Comments on: The Da Vinci Code

By: jjohnsen

jjohnsen — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:08:50 +0000

I hated this book. Not because of the religious content, but because I think it’s so poorly written. It was bad enough that I thought about abandoning it a couple of times, but kept going because so many people I know raved about it(their opinion on books no longer matters to me).

By: Johnsenclan » Blog Archive » Book Review: Born Standing Up

Johnsenclan » Blog Archive » Book Review: Born Standing Up — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:00:38 +0000

[...] reviews The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown, So Long and Thanks for All the Fish by Douglas Adams, Dr. Seuss & Mr. Geisel by [...]

By: Ben

Ben — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:34:29 +0000

Yeah, being irreverent is the least of the book’s concerns. It’s no wonder I put this garbage off for so long.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:28:02 +0000

I’ve gotten into fights with people who assume I dislike the book so vehemently because it counters the New Testament. That’s a whole separate argument; I could read a well-written book that goes against the Bible, and I have. But foremost among The DaVinci Code’s sins is that it sucks. A lot. And hard. Brown’s "prose" makes James Patterson and John Grisham look like Wordsworth and Frost by comparison.

By: Adam G.

Adam G. — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:18:37 +0000

Bravo, sir.

The only thing worse than The Da Vinci Code as a book is The Da Vinci Code as a film. God, it’s awful. No, it’s worse than awful. It’s arse gravy. Arse gravy of the worse sort (the kind that occurrs after a day of eating nothing but pizza rolls and Buffalo Wild Wings).

By: Ben

Ben — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:20:37 +0000

It’s going to be my favorite phrase now.

By: Brady

Brady — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:19:28 +0000

Heh. "Arse gravy."

I put the book down around page 20 and never picked it up when he wrote that the public considered his main character "The Harrison Ford of the Religious Symbology crowd" or some such nonsense.

It’s depressing that pseudo-historical candy corn like this and National Treasure is so popular. Sure, it ostensibly gets people interested in history, but the wrong kind of history- the kind where "research" equals "I read this on the dust jacket of a critically-crucified book from twenty years ago" and "reasoned analysis and careful conclusions" equal "wouldn’t it be cool if?"

Arse gravy. You know I’m using that one at some point.

By: AcademyX

AcademyX — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 03:05:44 +0000

Finally you have reviewed a book that i’ve read.

I’ve read Angels & Demons as well, many features of the plot are similar to The Da Vinci Code – for example, starting of with a dead guy with a synbol drawn on him. It looks like Dan Brown doesn’t get too many ideas.

# I shouldn’t say “inexplicably” because I know why it sells: people are stupid

Ha ha ha.

By: Conor

Conor — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:43:08 +0000

Impressive that you waded through that one. I never touched it. I did, however, tackle D&W, which was bar none the worst piece of trash I have ever read. Thank you for providing critical examples of Brown’s atrocious writing style—in my opinion, that’s really the only thing that need be addressed in any review of a book of his.

Scarringly bad. I think I actually destroyed the copy of D&W I read, which caused no small list of compunctions on my part. But it had to be done. The book was like goatse in text form.

By: Maw Books

Maw Books — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:06:42 +0000

I read this book right before the movie came out. I just thought it was "okay," nothing to get excited about. I’m curious as to what you think of Angels and Demons (if you’ve read it, I’m assuming no). My mother-in-law raves about this book! I picked it up second hand for a couple dollars and it’s been sitting on my bookshelf for months. Not in a hurry to read it, although I’ll get to it sometime.