Dan Brown Novels are...?

Recommended Videos

Jack and Calumon

Digimon are cool.
Dec 29, 2008
4,190
0
41
I find it to be a bunch of old tosh. It feels that Dan Brown is projecting a history onto us that Dan Brown wants, even if we should know it's not true. Then there are those that'll go around saying how it's all true apparently, that Jesus did in fact marry a prostitute, that Da Vinci did all the things the book says and wasn't just an artist/designer/engineer/all around cool guy. I believe it is stupider, than when Saturn's rings were first seen, and the librarian (Or some other lowly job) of the Vatican said that they were Jesus' holy foreskin.

Calumon: Ewww... why was his head in space?
 

Gatx

New member
Jul 7, 2011
1,458
0
0
They're page turners for sure, and I enjoy the crazy conspiracy theories and the bits that turn out to be true, but the plots and writing are absolutely terrible.
 

Malty Milk Whistle

New member
Oct 29, 2011
617
0
0
Bobic said:
Dan Brown Novels are . . .
Formulaic.

After reading The Da Vinci code and Angels and Demons I was able to pretty accurately predict what was going to happen in Digital Fortress and erm. . . whatever that one with the glacier on the front was called. I kinda lost interest after that.

Also, either I give books more leeway in their stupidity or my tastes matured in between reading the book and the movie (I read the book not long after it came out, as a silly teen), but when I saw the Da Vinci Code movie I just found so many moments really, really daft.

Having said that though I watched Angels and Demons with the intention of mocking it and annoyingly found myself oddly absorbed by the film and actually quite enjoyed it. (though I'm sure the stupidity was still there).
as soon as the mr pickings or whatever his name was introduced, i sussed he was the main villain. So. Repetitive.
 

Henkie36

New member
Aug 25, 2010
678
0
0
I think the phrase you are looking for is ''past their prime''. Digital Fortress and Deception Point are alright, Angels and Demons is good, The Da Vinci Code is really good and the Lost Symbol is back to alright again. I know this isn't exactly in the order he wrote them, but you get the point. Their fun to read and easy to understand, but he hasn't done a great job expanding his franchise.
 

Bobic

New member
Nov 10, 2009
1,532
0
0
Jack and Calumon said:
I find it to be a bunch of old tosh. It feels that Dan Brown is projecting a history onto us that Dan Brown wants, even if we should know it's not true. Then there are those that'll go around saying how it's all true apparently, that Jesus did in fact marry a prostitute, that Da Vinci did all the things the book says and wasn't just an artist/designer/engineer/all around cool guy. I believe it is stupider, than when Saturn's rings were first seen, and the librarian (Or some other lowly job) of the Vatican said that they were Jesus' holy foreskin.

Calumon: Ewww... why was his head in space?
To be fair, does it really matter if the conspiracy uncovered is actually true? It's not a non-fiction book, it doesn't have to be factual. Do people complain about Indiana Jones finding the Ark of the Covenant, something which factually doesn't exist?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the book, I just think it should be disliked for the right reasons.
 

jibjab963

New member
Sep 16, 2008
365
0
0
I got really bored trying to read Da Vinci Code. And I mean like it was a struggle to try and keep on reading it so I just stopped. Angels and Demons honestly wasn't that bad. It wasn't a "I CAN'T PUT IT DOOWWWWNNN" kind of book but it wasn't bad. In my honest opinion hes meh. Time killers but not that much enjoyment. Just what ever you do don't read the books then see the movies, you'll just get mad.
 

Craorach

New member
Jan 17, 2011
749
0
0
Dan Brown novels are...

.. acceptable "popcorn novels" much like many many movies. Just like movies, and video games, and music, not all books need to be fantasticaly written or high brow.

As far as I'm concerned, anything that gets people to pick up books is good.
 

Malkav

New member
Jan 17, 2012
67
0
0
I only "read" The Lost Symbol as an audio book.
Not bad, not good. The characters are a massive weak spot. Langdon is a lecturing know-it-all who sometimes talks arrogantly and sarcastically at people. This is all I remember on characters. And this makes it hard to care for them during tense parts, which often read like random forum posts because of it. Same goes for the final twist.
Those few moments that worked got cut off by cliffhangers, which are overused. The plot was a lot like the movies. They trimmed down the conspiracy stuff, which still reads like "hey readers! Those are facts! Get paranoid!"

Take it for what it is, light forgettable entertainment. Get yourself to like Langdon quickly. Then it might be a fast, fun read. The hype about those books being anything but fiction is what ruined them.
 

Jodah

New member
Aug 2, 2008
2,280
0
0
When I read The DaVinci Code by the time I was halfway through I knew what was going to happen. When I told my mom about that (shes the one that had the book and talked me into reading it) she didn't believe me. I was just thinking "this is a basic mystery from any of the fantasy novels I read. It isn't hard to predict." I ended up finishing it but still, for a mystery thriller it was very predictable.
 

Jack and Calumon

Digimon are cool.
Dec 29, 2008
4,190
0
41
Bobic said:
Jack and Calumon said:
I find it to be a bunch of old tosh. It feels that Dan Brown is projecting a history onto us that Dan Brown wants, even if we should know it's not true. Then there are those that'll go around saying how it's all true apparently, that Jesus did in fact marry a prostitute, that Da Vinci did all the things the book says and wasn't just an artist/designer/engineer/all around cool guy. I believe it is stupider, than when Saturn's rings were first seen, and the librarian (Or some other lowly job) of the Vatican said that they were Jesus' holy foreskin.

Calumon: Ewww... why was his head in space?
To be fair, does it really matter if the conspiracy uncovered is actually true? It's not a non-fiction book, it doesn't have to be factual. Do people complain about Indiana Jones finding the Ark of the Covenant, something which factually doesn't exist?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the book, I just think it should be disliked for the right reasons.
There's a difference between the two however, as Indiana Jones presents itself in a believable manner, while the Da Vinci Code does whatever the fuck it wants and presents itself in a way that it's almost as if it is telling you it is true. The Jesus marry prostitute malarky has been said to me by enough people to warrant a backhand AT THE VERY LEAST to Dan Brown. A firm one too, not one feeble enough to barely move an ant.

Calumon: ...You're mean today!
 

Zen Toombs

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,105
0
0
Doitpow said:
Dan Brown novels are...
fun
non-factual
sometimes exciting
readable in one sitting
not in any way to be taken seriously
not worth anyone getting their pants in a twist about

Frankly i can't see why there are such a big deal, there is less fact and more sensentionalist bull on the History Channel than there is in his books.
You summarized my thoughts on the subject quite succinctly, except for the "fun" part. To the OP: if you find them boring after a while, then you should probably stop reading them. Life is short, so just do the things that you actually enjoy doing! ^_^
 

Smiley Face

New member
Jan 17, 2012
704
0
0
Reading the Lost Symbol I had a strange sense of deja vu - and then I realized that it was ALMOST ENTIRELY THE SAME STORY STRUCTURE AS THE DA VINCI CODE. I mean, it was like someone had ripped off the Da Vinci code - except that person was the actual author.

The delivery is nice enough that it's good if you really just want anything to read and don't care - it's been so long since I read it I can't speak to the insaneness of the plot, but I think others have handled that.
 

wintercoat

New member
Nov 26, 2011
1,691
0
0
If you read them on the premise that they're a cheesy romp, they're enjoyable. If you read them all serious-like, they're shit.

Also, I would trust Stephen Fry's criticism on Dan Brown's books about as much as I would trust a theatre critics review of a cheesy b-movie. It's called conflicting interests. Not everything has to be taken seriously, even if it was written to be taken so.
 

Doitpow

New member
Mar 18, 2009
1,171
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
Dan Brown books prove that there is nothing the public like more than what the public are told they'll like more.

Every last one of them is a plagiarised, dull story told to shock.

And 7 years later, Meyer did it again.

But it's not like it's a modern thing:



The banned rude bits:

She pulled open his clothing and uncovered his belly, and kissed his navel. Then she laid her cheek on his belly and pressed her arm round his warm, silent loins. They were alone in the flood. "Tell me you want a child, in hope!" she murmured, pressing her face against his belly. "Tell me you do!" "Why!" he said at last: and she felt the curious quiver of changing consciousness and relaxation going through his body. "Why I've thought sometimes if one but tried, here among th' colliers even! They're workin' bad now, an' not earnin' much. If a man could say to 'em: Dunna think o' nowt but th' money. When it comes ter wants, we want but little. Let's not live for money---" She softly rubbed her cheek on his belly, and gathered his balls in her hand. The penis stirred softly, with strange life, but did not rise up. The rain beat bruisingly outside. "Let's live for summat else. Let's not live ter make money, neither for us-selves nor for anybody else. Now we're forced to. We're forced to make a bit for us-selves, an' a fair lot for th' bosses. Let's stop it! Bit by bit, let's stop it. We needn't rant an' rave. Bit by bit, let's drop the whole industrial life an' go back. The least little bit o' money'll do. For everybody, me an' you, bosses an' masters, even th' king. The least little bit o' money'll really do. Just make up your mind to it, an' you've got out o' th' mess." He paused, then went on: "An' I'd tell 'em: Look! Look at Joe! He moves lovely! Look how he moves, alive and aware. He's beautiful! An' look at Jonah! He's clumsy, he's ugly, because he's niver willin' to rouse himself I'd tell 'em: Look! look at yourselves! one shoulder higher than t'other, legs twisted, feet all lumps! What have yer done ter yerselves, wi' the blasted work? Spoilt yerselves. No need to work that much. Take yer clothes off an' look at yourselves. Yer ought ter be alive an' beautiful, an' yer ugly an' half dead. So I'd tell 'em. An' I'd get my men to wear different clothes: appen close red trousers, bright red, an' little short white jackets. Why, if men had red, fine legs, that alone would change them in a month. They'd begin to be men again, to be men! An' the women could dress as they liked. Because if once the men walked with legs close bright scarlet, and buttocks nice and showing scarlet under a little white jacket: then the women 'ud begin to be women. It's because th' men aren't men, that th' women have to be.---An' in time pull down Tevershall and build a few beautiful buildings, that would hold us all. An' clean the country up again. An' not have many children, because the world is overcrowded. "But I wouldn't preach to the men: only strip 'em an' say: Look at yourselves! That's workin' for money!--Hark at yourselves! That's working for money. You've been working for money! Look at Tevershall! It's horrible. That's because it was built while you was working for money. Look at your girls! They don't care about you, you don't care about them. It's because you've spent your time working an' caring for money. You can't talk nor move nor live, you can't properly be with a woman. You're not alive. Look at yourselves!" There fell a complete silence. Connie was half listening, and threading in the hair at the root of his belly a few forget-me-nots that she had gathered on the way to the hut. Outside, the world had gone still, and a little icy. "You've got four kinds of hair," she said to him. "On your chest it's nearly black, and your hair isn't dark on your head: but your moustache is hard and dark red, and your hair here, your love-hair, is like a little brush of bright red-gold mistletoe. It's the loveliest of all!" He looked down and saw the milky bits of forget-me-nots in the hair on his groin. "Ay! That's where to put forget-me-nots, in the man-hair, or the maiden-hair. But don't you care about the future?" She looked up at him. "Oh, I do, terribly!" she said. "Because when I feel the human world is doomed, has doomed itself by its own mingy beastliness, then I feel the Colonies aren't far enough. The moon wouldn't be far enough, because even there you could look back and see the earth, dirty, beastly, unsavoury among all the stars: made foul by men. Then I feel I've swallowed gall, and it's eating my inside out, and nowhere's far enough away to get away. But when I get a turn, I forget it all again. Though it's a shame, what's been done to people these last hundred years: men turned into nothing but labour-insects, and all their manhood taken away, and all their real life. I'd wipe the machines off the face of the earth again, and end the industrial epoch absolutely, like a black mistake. But since I can't, an' nobody can, I'd better hold my peace, an' try an' live my own life: if I've got one to live, which I rather doubt." The thunder had ceased outside, but the rain which had abated, suddenly came striking down, with a last blench of lightning and mutter of departing storm. Connie was uneasy. He had talked so long now, and he was really talking to himself not to her. Despair seemed to come down on him completely, and she was feeling happy, she hated despair. She knew her leaving him, which he had only just realized inside himself had plunged him back into this mood. And she triumphed a little. She opened the door and looked at the straight heavy rain, like a steel curtain, and had a sudden desire to rush out into it, to rush away. She got up, and began swiftly pulling off her stockings, then her dress and underclothing, and he held his breath. Her pointed keen animal breasts tipped and stirred as she moved. She was ivory-coloured in the greenish light. She slipped on her rubber shoes again and ran out with a wild little laugh, holding up her breasts to the heavy rain and spreading her arms, and running blurred in the rain with the eurhythmic dance movements she had learned so long ago in Dresden. It was a strange pallid figure lifting and falling, bending so the rain beat and glistened on the full haunches, swaying up again and coming belly-forward through the rain, then stooping again so that only the full loins and buttocks were offered in a kind of homage towards him, repeating a wild obeisance. He laughed wryly, and threw off his clothes. It was too much. He jumped out, naked and white, with a little shiver, into the hard slanting rain. Flossie sprang before him with a frantic little bark. Connie, her hair all wet and sticking to her head, turned her hot face and saw him. Her blue eyes blazed with excitement as she turned and ran fast, with a strange charging movement, out of the clearing and down the path, the wet boughs whipping her. She ran, and he saw nothing but the round wet head, the wet back leaning forward in flight, the rounded buttocks twinkling: a wonderful cowering female nakedness in flight. She was nearly at the wide riding when he came up and flung his naked arm round her soft, naked-wet middle. She gave a shriek and straightened herself and the heap of her soft, chill flesh came up against his body. He pressed it all up against him, madly, the heap of soft, chilled female flesh that became quickly warm as flame, in contact. The rain streamed on them till they smoked. He gathered her lovely, heavy posteriors one in each hand and pressed them in towards him in a frenzy, quivering motionless in the rain. Then suddenly he tipped her up and fell with her on the path, in the roaring silence of the rain, and short and sharp, he took her, short and sharp and finished, like an animal.

HALT CITIZEN
YOU ARE GUILTY OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND THE OBSCENE BEHAVIOR
UNDER THE PIPA ACT AND THE
PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM INTERNET PORNOGRPAHERS ACT OF 2011

STAND ASIDE EVERYONE NOTHING TO SEE HERE NOTHING TO SEE
 

Akimoto

New member
Nov 22, 2011
459
0
0
It was actually fun, but a history-accurate book it was not as Dan claimed it to be. Still, I won't mind reading it again.
 

Casey Bowen

New member
Jun 26, 2011
45
0
0
The Langdon books are fun reads. _Angels and Demons_ being the best of the three.

_Digital Fortress_ wasn't worth the paper and ink. Awful on every level.

_Deception Point_ was mediocre, but at least it wasn't DF.
 

DanielBrown

Dangerzone!
Dec 3, 2010
3,838
0
0
I first read The Da Vinci Code when there was a worldwide buzz about the book. Thought it was pretty clever, and I kind of liked it.
Then I read Angels & Demons. "Huh, it's exactly the same..."
Then I read that military-alien book. Needless to say; it was pretty much the exact same thing.
 

Seneschal

Blessed are the righteous
Jun 27, 2009
561
0
0
I always felt like Brown was the poor man's Michael Crichton. They both have a knack for blending fiction with popular science, except you will not find a list of sources 40-pages-long at the end of Brown's books.