translates it as "I'm Rick James, bitch!"). Szyfr Jana Matejki (Jan Matejko's Cipher) is a Polish parody by Dariusz Rekosz. Sequel Ko(s)miczna futryna: Szyfr Jana Matejki II (Co[s]mic Door-frame: Jan Mate jko's Cipher II) was released in 2008. Main character is inspector Jzef ?wienty w ho tries to solve The Greatest Secret of Mankind (Najwi?ksza Tajemnica Ludzko?ci ) - parentage of Piast dynasty. The book was parodied in the American Dad episode Black Mystery Month. But inste ad Stan searches for the controversial truth that Mary Todd Lincoln created pean ut butter, not George Washington Carver. 2008 In 2008, it was parodied in the second series of That Mitchell and Webb Look as "The Numberwang Code", a trailer for a fictional film based on a recurring sketc h on the show. Also in March 2008, the Irish blogger Twenty Major,[26] parodied elements in his first book The Order of the Phoenix Park[27] [edit] Inspiration and influences The novel is part of the exploration of alternative religious history. Its princ ipal source book is listed as per the court case, Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince 's The Templar Revelation, as well as the books by Margaret Starbird. An earlier novel had already used the theme of a Jesus bloodline: The Dreamer of the Vine, by Liz Greene, published in 1980 (Richard Leigh's sister and Michael Baigent's girlfriend at that time). The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (which is explicitly named, among several others, at the beginning of chapter 60), was stated by Dan Brown not to be amongst his primary research material for the book. Having paid acknowledgement to the above books as sources of inspiration, Dan Br own's The Da Vinci Code contains the overriding salient point in its plot: that the Merovingian kings of France were descendants from the bloodline of Jesus Chr ist and Mary Magdalene. In reference to Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent (two of the authors of The Hol y Blood and the Holy Grail), Brown named the principal Grail expert of his story "Leigh Teabing" (an anagram of "Baigent Leigh"). Brown confirmed this during th e court case. In reply to the suggestion that Lincoln was also referenced, as he

has medical problems resulting in a severe limp, like the character of Leigh Te abing, Brown stated he was unaware of Lincoln's illness and the correspondence w as a coincidence. After losing before the High Court in July 12, 2006, Michael B aigent and Richard Leigh appealed, unsuccessfully, to the Court of Appeal.[28][2 9] Following the trial, it was found that the publicity had actually significantly boosted UK sales of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail[30] There are also some striking similarities to 1996 video game Broken Sword: The S hadow of the Templars. [edit] Release details The book has been translated into over 40 languages, primarily in hardcover.[31] Alternate formats include audio cassette, CD, and e-book. Most recently, a Trad e Paperback edition was released March 2006 in conjunction with the film. Major English-language (hardcover) editions include: * (US) The Da Vinci Code, April 2003 (First edition), Doubleday, ISBN 0-38550420-9. * The Da Vinci Code, Special Illustrated Edition, November 2, 2004, Doubleda y, ISBN 0-385-51375-5 (as of January 2006, has sold 576,000 copies). * (UK) The Da Vinci Code, April 2004, Corgi Adult. ISBN 0-552-14951-9. * (UK) The Da Vinci Code: The Illustrated Edition, October 2, 2004, Bantam P ress. ISBN 0-593-05425-3. * (US/Canada) The Da Vinci Code (Trade Paperback edition), March 2006, Ancho r Books. * On March 28, 2006, Anchor Books released 5 million paperback copies of the book, and Broadway Books released 200,000 paperback copies of The Da Vinci Code Special Illustrated Edition. * On May 19, the day of the film's release, Doubleday and Broadway Books rel eased The Da Vinci Code Illustrated Screenplay: Behind the Scenes of the Major M otion Picture, by screenwriter Akiva Goldsman, with the introductions by Ron How ard and Dan Brown. It included film stills, behind-the-scenes photos and the ful l script. There were 25,000 copies of the hardcover, and 200,000 of the paperbac k version.[32] [edit] Puzzles [edit] Book jacket Part of the advertising campaign for the novel was that the artwork in the Ameri can version of the bookjacket held various codes, and that the reader who solved them via the author's website would be given a prize. Several thousand people a ctually solved the codes, and one name was randomly chosen to be the winner, wit h the name announced on live television, Good Morning America, in early 2004. Th e prize was a trip to Paris. The five hidden puzzles reveal: * That the back of the book jacket conceals latitude and longitude coordinat es, written in reverse, light red on dark red. Adding one degree to the latitude gives the coordinates of the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency in Northern Virginia, which is the location of a mysterious sculpture called Krypt os. The coordinates were taken from part of the decrypted text of part 2 of the sculpture (part 4 has never been solved). When Brown has been asked why the coor dinates are one degree off, his reply has been, "The discrepancy is intentional" . * Bold letters are present on the book jacket. There is a secret message hid den in the text of the book flaps. The message: Is there no help for the widow's

son (a reference to Freemasonry). * The words "only WW knows" can be seen on the back cover. It is a phrase pr inted invertedly, in the torn part of the book cover. This too is a reference to part 2 of the Kryptos sculpture.[33] * A circle with numbers, between the Doubleday logo and the barcode, reveals a secret message. These are the chapter numbers where the initial letters are a rranged in Caesar box format. * There is reverse writing on the cover of the book, which is the riddle for the first cryptex. Brown, both via his website and in person, has stated that the puzzles in the bo okjacket give hints about the subject of his next novel, The Lost Symbol. This r epeats a theme from his earlier novels. For example, Deception Point had an encr ypted message which, when solved, said, "The Da Vinci Code will surface". In the simplified Chinese version of The Da Vinci Code, the cover has a secret t ext; however, this text can be easily seen. It reads: "13-3-2-1-1-8-5 O, Draconi an devil! Oh, Lame Saint! P.S. Find Robert Langdon." This is the multiply encryp ted clue written in invisible ink next to the dead body in the museum which kick s off the plot of the entire novel. [edit] Pages All of the puzzles listed below can be found within the page headers in the Mass Market US Paperback edition of The Da Vinci Code. * Page 60: "Ankh Fendile" (anagram of "knife handle") in place of "Dan Brown " * * * * * n" * Page 217: "De Ysosy" (anagram of "odyssey") in place of "Da Vinci" * Page 262: "Mer Reve" (anagram of "Vermeer") in place of "Dan Brown" * Page 322: page number replaced by three asterisks Also in the body text on page 138, the word "numbers" in the sentence "Tearing i t open, she found four Paris phone numbers" is printed in a bold medieval typefa ce, instead of the typical serif typeface used throughout the rest of the book. [edit] Film Main article: The Da Vinci Code (film) Columbia Pictures adapted the novel to film, with a screenplay written by Akiva Goldsman, and Academy Award winner Ron Howard directing. The film was released o n May 19, 2006, and stars Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon, Audrey Tautou as Sophie N eveu, and Sir Ian McKellen as Leigh Teabing. The film had an opening weekend gro ss of $77,073,388 and grossed $217,536,138 in 2006, making it the fifth highest grossing movie of 2006. The film did very well overseas, grossing over $758,239, 852 worldwide. On November 14, 2006 the movie was released on DVD. Mer Apr 12, 2007 Mer rated it: 1 of 5 stars (review of isbn 1400079179) bookshelves: tripeshitandgarbage Read in January, 2004 recommends it for: morons and troglodytes PLEASE do NOT recommend The Da Vinci Code to me because you think it's brilliant Page Page Page Page Page 95: "De Lancs" (anagram of "candles") in place of "Da Vinci" 138: "Das Brilli" (anagram of "billiards") in place of "Dan Brown" 141: "La Sufrete" (anagram of "true/false") in place of "Da Vinci" 155: "sos" in place of page number 192: "Reon Tigaldo" (anagram of "Golden Ratio") in place of "Dan Brow

. Please do not try to explain to me that it is a "really interesting and eye-op ening book." Just don't. Please. I've read Iain Pear, I heart Foucault's Pendulum, Dashiell Hammett is my hero, A lan Moore is My Absolute Favorite, I listen to Coil on a fairly regular basis, a nd cloak n' dagger secret society/Priory of Sion/Knights of Templar-tinged num n ums make me a very happy girl... but if you t...more PLEASE do NOT recommend The Da Vinci Code to me because you think it's brilliant. Please do not try to expl ain to me that it is a "really interesting and eye-opening book." Just don't. Pl ease. I've read Iain Pear, I heart Foucault's Pendulum, Dashiell Hammett is my hero, A lan Moore is My Absolute Favorite, I listen to Coil on a fairly regular basis, a nd cloak n' dagger secret society/Priory of Sion/Knights of Templar-tinged num n ums make me a very happy girl... but if you truly believe that Brown's stupid ai rport thriller has ANY right whatsoever to be placed in the same category with M ichael "Wooden Dildo Dialogue" Crichton, let alone Umberto Eco, kindly keep this opinion very far away from me, or the ensuing conversation we have will not be constructive or polite in any way. I loathe Dan Brown. I resent him for spoon-feeding the masses pseudo-intellectua l "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" D-grade thriller shite under a pretense of real sophi stication, and getting orally serviced by The New York Times for his effort. I'd heard that the novel was meticulously researched and contained some really i nteresting and controversial assessments of religious zealotry. Um, not really? Well, not by my Merovingian standards, anyway. :D Let's put it this way. If Dan Brown was teaching an Insurgent Christian Symbolis m in Art and Literature 101 class at my local community college, I'd definitely have a different opinion about him. But NO. Dan Brown is not a professor of anything but pap. He is a barely compete nt thriller writer who wrote an AWFUL book that I could not bear to finish becau se I felt my IQ plummeting a little further with every "Let's Go to Paris! Guide book" description and blowhard authorial essay. Oh, don't even get me started ab out those cute soliloquies the main characters are so fond of delivering, ever s o calmly, often while cops n' bovvers are chasing them. The characters are weakly drawn. The dialogue is excruciating. The research is s hoddy and self-serving at best. The plot, no matter how open-minded you are, is beyond ludicrous. It's laughable enough to be incorporated into the next Indiana Jones movie. That'd be sweet, dude. What really irks me are Dan Brown's sanctimonious interviews, wherein he shows o ff all of his priceless antiques while expressing his abiding convictions that t he American public needs a "deeper appreciation" of art and history and culture. What a shallow, self-aggrandizing hypocrite. I'm all for fictional subversion o f the dominant Catholic paradigm, but only if the subverter knows what the hell they're talking about. Brown DOESN'T. He's all "la la la, connect the dots" but the picture he comes up with is awkward and unconvincing. The DaVinci Choad is a dead easy, nay, downright lazy read, and yet droves of pe ople are patting themselves on the back for having read and *gasp* actually unde rstood it. Like this is some spectacular achievement? WHY? What, because the sli pcover describes it as "erudite"? Are you fucking kidding me? Don't believe the hype, kids. You are profoundly more intelligent than this holi day page-turner gives you credit for.

If you really, honestly, just plain liked the book, that's cool I guess. Maybe y ou also prefer Anne Geddes to Alfred Stieglitz, Kenny G to Sidney Bechet, John T esh to Igor Stravinsky. Your prerogative. Just.... please don't try to tell me t hat this is "fascinating" or "meaningful literature". Frickin' read The Club Dum as or something. Then we'll talk, and I won't want to shoot myself in the face. Alright, glad I purged that poison from my system. Carry on.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (364 people liked it) 282 comments 35400 Jim Jul 17, 2007 Jim rated it: 1 of 5 stars This is a pretty formulaic page turner, a fun quick read. Written at about the l evel of the average Nancy Drew mystery, it is best appreciated at that level. As far as the content, there are howlers on virtually every page (starting with th e hero who looks like "Harrison Ford in Harris tweed" and is a "Professor of Rel igious Symbology at Harvard" -- good work if you can find it). You have to ignor e very pulpy, cheesy writing to enjoy this romantic thriller. Intende...more This is a pretty formulaic page turner, a fun quick read. Written at about the level of the average Nancy Drew mystery, it is best appreciated at that level. As far as the content, there are howlers on virtually every page (s tarting with the hero who looks like "Harrison Ford in Harris tweed" and is a "P rofessor of Religious Symbology at Harvard" -- good work if you can find it). Yo u have to ignore very pulpy, cheesy writing to enjoy this romantic thriller. Intended as a book that a dedicated reader could finish in a day, or something y ou take to the beach and casually finish in a weekend, The Da Vinci Code makes f or a reasonable airline novel, so much so that it is often a bit clunky in its d esire to ensure that no intellectual effort on the reader's part will be require d. Here's a recurring example in this novel: a bit of unfamiliar terminology, sa y "crux gemmata" (jeweled cross) will will be explained on page N, then on page N+1, a character will finger his jeweled cross and explain, "Oh, yes -- this is a crux gemmata." I've read dinner menus that were more demanding on the reader. My wife and I both read about a third of it in a day, sharing the same copy, and that's a full work day plus taking care of kids, bedtime, etc. That's also a ki nd of virtue, I guess -- it's fast and peppy. As far as history goes, Dan Brown apparently thinks that "most historians" give credence to the hoary forgeries and frauds promoted in sensationalist best-selle rs like Holy Blood, Holy Grail. This author gets the best of both worlds: simult aneously claiming that "it's just fiction," while introducing the novel with cla ims that the historical record contained within is "fact." That claim is ridicul ous. To pluck a random example, he spends some time talking about the Council of Nicaea, and incorrectly summarizes it as the origin of the doctrine of Christ's divinity by Constantine. He ignores the Arian controversy out of which it arose , which is like trying to explain the Treaty of Versailles without mentioning Wo rld War I. He ignores the documented fact, agreed upon even by the cheerleaders of the gnostics that he is sympathetic to, that the earliest gnostic doctrines h eld that Christ was *purely* God, and not really man -- the very reverse of the doctrine that serves as the linchpin of his novel's intellectual base (such as i t is). This is a bad novel for weak or misinformed Christians, but anyone famili ar with history should spot the train wreck of Brown's ideas a mile off. Oh yes, and in Brown's world, Opus Dei has shadowy assassin "monks" (in real lif e, Opus Dei is not a monastic order -- there are no Opus Dei monks, let alone tr ained assassins), and the Catholic Church has been promulgating known lies as it

s central dogmas, promotes violence throughout the world, and has been retarding the progress of science and knowledge for 2 millennia. Brown leaves the reader with the impression that this, too, is a matter of settled historical record. Oh , but then again, it's just fiction. Except when it's not. In general, if you're looking for a heady thriller wrapped around Christian arca na, I'd recommend Umberto Eco's excellent The Name of the Rose, not this dumbed down, by-the-numbers novel.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (65 people liked it) 6 comments 6100 Maura Jul 30, 2007 Maura rated it: 1 of 5 stars Read in July, 2006 recommends it for: someone interested in a completely mindless beach read I've finally started reading that ever so controversial best-seller by Dan Brown . Actually, not reading it, listening to it while driving around Lansing, MI. Th is book seems to have changed the minds of many Catholics (my grandfather includ ed) and Protestants alike. Granted, there have long been rumors of secret societ ies and organizations within the Roman Catholic Church, and historical cover-ups are rampant throughout civilization. HOWEVER, The book is crap. It's no...more I've finally started reading that ever so contr oversial best-seller by Dan Brown. Actually, not reading it, listening to it whi le driving around Lansing, MI. This book seems to have changed the minds of many Catholics (my grandfather included) and Protestants alike. Granted, there have long been rumors of secret societies and organizations within the Roman Catholic Church, and historical cover-ups are rampant throughout civilization. HOWEVER, The book is crap. It's not at all well written. Brown seems to feel that in orde r to impress the mystery of the supposed Holy Grail conspiracy upon his readers, he must be repetitive and condescending. It almost seems that the whole purpose of the book is to tell the world how much Brown knows about obscure art history and symbology, and that he is willing to explain it to the teeming masses of un iformed Christendom. His constant use of cliff-hanger chapter endings (almost ev ery chapter) makes the novel read like it was originally intended as a serial pu blication. Much of Brown's story hinges upon the loss of the Sacred Feminine, an d yet his main female character (a cryptologist for the French police) is consta ntly having to be led clue by clue to obvious conclusions by her quicker, more w orldly, male counterparts. I might have put some stock into Brown's "history," he writes with conviction, i f not much style. I may even have looked into some of his sources on my own. Tod ay, though, Brown completely lost any stock I would have put into his actual kno wledge. He referred, multiple times, to Jesus Christ as the Immaculate Conceptio n. As every half-informed Catholic knows, Mary was the Immaculate Conception (co nceived without sin), Jesus was the Miraculous Conception (conceived by the powe r of the Holy Spirit). How this novel came to be as popular as it is, I can understand. Everyone today is dying to get to the big TRUTH, something which can never be done in religion. Faith is by definition something that is unsubstantiated, we must just believe. What I can't understand is how people can believe this absolute drivel.

(less) Like this review? 9 comments 3300

yes Loading

(34 people liked it)

ryan Apr 17, 2007 ryan rated it: 5 of 5 stars (review of isbn 0385504209) recommends it for: open minded folk most of us have heard of this controverisal book. it takes an open minded person to read this and to remember it is just fiction. but it brings up a lot of impo rtant questions about the Christian church, and the loss of paganism and the res pect of the Goddess or the Woman. I don't care if I am the only one who likes this book. it is my own truth, and i will think what i want to think. Dan Brown didn't LEAD me or anyone else. he OP ENED our minds. simply and importantly...he was just a...more most of us have he ard of this controverisal book. it takes an open minded person to read this and to remember it is just fiction. but it brings up a lot of important questions ab out the Christian church, and the loss of paganism and the respect of the Goddes s or the Woman. I don't care if I am the only one who likes this book. it is my own truth, and i will think what i want to think. Dan Brown didn't LEAD me or anyone else. he OP ENED our minds. simply and importantly...he was just a catalyst for different th inking. that is a good thing...poorly written or not. if you finish the book you will notice that Dan Brown even makes it clear to rea ders through his characters words, that he doesn't want to destroy christianity because it has done so much good for so many people, and if it works for them, l et's let them continue to do what works for them. but find your own path. if you were or are a Christian ask yourself about the topics in this book. They are so eye opening. Jesus having a baby? totally possible...never thought of it before. never thought of it. is it true? who knows. Things like this are happeni ng all the time today...Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq? sound familiar? May be the church repressed information LIKE this because it was a threat to the chu rch. totally possible. The catholic church creating the biblical canon with a po litical agenda to wipe out paganism? actually this seems to be a fact. women bei ng oppressed due to the fear of religous zealot men in power losing their power. ..never looked at it that way. but this seems to be a fact too. is it helpful in broadening my perspective of the fact that christianity is just a religion made by fallible people. it sure is. does it open my mind to other faiths like pagan ism, judiasm, islam, bhuddism, and want to take the truths from all of them, and then THINK FOR MYSELF and figure out my own truth. it sure does...and that is w hat this book has probably done for many other people. why do you think Dan Brow n's book was on the bestseller list for so long...and became a movie...obviously it was doing some good.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (35 people liked it) 10 comments 3300 Ruth Sep 03, 2007 Ruth rated it: 1 of 5 stars bookshelves: total-crap Read in January, 2006 Impossibly complicated plot. Really, really, really bad writing. This book was f

orced upon me. I should have known better. Like this review? 63 comments 2312 yes Loading (23 people liked it)

Jeremy Nov 17, 2007 fbuser17814347 rated it: 1 of 5 stars Read in January, 2005 This book, and everything written by Dan Brown (to varying degrees), represent m uch of what I most dislike about pop literature. First of all, Mr. Brown, despit e teaching English at Amherst College, is a bad writer. This is not to say that I am a good writer. But I recognize a person who can't "show" you vivid scenes, he has to "tell you". Various characters wear expensive clothes. How do we know? The text says they're expensive. How do we know Mr. Langdon is brilliant? The t ...more This book, and everything written by Dan Brown (to varying degrees), rep resent much of what I most dislike about pop literature. First of all, Mr. Brown , despite teaching English at Amherst College, is a bad writer. This is not to s ay that I am a good writer. But I recognize a person who can't "show" you vivid scenes, he has to "tell you". Various characters wear expensive clothes. How do we know? The text says they're expensive. How do we know Mr. Langdon is brillian t? The text makes no bones about telling us. Langdon is also famous. Blah. Furthermore, Mr. Brown's books are ridiculously formulaic. Every single "thrille r" that he has written to date begins with the murder of a key character at the hands of a shadowy and "terrifying" assassin individual/group. This group is con trolled by a larger group with dubious intentions that generally have to do with world domination. The protagonist is introduced as an "expert" whose credential s relate to the matter at hand, and who takes the job of hunting down the bad gu ys. He enlists the aid of an extremely avuncular, wise, benevolent helper. This person provides assistance as the protagonist (with a love interest) finds clues to the murder, attempts to find the bad guys, is pursued by the assassin(s), al l while TIME IS RUNNING OUT. The avuncular father figure turns out to be pulling the strings of the assassins, is behind the original killing, and provides a fo rgettable monologue at the end where he pleas for understanding. But our hero ta kes him down. The end. I'm sorry if I just ruined all Dan Brown's books for you. Finally, Mr. Brown likes to write about what he sees as religious conflicts. The se conflicts take place between believers and non-. Unfortunately, he proves una ble to adequately and convincingly describe these conflicts, because he reveals a striking inability to understand why people believe, in the first place. His h ighly religious characters therefore invariably turn out to be crazed nutjobs. I don't like stories that exploit religion for entertainment, and then use the at tention that they draw to this entertainment to subtly undermine the reasons for faith. But by all means, read the Da Vinci Code. People say it's smart. Others describe it as a fast-paced thriller with historical and theological implications. It co uld've been in the hands of another author. (less) Like this review? yes Loading (28 people liked it) 1 comment 2000 Joey May 07, 2007 Joey rated it: 1 of 5 stars This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop

action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is no n-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This boo k is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.T his book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop a ction.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non -stop action.This bo...more This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop a ction.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non -stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.Th is book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop ac tion.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is nonstop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.Thi s book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop act ion.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-s top action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book i s non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop acti on.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-st op action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop actio n.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-sto p action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This b ook is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action .This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is n on-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This bo ok is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (20 people liked it) 5 comments 1800 Keely May 13, 2007 Keely rated it: 1 of 5 stars (review of isbn 0385504209) bookshelves: contemporary-fiction, novel, reviewed A thriller devoid of pacing or exciting language. A mystery devoid of clues, for eshadowing, or facts. A tell-all of half-truths based upon a forged document wri tten by a schizophrenic conman. A character-driven modern novel devoid of charac ter. The second draft of Angels and Demons. Page-turning action thanks to the li terary equivalent of pulling out at the moment of orgasm. A spiritual awakening built on new-age conspiracy theory. This book is many things, and none of them g ood, new, or interes...more A thriller devoid of pacing or exciting language. A mystery devoid of clues, foreshadowing, or facts. A tell-all of half-truths base d upon a forged document written by a schizophrenic conman. A character-driven m odern novel devoid of character. The second draft of Angels and Demons. Page-tur ning action thanks to the literary equivalent of pulling out at the moment of or gasm. A spiritual awakening built on new-age conspiracy theory. This book is man y things, and none of them good, new, or interesting. However, it is an excellen t litmus test for idealistic delusion. Upon the first reading, I must admit I found it a bit interesting, but then I tu rned the final page, and there was no bibliography. No explanation of how the au thor became familiar with all the concepts he claimed to 'faithfully portray'. H e wrote this book and pretended it was a history book, and then refused to suppo rt it in any way. And any history you can't check up on is a bad one.

He's no better than James Frey. In fact, he may be worse, since I know people wh o base their religious beliefs on this book, whereas Frey's only crime was wishi ng he was Scarface. And really, what macho thirtysomething male doesn't? Brown had good reasons for hiding his sources: they were forged by con-man Pierr e Plantard and snuck into the Bibliotheque National in Paris. The artistic 'icon ography' is also completely made-up, and was declared ludicrous by an art histor y professor of my acquaintance. The rest of Brown's book is filled with the sort of cliched religious conspiraci es you get from your first year as a theology student. Not only that, but these conspiracies were already explored by better writers in 'Foucault's Pendulum' an d the earlier 'Illuminatus! Trilogy'. Well, I've already done more legitimate historical research on this review than Brown did in his whole book, so I guess I'll call it a day.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (18 people liked it) 2 comments 1700 Ethan Jul 15, 2008 Ethan rated it: 3 of 5 stars (review of isbn 1400079179) Read in May, 2005 Four stars for pure entertainment value. However, Dave Barry's review gets five stars: `The Da Vinci Code,' cracked by Dave Barry I have written a blockbuster novel. My inspiration was The DaVinci Code by Dan B rown, which has sold 253 trillion copies in hardcover because it's such a compel ling page-turner. NOBODY can put this book down: MOTHER ON BEACH: Help! My child is being attacked by a shark! LIFEGUARD (looking up from The Da...more Four stars for pure entertainment value . However, Dave Barry's review gets five stars: `The Da Vinci Code,' cracked by Dave Barry I have written a blockbuster novel. My inspiration was The DaVinci Code by Dan B rown, which has sold 253 trillion copies in hardcover because it's such a compel ling page-turner. NOBODY can put this book down: MOTHER ON BEACH: Help! My child is being attacked by a shark! LIFEGUARD (looking up from The DaVinci Code: Not now! I just got to page 243, wh ere it turns out that one of the men depicted in ''The Last Supper'' is actually a woman! MOTHER: I know! Isn't that incredible? And it turns out that she's . . .

SHARK (spitting out the child): Don't give it away! I'm only on page 187! The key to The DaVinci Code is that it's filled with startling plot twists, and almost every chapter ends with a ''cliffhanger,'' so you have to keep reading to see what will happen. Using this formula, I wrote the following blockbuster nov el, titled The Constitution Conundrum. It's fairly short now, but when I get a h uge publishing contract, I'll flesh it out to 100,000 words by adding sentences. CHAPTER ONE: Handsome yet unmarried historian Hugh Heckman stood in the National Archives Building in Washington, D.C., squinting through the bulletproof glass at the U.S. Constitution. Suddenly, he made an amazing discovery. ''My God!'' he said, out loud. ``This is incredible! Soon I will say what it is. '' CHAPTER TWO: ''What is it?'' said a woman Heckman had never seen before who happ ened to be standing next to him. She was extremely beautiful, but wore glasses a s a sign of intelligence. ''My name is Desiree Legume,'' she said. Heckman felt he could trust her. ''Look at this!'' he said, pointing to the Constitution. ''My God, that's incredible!'' said Desiree. ``It's going to be very surprising when we finally reveal what we're talking about!'' CHAPTER THREE: ''Yes,'' said Hugh, ``incredible as it seems, there are extra wor ds written in the margin of the U.S. Constitution, and nobody ever noticed them until now! They appear to be in some kind of code.'' ''Let me look,'' said Desiree. ``In addition to being gorgeous, I am a trained c odebreaker. Oh my God!'' ''What is it?'' asked Hugh in an excited yet concerned tone of voice. ''The mess age,'' said Desiree, ``is . . . '' But just then, the chapter ended. CHAPTER FOUR: ''It's a fiendishly clever code,'' explained Desiree. 'As you can see, the words say: `White House White House Bo Bite House, Banana Fana Fo Fite House, Fe Fi Mo Mite House, White House.' '' ''Yes,'' said Hugh, frowning in bafflement. ``But what can it possibly mean?'' ''If I am correct,'' said Desiree, ``it is referring to . . . the White House!'' ''My God!'' said Hugh. ``That's where the president lives! Do you think . . . '' ''Do I think what?'' said Desiree. ''I don't know,'' said Hugh. ``But we're about to find out.'' CHAPTER FIVE: Hugh and Desiree crouched in some bushes next to the Oval Office. ''We'd better hurry up and solve this mystery,'' remarked Desiree anxiously. ''I t's only a matter of time before somebody notices that the Constitution is missi ng.'' She had slipped it into her purse at the National Archives while the guard wasn't looking.

''The answer must be here somewhere,'' said Hugh, studying the ancient document, which was brown from age and the fact that he had spilled Diet Peach Snapple on it. ''Wait a minute!'' he said. ``I've got it!'' ''What?'' said Desiree, her breasts heaving into view. ''The answer!'' said Hugh. ``It's . . . But just then, shots rang out. CHAPTER SIX: ''That was close!'' remarked Desiree. ``Fortunately, those shots ha d nothing to do with the plot of this book.'' ''Yes,'' said Hugh. ``Anyway, as I was saying, the answer is to hold the Constit ution up so that it is aligned with the White House and the Washington Monument. . . . There, do you see what I mean?'' ''My God!'' said Desiree, seeing what he meant. ``It's . . . '' ''Hold it right there,'' said the president of the United States. CHAPTER SEVEN: '' . . . and so you see,'' concluded the president, ``you two unc overed a shocking and fascinating secret that, if it should ever get out, could change the course of history.'' ''Mr. President,'' said Desiree, ``thank you for that riveting and satisfying ex planation, which will be fleshed out into much greater detail once there is a pu blishing contract.'' ''Also,'' noted Hugh, ``we may use some beverage other than Snapple, depending o n what kind of product-placement deals can be worked out.'' ''Good,'' said the president. ``Now can I have the Constitution back?'' They all enjoyed a hearty laugh, for they knew that the movie rights were also a vailable...(less) Like this review? yes Loading (29 people liked it) add a comment 1600 Lauren Oct 19, 2007 Lauren rated it: 1 of 5 stars Read in January, 2004 This book, this book, this hopelessly stupid book. It's okay. It's something to read. It's not the worst book I've ever read. I did get through the whole thing. But, simply, it is not THAT good. I will now proceed to quote from another reviewer, Mer, who has said exactly wha t I have been saying for years -albeit she does it far more eloquently than I: "The characters are weakly drawn. The dialog is excruciating. The research is sh oddy and self-serving at best. The plot, no m...more This book, this book, this hopelessly stupid book. It's okay. It's something to read. It's not the worst bo ok I've ever read. I did get through the whole thing. But, simply, it is not THA T good. I will now proceed to quote from another reviewer, Mer, who has said exactly wha

t I have been saying for years -albeit she does it far more eloquently than I: "The characters are weakly drawn. The dialog is excruciating. The research is sh oddy and self-serving at best. The plot, no matter how open-minded you are, is b eyond ludicrous.(...) "I'm all for fictional subversion of the dominant Catholic paradigm, but only if the subverter knows what the hell they're talking about. Brown DOESN'T. He's al l "la la la, connect the dots" but the picture he comes up with is awkward and u nconvincing. "The DaVinci Code is a dead easy, nay, downright lazy read, and yet droves of pe ople are patting themselves on the back for having read and *gasp* actually unde rstood it. Like this is some spectacular achievement? WHY? What, because the sli pcover describes it as "erudite"? Are you fucking kidding me? "Don't believe the hype, kids. You are profoundly more intelligent than this hol iday page-turner gives you credit for." So, so, so true. And if you've read "Angels and Demons" you'll see that it start s out precisely the way "Code" does, nearly word-for-word, even using the dreade d looks-at-himself-in-the-mirror character description cop-out. This, and the man (the author, that is) looks like a troll. A self-aggrandizing oh-so-clever stuffed pompous troll. All he did was capitalize on a theme that's been out there for years, insist that it was all 100% factual, and put a pretty red cover on it. He's created a sensation and got himself a movie, I'll give him that. I bet he swims around in vaults of money every night cackling at his delu ded readership. But the book is just NOT THAT GOOD. Get over it. Want something historical? Read Anya Seton. Something thrilling? Read Thomas Tryon. Richard North Patterson. Jo n Krakauer. Croikey, even Clive Cussler! Anything but that damn Dan Brown.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (17 people liked it) add a comment 1200 Tortla Dec 11, 2007 Tortla rated it: 1 of 5 stars bookshelves: suckysuckybooks Read in January, 2006 recommends it for: nobody, ever I accidentally deleted this from my books. So that sucks. I don't remember when I read it anymore. It was horrible. EDIT: ...But not quite as horrible as the idiotic discussion which this review spawned . I hate this book. That is my opinion. Many people share that opinion. I do not claim to be capable of writing a better book (although I suspect I already have written better pieces of literature, for some school assignment or something). You can like this book if you want. But if...more I accidentally deleted this fr om my books. So that sucks. I don't remember when I read it anymore. It was horr ible. EDIT: ...But not quite as horrible as the idiotic discussion which this review spawned . I hate this book. That is my opinion. Many people share that opinion. I do not claim to be capable of writing a better book (although I suspect I already have written better pieces of literature, for some school assignment or something). You can like this book if you want. But if you do, please do not embarrass yours elf by stating such a thing publicly. Especially on this review's comments. Beca

use I'm deleting them all. PS The whole "if you can't do better, you have no right to criticize" thing is not a valid argument. So please stop making it. Please.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (13 people liked it) add a comment 1177 CJ Mar 26, 2008 CJ rated it: 1 of 5 stars bookshelves: mystery Read in January, 2005 recommends it for: people who are gullible Caveat Academics!!! I won't belabor the obvious, as it's been done quite well by other reviewers, bu t I just couldn't stand not to add my own "hear hear!" to the fray. If you're go ing to create a character who is an expert, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make sure you c heck your facts! Whoever edited this drivel ought to be sewn in a sack with a ra bid raccoon and flung into Lake Michigan. And just as a matter of good taste - your expert should not be an expert in ever ything under...more Caveat Academics!!! I won't belabor the obvious, as it's been done quite well by other reviewers, bu t I just couldn't stand not to add my own "hear hear!" to the fray. If you're go ing to create a character who is an expert, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make sure you c heck your facts! Whoever edited this drivel ought to be sewn in a sack with a ra bid raccoon and flung into Lake Michigan. And just as a matter of good taste - your expert should not be an expert in ever ything under the sun. That's one of the hallmarks of poor writing. Even if I were not a practicing pagan, I would find it stretching credibility th at every single item the characters run across is a symbol of goddess worship. F ive pointed star? Goddess worship. Chalice? Goddess worship. Porcelain toilet bo wl? Goddess worship. Pilot ball point pen? Goddess worship. You get the general idea. Not only is every item part of the mythology of the divine feminine, but e very number is also part of the divine feminine. Hello? Is a cigar NEVER just a cigar? And some of the claims of symbolism are just plain wrong, as the editor would ha ve found out if he'd bothered to do some fact checking. Remember those military chevrons that, because of the way they were pointed, represented the female divi ne and those poor slobs of soldiers had been running around all these countless centuries with goddess symbols flaunted on their uniforms without knowing it? Th e only problem with that premise is that the chevrons facing in their current di rection is relatively recent - according to my military historian husband, they faced the OPPOSITE direction for quite some time before being reversed (for what reason, I have no idea...unless the generals all got together and decided they didn't have quite enough goddess symbols on their uniforms and needed it fixed p ost haste). My theology professor ended up traveling around the country giving talks about t his book to thousands of interested people. He loves the book if only because he 's now giving pretty much the same information that he used to give to dozing fr eshman and sophomores to packed theaters of interested listeners. He tells a sto ry about being somewhere in southern Ohio and making a joking remark about the c elice being something that all Catholics wore and how now the secret was out, an

d there was a lady in the back row who elbowed her husband and said "See? I told you so!" The increased interest in history is about the only positive thing tha t's come out of this book. Honestly, you don't need to make anything up about th e Catholic church to point out that it's been the source of some horrible things . I could go on about the poor research and editing in this book, but others have done a pretty thorough job of finding the problems with it. If you want a decent page turner, go for it. If you want something well research ed and accurate, give this one a big ol' pass.

(less) Like this review? 4 comments 1000

yes Loading

(15 people liked it)

Michael Jun 26, 2007 Michael rated it: 1 of 5 stars I read the Baigent book a decade before I read this novel. Somehow, Brown managed to "dumbify" everything. Afterwards I read Eco to wash the taste out of my brain. Like this review? yes Loading (9 people liked it) add a comment 916 AJ Griffin Jul 03, 2007 AJ Griffin rated it: 2 of 5 stars (review of isbn 0552149519) recommends it for: trying to think of a clever joke here....the pope? ron howard ? i don't know. no new ground here First of all, let's try to rid our mind of all the hype and hoopla surrounding t he whole thing. Let's pretend the whole thing is just some spiral bound notebook that you found on the train and read because you were lonely. Ok, having accomplished that, let's dole out some compliments. Good plot, Danny boy! You managed to write an interesting crime/mystery/whatever thing WHILE mana ging to blaspheme one of the most worshiped dudes of all time. That takes some c reativity, and some ...more First of all, let's try to rid our mind of all the h ype and hoopla surrounding the whole thing. Let's pretend the whole thing is jus t some spiral bound notebook that you found on the train and read because you we re lonely. Ok, having accomplished that, let's dole out some compliments. Good plot, Danny boy! You managed to write an interesting crime/mystery/whatever thing WHILE mana ging to blaspheme one of the most worshiped dudes of all time. That takes some c reativity, and some balls. Kudos. If i might suggest something, though- and I realize this is hurtful, but take it like a man big guy- you probably could have done the literary world a favor by giving this wonderful little story to, er, a writer. I mean, it's nice to be abl

e to read the whole thing in one afternoon without even having to get up for a p iss, but I couldn't help but feel like I was reading the newspaper the whole tim e. And that's a big part of a book's validity- the whole "quality of writing" th ing. Anyway, you kind of got fucked over with the whole international attention thing - now all the 'cool' people in the world will diss on your book because it's way overblown, and the only people who still embrace will be those poor little simp letons who don't know the difference between hip and square. Looks like it's a l ife in the lower-middle class for you, Mr. Brown. But hey- enjoy that swimming pool filled with gold doubloons. (less) Like this review? yes Loading (8 people liked it) add a comment 900 mary Apr 23, 2007 mary rated it: 3 of 5 stars it's an action movie! it's a book! it's an action movie! it surprises me that the movie version was so dull, having such a simple adapted screenplay to write. this book reads like a blockbuster looks. and i will admit that i totally loved it while i was reading and forgot it promptly after, but i did the same when i watched vin diesel in XXX. it's a very fun read. it's horrendously written, the characters are rather shall ow, there are enough chase scenes and things popping...more it's an action movie ! it's a book! it's an action movie! it surprises me that the movie version was so dull, having such a simple adapted screenplay to write. this book reads like a blockbuster looks. and i will admit that i totally loved it while i was reading and forgot it promptly after, but i did the same when i watched vin diesel in XXX. it's a very fun read. it's horrendously written, the characters are rather shall ow, there are enough chase scenes and things popping out of dark corners to sati sfy anyone's juvenile appetite for suspense. and if you're catholic or knowledge able at all about religion, it does provide some fodder for thought in between a ll the drama. but after you think, you realize that none of this information, tr ue or not, is really that shocking and has little effect on the catholic faith. people would do well to learn about the nature and history of their belief syste m a little more. i still can't figure out how this book has caused so much controversy. let me re phrase that. i still can't figure out how people can be so oblivious and closemi nded as to be scandalized by drivelly fiction. i was on an airplane a while ago and i sat next to a man reading "cracking the davinci code" or one of those othe r pissed off books that came out soon after. i asked him what he thought of the book. he said, 'oh! i've never read the da vinci code! it goes against the catho lic church! why would i read such blasphemy? i just want to be armed with inform ation when i speak to some simple-minded person who believes that heretic dan br own!" i wish i could make that kind of stuff up. i was silent, smiled and nodded, and quickly opened up Kavalier and Clay. i simp ly had no idea how to respond to someone who was taking notes on a book to colle ct information on a novel that he had never read so he could disprove the opinio

ns of those who thought it was true. what? (less) Like this review? add a comment 900

yes Loading

(8 people liked it)

Brian Aug 14, 2007 Brian rated it: 1 of 5 stars Read in July, 2004 recommends it for: No one I read this because someone recommended to me. To this day I would like tell the m off. This book is complete crap. Stereotypical one-dimensional characters (c'm on! an albino monk assassin?? Gimme a break people!). There are really only 4-5 actual characters so it is no mystery of "whodunnit?" Yeah it's a page-turner. So what? So is any Dr. Seuss book. But at least Dr. Seu ss was a genius. Dan Brown is a hack. A rich hack, now. But totally talentless. He is the Brittney Spea...more I read this because someone recommended to me. To this day I would like tell them off. This book is complete crap. Stereotypical one-dimensional characters (c'mon! an albino monk assassin?? Gimme a break peopl e!). There are really only 4-5 actual characters so it is no mystery of "whodunn it?" Yeah it's a page-turner. So what? So is any Dr. Seuss book. But at least Dr. Seu ss was a genius. Dan Brown is a hack. A rich hack, now. But totally talentless. He is the Brittney Spears of authors. All titilation and no talent. Except in on e area. He knows what people want and how to deliver it with all the controversy to sell books. He knows that the best way to stir a controversy is to have a big enough target. Who better than the "mysterious Catholic Church?" It's already common-place to bash Catholocism anyway and basically last surviving practicing prejudice. And t aking a page out of the hype with "The Last Temptation of Christ" or "Dogma" Dan Brown knew that controversy and protests lead to more sales. I won't even get into the total disregard for "factual" things that he uses in t he book (such as works of Leonardo DaVinci, various church's, Opus Dei, etc) bec ause it just isn't worth it. You want real literature with secret societies and something that you can really sink your teeth and the brain that God intended you to use, then read Umberto E co's "Foucault's Pendulum." Bottom line: Awful book. (less) Like this review? yes Loading 1 comment 800 Crystal Jul 10, 2007 Crystal rated it: 1 of 5 stars bookshelves: books-i-didn-t-enjoy, novels Owns a copy Read in January, 2005 recommends it for: men, conspiracy buffs, religious skeptics Believe it or not, my BOSS lent me this book. He said it was so great that I HAD (7 people liked it)

to read it, and he pressed it into my hands. I said thanks in surprise, because that was about as personal as my boss ever got. well, imagine the awkwardness w hen I didn't really like the book. what do you say to the man who signs your pay checks when you think his book is nothing more than a creative version of what I call the man's romance novel--boring, average man (okay, in this book very smar t--but not special ...more Believe it or not, my BOSS lent me this book. He said it was so great that I HAD to read it, and he pressed it into my hands. I said thanks in surprise, because that was about as personal as my boss ever got. well , imagine the awkwardness when I didn't really like the book. what do you say to the man who signs your paychecks when you think his book is nothing more than a creative version of what I call the man's romance novel--boring, average man (o kay, in this book very smart--but not special looking) finds incredibly beautifu l and often smart woman to follow him through thick and thin and all manner of l udicrous plots and danger for some unknown reason. It's just a religious conspir acy version of the Bourne Identity or any other book like that. What average guy wouldn't love to believe that a hot woman would follow him around, as he impres ses and saves her from all kinds of dangers. except I don't get much out of that myself, not being a guy, and I didn't think there was much to the whole plot of religious conspiracy, having majored in Bibl ical studies in college, and knowing how hokey and unrealistic some of this stuf f is. and don't even get me started on weak arguments and faulty logic. (SPOILER ALERT: "don't worship Jesus because He was a normal guy who married a woman and had a kid--no, but go ahead and pray to his fully human wife who's DEAD!" yes, clearly a good argument.) but, hey, my boss likes Jennifer Aniston a lot too, and she doesn't do much for me either. ;)(less) Like this review? yes Loading (7 people liked it) 1 comment 800 rachel Apr 03, 2007 rachel rated it: 1 of 5 stars Read in July, 2006 I was genuinely confused by the stupidity of the DaVinci code. The two protagoni sts were touted as supergeniuses, yet kept making the most amazing dumbfuck move s. Sometimes this could be written off as making the book accessible to its inte nded public (e.g., to insure that his readers understand the concept of a keysto ne, Brown has one of his supergenius characters exclaim, "but wait, vaulted ceil ings don't *have* keys!" as an intro to a suitable-for-third-graders explanation ). Othe...more I was genuinely confused by the stupidity of the DaVinci code. Th e two protagonists were touted as supergeniuses, yet kept making the most amazin g dumbfuck moves. Sometimes this could be written off as making the book accessi ble to its intended public (e.g., to insure that his readers understand the conc ept of a keystone, Brown has one of his supergenius characters exclaim, "but wai t, vaulted ceilings don't *have* keys!" as an intro to a suitable-for-third-grad ers explanation). Other times, it was just ridiculous and disorienting. I spent significant mental energy trying to rationalize why the supergenius characters w ere stealing an armored van from the swiss bank and driving it straight to their hideout when *obviously* any such van would be fitted with a tracking device an d thus was a dangerous thing to leave parked right outside your "safehouse". In fact, I had half convinced myself that there must be some supersecret reason tha t I just didn't know about as to why the swiss bank wouldn't want its vans to be traceable (the system could be hacked into, necessitates getting too many outsi de parties involved, etc). But then it turned out that I had been right all alon g - the van *was* being tracked. The Supergeniuses just hadn't considered that p ossibility. Duh. Not every book has to be brilliant. Sometimes a nice, fun, escapist mystery nove

l really hits the spot. But dude, this kind of inconsistency and bad writing (an d bad imagination!) just cannot be tolerated. As a reasonably smart person, I wa s offended at the limitations Dan Brown seems to have projected onto human intel ligence - both with respect to his characters and his audience.(less) Like this review? yes Loading (7 people liked it) 1 comment 800 Jen3n Jun 04, 2008 Jen3n rated it: 1 of 5 stars bookshelves: awful, books-made-into-movies, fantasy, history, mystery I found this book condescending, unexciting, and ill thought-out. I wanted it to be better. I had been TOLD it was fun. I was lied to. This is an awful book. Like this review? yes Loading (10 people liked it) add a comment 716 Robert Feb 22, 2008 Robert rated it: 5 of 5 stars (review of isbn 1400079179) bookshelves: female-divinity For the most part, it seems that people either passionately love this book or th ey passionately hate it. I happen to be one of the former. For my part, I don't see the book so much as an indictment of the Catholic Church in particular but o f religious extremism and religion interfering in political process in general. The unwarranted political control granted to extreme religious organizations lik e the CBN is an issue that we will be forced to address one way or the other. To my eye, our politic...more For the most part, it seems that people either passi onately love this book or they passionately hate it. I happen to be one of the f ormer. For my part, I don't see the book so much as an indictment of the Catholi c Church in particular but of religious extremism and religion interfering in po litical process in general. The unwarranted political control granted to extreme religious organizations like the CBN is an issue that we will be forced to addr ess one way or the other. To my eye, our political process has been poisoned by it and the danger of theocracy is quite real. Furthermore, Brown's indictment of the Church for removing or suppressing feminine divinity figures is justified a nd needs a much closer look. Women do not have enough of a role in religion, rel igious practice, heroic myths, and creation myths, nor are they portrayed as div inity figures enough. In short, our religious systems and institutions lack bala nce and have a bias to suppress issues, stories, and roles that empower women to live as equals to men. Finally, Brown wrote his story simplistically, in my vie w, to spread his tale to as broad an audience as possible. Though it is not as p ristine a narrative as, say, Umberto Eco, the message it conveys is one that nee ds to be heard. More obscure books on the matter are not as accessible as Da Vin ci Code and if someone were to write an accessible book of genius on this subjec t, I would give him/her all due praise. In the meantime, Dan Brown is telling a story that needs to be told. It is one that has been kept quiet and in the dark for far too long.(less) It takes guts to write a novel that combines an ancient secret brotherhood, the Swiss Conseil Europen pour la Recherche Nuclaire, a papal conclave, mysterious amb igrams, a plot against the Vatican, a mad scientist in a wheelchair, particles o f antimatter, jets that can travel 15,000 miles per hour, crafty assassins, a be autiful Italian physicist, and a Harvard professor of religious iconology. It ta kes talent to make that novel anything but ridiculous. Kudos to Dan Brown (Digit al Fortress) for achieving the nearly impossible. Angels & Demons is a no-holdsbarred, pull-out-all-the-stops, breathless tangle of a thriller--think Katherine

Neville's The Eight (but cleverer) or Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum (but mo re accessible). Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon is shocked to find proof that the legendary s ecret society, the Illuminati--dedicated since the time of Galileo to promoting the interests of science and condemning the blind faith of Catholicism--is alive , well, and murderously active. Brilliant physicist Leonardo Vetra has been murd ered, his eyes plucked out, and the society's ancient symbol branded upon his ch est. His final discovery, antimatter, the most powerful and dangerous energy sou rce known to man, has disappeared--only to be hidden somewhere beneath Vatican C ity on the eve of the election of a new pope. Langdon and Vittoria, Vetra's daug hter and colleague, embark on a frantic hunt through the streets, churches, and catacombs of Rome, following a 400-year-old trail to the lair of the Illuminati, to prevent the incineration of civilization. Brown seems as much juggler as author--there are lots and lots of balls in the a ir in this novel, yet Brown manages to hurl the reader headlong into an almost s urreal suspension of disbelief. While the reader might wish for a little more sa rdonic humor from Langdon, and a little less bombastic philosophizing on the ete rnal conflict between religion and science, these are less fatal flaws than nigg ling annoyances--readers should have no trouble skimming past them and immersing themselves in a heck of a good read. "Brain candy" it may be, but my! It's tast y. --Kelly Flynn