The Da Vinci Code

---

I'm far from an avid reader (in fact I'd be lucky to read more than one book a year), but I finally picked up The Da Vinci Code from my desk, which had been collecting dust for a few months...and...

Wow.

I'm more engaged in a book than I've ever been before. I'm flying through this thing at a record-setting pace for myself.

Anyone else read it? Liked it? Disliked it?

I can see why the book is/was so popular. Most everyone loves a good conspiracy theory. :grin:

Oh, and by the way, I haven't seen the movie. I held off on the movie since I hadn't read the book yet. So I can't really comment on that yet.

first off the book is far better than the film, i didn't like the film but i enjoyed the book for what it was.............

The movie was not bad, but it will be incomprehensible unless you read the book first.The story were engaging (although I found one of the main premises not to be very plausible), and it touches on some interesting ideas in modern theology, it is definitely not a history book.It was a fun (and quick) read, though.

i never read the book or saw the movie..is it worth reading?? i love readin. so should i get it? :smile:

It's worth reading. It won't take more than a few days. It's not going to be a literary classic, though.

I'm sure Dan Brown is too busy counting his millions to give a hairies about critical acclaim!

Like Harry Potter, it's a fun thing...nothing wrong with that. Anything that gets kids and adults to read is good. And compared to The Bridges of Madison County, The Davinci Code is masterfully written.

Bridges is my touchstone for bad writing. It's barfilicious.

is Bridges that bad? lolit's not even something I would concider reading... or see the movie.At the risk of being very unpopular with many members of this board... including a few mods, there is this certian, very popular author that I just can't stand. I won't name names but suffice to say, the writing style is so styalistc that it's hard to forget that you're reading a book rather than getting lost in the story.

Yes, Bridges (the book) is that bad, but the movie, with Clint Easwood and Meryl Streep, is not bad. The folks who made the movie transcended their crappy source material.>here is this certian, very popular author that I just can't standAre you talking about Tinkerbell Hilton? (She wrote a book about her life with Paris.) Cut her some slack; most dogs are completely illiterate.

believe it or not, I wasn't actually refering to Tink's masterpiece.

I'm curious to know who you're talking about unsupervised. Come on, lets hear it!

hehehe.... but you know how scared I am of contravercy

The book is better than the movie. I don't really like his style of writing, but the story is good.

If your really into the whole conspiracy thing, toss The Da Vinci Code and pick up Holy Blood Holy Grail, which I would make the assertion The Da Vinci Code is based on, inspired by, lifted from,...whatever. It was written in the late 70's or early 80's, if I remember correctly. I read it in around 1990, as best as I can remember I thought it was a pretty good book or at least was far better than what little I read of The Da Vinci Code.

I read holy blood holy grail when i was 18. extreamly interesting.There was a contraversy about plagarism with the Da Vinci Code but HBHG was a reaserched historical work while Da Vinci was fiction based on the historical research

Dan Brown just recently fought off a lawsuit from the authors of 'Holy blood, Holy grail'. Sick for them, they would have been in for some payday had they been successful. Still though, I don’t think they deserved to be compensated. DDC was a fictitious work and, to my mind, an author of fiction ought to be free to draw inspiration from historical works unhindered by copyright laws.

uhmmmmmm "Holy Blood Holy Grail" is NOT a historicl work, the author admitid it was all made up. but i see your point

"the author admitid it was all made up"When did the authors admit it was fiction? And what else did they have to say about that, do you know?

Wikipedia article on Holy Blood, Holy Grail": search for the word backpedaled. There's not a lot of detail there, but the "Priory of Sion" has been revealed as a hoax.

I haven't seen any evidence anywhere (including those links) to convince me either way. I would, however, be very interested in any evidence of either Richard Leigh, Micheal Biagnet or Henry Lincoln ever having stated that all their years of research never happened and that in fact their book was a work of fiction!