What readers think of The Da Vinci Code, plus links to write your own review.

A movie with Tom Hanks about this book? Smart people will find a lot of incoherence, although I must say that Mr. Brown did a good research in order to write his fiction.

This book was interesting in the first chapters. Then it just turned predictable. I'm almost sure Mr. Brown has read The Brotherhood of the Rose (by David Morrel) and Umberto Eco's The name of the rose, but couldn't make a good book. I wonder why it is a bestseller. Some episodes of Third Watch are actually better written than this light "novel".

I am currently reading the DaVinci Code and have to say that I am a little bit disappointed. I will not go into the spiritual claims that Brown is making, but rather would like to highlight some basic (some might say trivial) errors.
I will just highlight some of the mistakes Brown makes regarding simple everyday items like cars. This might sound boring, but I think it highlights the general inaccuracy of the book and its bold statements.

1.   Regarding the ‘Smart Cat’, the Heroine claims that the car just consumes 1 liters per 100km, but a @Smart’ uses an average of 4.5 liters per 100km.

2.   Regarding the Taxi ride in Paris. Langdon tries to drive the Taxi, but being an American he cannot use a clutch (stereotype), so he accelerates to hard and the car tailgates away. European cars (especially Taxis) are mostly front wheel drive and would not tailgate, the few rear wheel drive cars used as taxis (usually Mercedes) are mostly fitted with an automatic. So there is no tail wagging.

3.   The drive in the Range Rover. The group tries to escape the police and heads into a forest. The butler is driving the car and gets the instruction to use the “emergency brake” to avoid using the brake lights. I never saw an emergency brake on a Range Rover and he surely does not suggest using the handbrake, as this action would result in the immediate loss of control over the car.

You might find these finding trivial, but I think they show how Brown alters information to suit his case. I leave to you to judge how this could be interpreted in regards to his claims about Christianity. I would like to admit that of course I am nagging about the most unimportant aspect of the book by picking out details like fuel consumption and the like.
However these details are usually "researchable" by the click of a button and I wonder why Brown chooses to mention these details in the first place. In fact he describes them so detailed that you have to wonder why as they are mostly irrellevant for most part of the story. If he feels so strongly about the fuel consumption then he should have looked it up or leave it out.
I think these details highlight the concern that Brown has spent most of his time making the story work, but it seems to fall apart once you scratch the surface.

This novel was totally based on one-dimensional characters that give no depth to the story-line. The sole appeal of the book was revealing the facts and after a few hundred pages my interest fully died. I literally had to force myself to read the last 100 pages! If you find attraction to religion read it, otherwise leave the book in the store!!

Dan Brown throws a great number of conspiracy theories together and in that sense inspires you to dig deeper for actual reliable sources.
But before you start questioning your Sunday School lessons, take a look at http://www.ubcaustin.org/ubu_davincicode01.htm or the many books writtten that deals with the so-called facts in Brown's novel. After all, it is a novel, so he can get away with all the errors.
Besides the interesting theories he throws out, his characters are mundane, the twists predictable, and his villans a repeat of his characters from Angels and Demons. If you want good historical fiction writing read anything by Bodie Thoene.
The one amazing concept in this book which I have never heard of before and am definitely going to check out is the Golden Ratio - so I'm reading Mario Livio's book and will see what I think.

I too am astonished at how popular this book is. It is painfully predictable, the characters are dull, the pacing is agonizingly slow. The plot "twists" are often silly to the point of insult--I've been to the Louvre and used the bathrooms...Dan Brown's research isn't THAT good, obviously. Mr. Brown is clearly hoping Hollywood will turn this monstrosity into 90 minutes of vapid entertainment

I am AMAZED at this book's popularity. While it is true that there is lots of fascinating historical detail, the flat, implausible characters, unbelievably cliched dialog, the goofy plot coincidences and Deus ex machina's, and the INCREDIBLY BAD WRITING (bullets that "sail" over people's heads? PUH-LEEEZE. Every page had at least one howler, it seemed.) all combine to form one really bad novel. I had to force myself to finish this book because I figured there had to be an incredibly exciting climax for this drivel to have impressed so many people. I was wrong. If you thought this was a great thriller, well, all I can say is that you have worlds of delight ahead of you when you read a genuinely well-written, taut thriller. Try Robert Harris and continue upward you've reached the heights with Le Carre and Alan Furst.

I am surprised that so many like this book! The characters are not at all well portrayed (Langdon is some sort of Jack Ryan in a tweed jacket who spouts rough'n'ready platitudes: "I've seen plenty!" "You must be kidding!"). The story is creaking, and contrived. I don't find it a compulsive page turner at all -- I have only kept reading out of a sort of masochistic fascination. I guess it rates a "two" for that, though . . .. Inaccuracies abound, about law enforcement, what embassies can do for fugitive Harvard profs., apparently quite a bit of the conpiracy theory stuff is lifted from dubious web sites. If you want a "smart" mystery thriller, you can do WAY better, folks. I'd suggest starting with "Foucalt's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco.