The Da Vinci code (1 Viewer)

[Angelo.M]

Those of you who enjoyed the book might also want to check out the works of Arturo Perez-Reverte; his stuff has been called "summer reading for intellectuals" and "Umberto Eco-lite." Doesn't really float my boat entirely, but the stuff is fairly well-written and interesting.

I've only read two: The Club Dumas and The Flanders Panel, both of which were entertaining. Looks like most of his stuff is available at Amazon.

 

[Jason_Els]

I bought the unabridged CD edition and DAMN! is it a ride! I listen to it while commuting and then find myself driving 40 on the way home so I can hear more. The reading of it is excellent and the reader's characterization of Sir Lee is a riot.

I'm not sure research really has anything to do with it. When a book says "Fiction", on the cover I assume that everything is a fabrication short of what I already know exists. Fiction is free to be what it is and in novels like these you take everything with a grain of salt.

As someone who majored in art history I'm very happy to see a popular novel revolve around some great works as I hope it will inspire people to go see great art. My advice is to enjoy the ride and then go see the real things in the Louvre (don't miss the Delacroix room).

 

[Jon_Are]

I agree totally. I just don't think Brown is very skilled at writing fiction.

Jon

 

[Matt Gordon]

That is his claim, but it's not true.

 

[Carlo_M]

Well Matt, now that you're attacking specific facts that he got wrong, that is fine (I was aware of the Dead Sea Scrolls mis-date).

But you say nothing of the specifics in your original post. Instead, what you say is this:
which intimates the banned discussion of religion. That is what I was referring to with my reply, because with your last line that is what I thought you intimated. But now, adhering to forum rules, I absolutely will not be drawn into a discussion on that topic. I've been here long enough to know when to stop!

 

[Matt Gordon]

Yup.

 

[Tom Meyer]

I read the whole friggin' thing in about 7 hrs on the plane back from Europe and while it was indeed a good read, I didn't think much of the writing. Very sophomoric portrayals of the characters, especially the lame 'have a spot of tea, mate ?"-type stuff that the english guy spewed every paragraph. As for the 'research', well, it's fiction, don't get so worked up over it.

While I'm sure it'll be made into a movie (it's already in IMDb, in fact http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0382625/ ... Ron howard directs !) , they'll have to do some major trimming of the "library scenes" (all you Buffy fans know what I'm talking about). Waaaay too much expository fact reciting going on. On that note, who would play whom ? My guesses .... heavily influenced by what I've watched lately

Langdon -- Viggo Mortenson or Russell Crowe
Sophie -- Emmanuel Beart or Virgine Ledoyan, maybe Kate Winslett (tho I hear Kate Beckinsale as well)
Bezu Fache - Jean Reno. no way anyone else could do it.
Teabing -- Ian McKellan, Sean Connery,
Silas -- ?
Aringarosa -- ?

 

[Rich Malloy]

I read "The Da Vinci Code" last spring break in Cancun, and found it not at all bad for genre fiction and a fairly excellent beach-read. Someone upthread mentioned Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum", finding "DVCode" to be a pale imitation. In many ways, I agree. But I don't suspect they're going for the same audience.

Brown's hit upon a perfect little formula here that he seems to have repeated in his subsequent book. I'm not real familiar with the genre, but Brown strike's me as practically a master of the "can't-put-it-down page-turner". To put it mildly, Umberto Eco's dense prose is a tad more, er, challenging, and I've never considered him to be a natural writer. I think Eco would agree that he's a scholar and philosopher first, who happens to enjoy writing fiction. As a matter of fact, Umberto Eco happens to be a professor of semiotics, which is just about the exact same thing that Dan Brown's hero is in "the Da Vinci Code" (a professor of symbology, is how he puts it, I think).

And while "Foucault's Pendulum" is also kinda-sorta a detective novel (like Eco's earlier novel "The Name of the Rose"), what most people love about Brown's prose and genre formulation they certainly won't find in Eco's novels. Even Eco's fans, I suspect, would admit to tough slogging here and there, and I doubt many would take "Foucault's Pendulum" to the beach over spring break.

However, Eco's novel ultimately is so much more satisfying than Brown's, but it's also a much more self-consciously "serious" work. It's "idea-driven" as opposed to "plot-driven". (No, Brown doesn't skimp on the "ideas", but these are primarily useful only in driving the plot.) It takes several hundred pages before one can really latch onto much of a "plot" at all in "Pendulum", whereas "The Code", like most suspense/mystery/thrillers, I guess, is primarily a plot-driven affair. Brown fills his novel with action, whereas Eco stuffs his with information.

Basically, Eco's novel is about a trio of scholars who put out a call for manuscripts regarding the various "secret societies" over the centuries (the Rosicrucians, Knights Templar, Masons, etc.) and all the various conspiracy theories regarding them. They then feed these into a computer which starts synthesizing them into something akin to "the Big Toe", that is, the "Theory Of Everything", a single cosmic plan that incorporates and accounts for every nutty conspiracy theory over the ages. As a result, they discover that the movements of these groups (and the drift of history, itself) is controlled via "telluric forces" (psychic waves that control all). And it is the control of these forces that every secret society (or government) has been seeking through various means: the Celt's Stonehenge, the Egyptian's pyramids, the Gothic's cathedral spires, the Eiffel Tower... and Foucault's Pendulum. Is that the laying of claim by the "postmoderns", of which Eco is certainly one?

Ma gavte la nata!

 

[Angelo.M]

Well, one could argue that reading Foucault's Pendulum in English isn't reading Eco at all, but rather William Weaver. I will grant you, however, that it's a book of staggering density, and not exactly an easy read (nor could it have been an easy translation for Weaver).

I have not tackled any of Eco's writings in Italian, although I suppose I ought to try. My suspicion, however, is that Eco's writing isn't exactly crystalline prose in the original.

Well, neither is Ulysses.

At any rate, if you've enjoyed Eco's fiction you might want to have a crack at his non-fiction. Movie fans might want to sample his essay on serials/sequels, from Eco's Limits of Interpretation. I think it's still in-print.

 

[Carlo_M]

This I agree with (and I liked the book).

What kept me interested is the "research" (and the leaps of faith he takes from that) and the fictional "what if" scenarios re: history and religious history.

As far as a writer of characters about whom readers care and are interested in...well let's just say Dan Brown needs work on that. But Brown is very much like Crichton whose books are researched, but whose characters are pretty much there to service the real interesting parts of the story - the alternative theories that can spin off of the "research".

Don't go reading The Da Vinci Code and looking for well fleshed out characters that you'll care about. Simply won't happen.

 

[Jason_Els]

Quite true as it's assumed that characterization isn't necessary since the actors will supply that when the movie is made. This book has screenplay written all over it. Authors like Chrighton, Grisham, et al. do it all the time. They're writing a screeplay and the rhythms of the book mimic the rhythms of a modern action-suspense movie (action every 10 minutes), using cliff-hangers for scene endings, exotic locales, etc. Brown is writing with an eye to the movie, plain and simple. Let the actors and the director worry about characterizations.

It's not a great book but it's a fun book, and that's enough. If I want real literature I look elsewhere, but for commuting material, it's easily-digestible.

Now for my casting:

Jacques Sauniere---- would have liked Francois Truffaut but alas, Tim Curry could do it (think about it).

Tom Langdon---- Timothy Hutton (I have faith)

Sophie Nevue---- Sophie Marceau (beautiful and French)

Silas---- Crispin Glover

Sir Leigh Teabing---- Nathan Lane

Chief Inspector Fache---- Daniel Auteuil

Bishop Aringarosa---- Christopher Walken

Legaludec---- Gary Oldman

But the Hollywood version would be very different:

Jacques Sauniere---- Wilfred Brimley

Tom Langdon---- Vin Diesel

Sophie Neveu---- Jessica Simpson

Silas---- Elijah Wood

Sir Leigh Teabing---- Sylvester Stallone

Chief Inspector Fache---- Keanu Reeves (he does accents so well)

Bishop Aringarosa---- Robert Redford

Legaludec----- Woody Harrelson

 

[Kevin_Spradley]

I like the casting list, however, in the hollywood list, I just don't see how Jessica Simpson can pull off being a cryptographer.

I think it would be hilarous to see her try to play a highly technical minded person, not to mention a good-looking highly technical minded person.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Hilarious, Jason!

 

[Dan D.]

The fantasy casting game - one of my favorites! Here's my pass:

Langdon: Russell Crowe
Sophie: Sophie Marceau (good call Jason)
Silas: David Morse
Teabing: Robbie Coltrane
Fache: Tcheky Karyo
Aringarosa: Ian McKellan
Legaludec: Alan Rickman

Most of those choices are almost cliche, but we are talking about a good popcorn thriller here (based on the source material), not Citizen Kane.

 

[Dave Poehlman]

Okay.. I just finished reading this book, so I thought I would revive this thread.

Overall, I liked it... and it does raise some interesting points. Although, on occasion, it seemed like Brown was going out of his way just to toss out some theory or fact. I would've like to see him be a little less blatant about it.

It will be interesting to see how this is all handled in the film. At least they've got a respectable director in Ron Howard.

As far as casting goes... I think Lee Evans should play Teabing. I kept thinking of his "Something About Mary" character everytime the book mentioned Teabing's crutches and accent. "Right-o, Mary"

 

[Carlo_M]

heh heh
I just started reading "Angels and Demons" [yes I know it came out before DVC], but as I started reading I was like: "hey! this is the same book all over again!"

100 pages into it, and that thought still hasn't changed. Of course, I did read a few Grisham Lawyer novels which followed the same formulas so I'm not one to throw stones.

 

[Dan D.]

I started reading Dan Brown's first book "Digital Fortress" and had to toss it after about 40 pages. Complete and total crap. Hysterically over-dramatized, horribly rendered characters, terrible writing, it was painful.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

If the concepts intrigue you, there's plenty more (pretty much directly lifted by Brown) in Holy Blood Holy Grail and its sequel, The Messianic Legacy.

A little online research will point you towards the notion the the Priory of Sion was a hoax by a clique of French fascists & royalists, for motives not entirely clear, but it's fun for conspiracy fans in any event.

 

[Marc_Sulinski]

As bad as Digital Fortress is, it is still way better than Deception Point, which I think is Dan Brown's worst book.

 

[Christ Reynolds]

my gf raves about this book, told me to run out and get it. she took a little while to do it, she is reading it in spanish (going to school in madrid), but she told me i would like it. is it in paperback yet?
that reminds me of when i first got addicted to crack. all i wanted to do was read that crack until the sun came up!

CJ