The Davinci Code

[Goalie]

What are everyone's thoughts on the Davinci Code. I know it stirred up a lot of questions in me. It was a very intriguing book.

[Watchman]

Never actually read it, but from first-hand accounts and the associated publicity I've came to the conclusion it's a pile of sensationalist, conspirationalist, contrivedly wannabe-clever, perversely conservative junk literature mainly fit to be sold in the kiosks of railway stations.

[Csargo]

What is the DaVinci code?
I've never read the book and I dont know what its about please
Educate me.

[edyzmedieval]

Never actually read it, but from first-hand accounts and the associated publicity I've came to the conclusion it's a pile of sensationalist, conspirationalist, contrivedly wannabe-clever, perversely conservative junk literature mainly fit to be sold in the kiosks of railway stations.

Totally idem.

Read a few pages, dropped it from my hand. Junk.

[Incongruous]

Its based off Holy Blood Holy Grail which is complete and utter nonsense so don't but it for the reason of learning anything factual. Coupled with that is the fact that Dan Brown can't write for pooh.
Load of junk (reminded me of Tom Clancey).

[edyzmedieval]

Load of junk (reminded me of Tom Clancey).

How come? Tom Clancy is really good.(at least Red October is )

[Banquo's Ghost]

Never actually read it, but from first-hand accounts and the associated publicity I've came to the conclusion it's a pile of sensationalist, conspirationalist, contrivedly wannabe-clever, perversely conservative junk literature mainly fit to be sold in the kiosks of railway stations.

I did read it (largely because a few friends argued that I couldn't have a strong position on the book without reading it) and you are 100% spot on.

The worst aspect is that is very, very badly written. Primary school plot devices and characterisation.

A few hours of my life I won't get back, and of course those people who liked it anyway were still not convinced by my now informed views.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

While it is about 99% bull the one percent that isn't is that Jesus married Marry Magdaline and had kids, and that the dead sea scrolls tell you some funny things about the Bible. (I'm reading an interesting book by a theologin at the moment on this.)

That said, the tiny kernel of truth is pure luck from Dan Brown.

[Kralizec]

Brown is pure fiction and should be read as such. I liked Angels & Demons, wich I read first. No literary masterpiece, but a fun read. Reading the DaVinci Code just gave me a deja vu feeling because it used the exact same formula. I haven't read his other 2 books but I expect them to be pretty much the same, and I'm already tired of it.

[Asmodai]

Pure fiction? Maybe not as drastic, but surely a theory, that is rather unreal. Maybe some part of informations, after long research could be true....
Could be, if the author realy wants to seek real facts, not material for fantasy book.

[Aenlic]

What are everyone's thoughts on the Davinci Code. I know it stirred up a lot of questions in me. It was a very intriguing book.

The original post.

Everything so far looks on topic to me.