![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
silversolitaireWhen I walked past the book in the bookstore yet again today I realized that I have this review of The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown sitting around on my harddrive for a year now or so O.o. I think it was pretty much over a year now that's I've read it and written this. I've always delayed posting it because I wanted to crosscheck the names (and good thing I did! With my crappy memory for names I got about every name in the book wrong!) and then kinda forgot about it. I've always promised I'd post it, so here it is. Of course, it's extremely spoilery, so I'd better hide it behind a cut for now. Later I might open the cut again though because I kinda like my sense of wittiness in this piece that shows my l33t skillz as a scholar of literature... and at ranting. Yeah. Anyway, here we go:
My take on The DaVinci Code
Reading the book I found it hard to really have a relationship to any of the characters. I mostly credit this to the fact that the author chose to not stick to one person's POV. That way the reader never really gets to fraternize with anyone. The result of that was that I found Langdon mildly fascinating, but most of the time he was just annoying me. It seems like his only justification for being our noble hero is that he's somewhat goodlooking. Other than that he'd just be your average quirky professor. Indiana Jones much? At the beginning he was driving me nuts with his constant narrations on useless factoids that were later repeated by other characters. Then I wanted to strangle him for every time he thought "OMG he did THIS to himself? I mean like, REALLY??? To himSELF?!?". It's funny how he's supposed to be the protagonist, and also manages to bring about the most important turns, and yet he's so incredibly passive. He's constantly being dragged around, brought across country borders, headclonked and threatened at gunpoint... It's kinda pathetic.
Not so sure about Sophie. She was a powerful character and I did feel sympathetic for her loss of her grandfather. It was like it was clear there would never be a happy end for this book because her grandfather was dead and gone and all the lost time would never be undone again. That saddened me. And I could feel her regret as being genuine. So yay, a character I could relate to! But then I wanted to whack her over the head, too! I can see that it was a huge shock to see her grandfather in such a situation, but wasn't that reaction a bit TOO harsh? He's the only family she's ever known and over this she totally cuts him out of her life and doesn't even give him the tiniest chance to explain himself. On second thought, she deserved to suffer -.-.
And don't get me started on whatshisface. I've already forgot his name... Teabing? Even before it was obvious he was a baddy I didn't like him. This entire conversation about the Holy Grail was just nauseating IMO. I mean, how many sexual innuendos can you fit into one conversation without making the other one feel raped and disgusted? Yeah, so he's really into the Grail up to a point that he's willing to kill for it, but does he really have to be constantly comparing it to sex? *twitches* Not to mention that his character is just one huge plot hole. A British aristocrat, THE authority on the field of "Grailology", oh so conveniently residing in Paris, becomes the only safe habor for an American symbologist who accidentally comes about the information of where the Holy Grail is located. Yeaaaah. And then we haven't even taken into account that he's the sole reason for the symbologist's involvement in this entire business. Sorry, ain't buying it.
Come to think of it, the entire book is built way too much on coincidences to really be believeable.
To return to Teabing, he's the perfect example for how wrong it can go to jump into the POV of everyone and their dog repeatedly. That whole scene where he, as the Teacher, kills Rémy is just One. Big. Foot in Mouth. There's no way Rémy's inner thoughts would have been like that, never mentioning that it was Teabing.
And then there's the Parisian commissioner whom I would like to dub Bezu what the Fache?!?. All through the book he's just one unpredictable character, but not in a good way, because he constantly fluctuates, all the hints given towards him are either red herrings or left unexplained in the end and he turns around 180° from our noble hero's biggest nightmare to his knight in shining armor, at the blink of an eye, without a hint of explanation. I just found the entire set-up of this character unsatisfying. Why waste so many pages on him, his looks (what's a widow's peak anyway?), his characterization, his inclination to religion and what not, only to toss it all out of the window and make him the classic deus ex machina? I don't get it.
Whom did I miss... not much to say about Rémy other than that his peanut allergy was so awfully predictable as his cause of death. Oh! And the Albino of course. I couldn't help but think about The Princess Bride the entire time... heh. He was a bit of a waste, IMO. He had a nice background, about him being only a ghost and when he met the priest he found a new life. I liked that. But I don't really get why he had to be an albino. It gave his story an additional sense of tragedy, but it also made him stick out like a whale in a tin of sardines. When I first read his description I thought "Erm... okay what is this? Anime?" Later it was explained of course, but still. He should have just been a weird looking thug-like monk-dude. That would have been better.
Now, my main grudge. I've heard theories about Mary Magdalene before. I've also heard theories about Leonardo DaVinci. I won't lie, I found it delectable to have all this information wrapped up nicely in a readable book. The connections between the cult, the grail and DaVinci, all very nice. Thing is, it's not really the author's accomplishment, is it? His only achievement is that he wrapped it up in a big story made of Bezu WTFs and other improbabilities. So I don't really get all this hullapalooza about the book. Yeah, it's nice, but it's old news and it seems unfair that Dan Brown gets all the credit for it.
As for Mary Magdalene. I don't know much about her. Nobody does. We can only speculate can we? So I don't know whether she was just a figment of people's imagination, along with Jesus, or whether she's a victim of the evil Roman Catholic church who turned her into a whore when she really was the loving and honest wife of our Lord Jesus. No clue. But I know one thing. IF she really was Jesus' wife, then... so what? That still only makes her a mortal woman and I totally refuse to accept any notion that she might be worthy of whoreship - oops, that was an honest typo but I'll leave it because it's funny! Anyway, - worthy of worship. Jesus was born as a human but he was divine and upon his death he fulfilled his transformation. Mary was just his wife. Maybe he loved her and maybe she bore his mortal seed, but I still don't see why she should be worshipped. But maybe that's just me.
Oh I should probably say something about the end, too. It was also a bit predictable, IMO. For one that thing that her family wasn't totally killed off (which is yet another plot hole. Can you really make half of your family disappear and nobody ever asks any questions? I doubt it) and then that they don't find the grail. There have been other books and movies about this and unless you want to slip into the Indiana Jones routine you kinda have to find a cop out like that. So woohoo, it's the Maltese Falcon! We search for something like crazy and then we find out, oopsy, it's not there. Makes you wonder, why the fuck did Saunière go to these lengths to lead Sophie there when the Holy Grail wasn't anywhere near there??? I could have written on his stomach "Sophie, I lied, your grandmother and brother are still alive, here's the address, sorry for the hassle." That would have been a lot easier and it certainly would have saved Langdon a lot of trouble -.-.
Okay, now after all this ranting let me assure you, I didn't hate the book! I found it quite amusing and considering it's length it was a rather quick and entertaining read. And I totally credit Dan Brown for all his cryptologic twists and turns. That sure was brilliant. I still don't buy it that you really can solve it just like Langdon did, but hey, it's a work of fiction and to quote my esteemed professor "We have to ask ourselves just how much it claims to be reality." So yeah, I can live with that. My aforementioned points still stand and if I had a chance I'd edit rigorously. But I won't so I'm just gonna live with it and end with the notion: read it, but don't expect that it rocks your world. Unless you never really heard ANYthing about this, then it might probably surprise you a bit.
Additional mini-rant brought to you by the impending movie:
OMG are there possibly ANY French actors out there who aren't Jean Reno and Audrey Tautou?!? Seriously, it seems like Hollywood only has those two names in their card index listed under "Frenchies". That and maybe Gérard Depardieu... Although I have to admit that Jean Reno is rather fitting.
My take on The DaVinci Code
Reading the book I found it hard to really have a relationship to any of the characters. I mostly credit this to the fact that the author chose to not stick to one person's POV. That way the reader never really gets to fraternize with anyone. The result of that was that I found Langdon mildly fascinating, but most of the time he was just annoying me. It seems like his only justification for being our noble hero is that he's somewhat goodlooking. Other than that he'd just be your average quirky professor. Indiana Jones much? At the beginning he was driving me nuts with his constant narrations on useless factoids that were later repeated by other characters. Then I wanted to strangle him for every time he thought "OMG he did THIS to himself? I mean like, REALLY??? To himSELF?!?". It's funny how he's supposed to be the protagonist, and also manages to bring about the most important turns, and yet he's so incredibly passive. He's constantly being dragged around, brought across country borders, headclonked and threatened at gunpoint... It's kinda pathetic.
Not so sure about Sophie. She was a powerful character and I did feel sympathetic for her loss of her grandfather. It was like it was clear there would never be a happy end for this book because her grandfather was dead and gone and all the lost time would never be undone again. That saddened me. And I could feel her regret as being genuine. So yay, a character I could relate to! But then I wanted to whack her over the head, too! I can see that it was a huge shock to see her grandfather in such a situation, but wasn't that reaction a bit TOO harsh? He's the only family she's ever known and over this she totally cuts him out of her life and doesn't even give him the tiniest chance to explain himself. On second thought, she deserved to suffer -.-.
And don't get me started on whatshisface. I've already forgot his name... Teabing? Even before it was obvious he was a baddy I didn't like him. This entire conversation about the Holy Grail was just nauseating IMO. I mean, how many sexual innuendos can you fit into one conversation without making the other one feel raped and disgusted? Yeah, so he's really into the Grail up to a point that he's willing to kill for it, but does he really have to be constantly comparing it to sex? *twitches* Not to mention that his character is just one huge plot hole. A British aristocrat, THE authority on the field of "Grailology", oh so conveniently residing in Paris, becomes the only safe habor for an American symbologist who accidentally comes about the information of where the Holy Grail is located. Yeaaaah. And then we haven't even taken into account that he's the sole reason for the symbologist's involvement in this entire business. Sorry, ain't buying it.
Come to think of it, the entire book is built way too much on coincidences to really be believeable.
To return to Teabing, he's the perfect example for how wrong it can go to jump into the POV of everyone and their dog repeatedly. That whole scene where he, as the Teacher, kills Rémy is just One. Big. Foot in Mouth. There's no way Rémy's inner thoughts would have been like that, never mentioning that it was Teabing.
And then there's the Parisian commissioner whom I would like to dub Bezu what the Fache?!?. All through the book he's just one unpredictable character, but not in a good way, because he constantly fluctuates, all the hints given towards him are either red herrings or left unexplained in the end and he turns around 180° from our noble hero's biggest nightmare to his knight in shining armor, at the blink of an eye, without a hint of explanation. I just found the entire set-up of this character unsatisfying. Why waste so many pages on him, his looks (what's a widow's peak anyway?), his characterization, his inclination to religion and what not, only to toss it all out of the window and make him the classic deus ex machina? I don't get it.
Whom did I miss... not much to say about Rémy other than that his peanut allergy was so awfully predictable as his cause of death. Oh! And the Albino of course. I couldn't help but think about The Princess Bride the entire time... heh. He was a bit of a waste, IMO. He had a nice background, about him being only a ghost and when he met the priest he found a new life. I liked that. But I don't really get why he had to be an albino. It gave his story an additional sense of tragedy, but it also made him stick out like a whale in a tin of sardines. When I first read his description I thought "Erm... okay what is this? Anime?" Later it was explained of course, but still. He should have just been a weird looking thug-like monk-dude. That would have been better.
Now, my main grudge. I've heard theories about Mary Magdalene before. I've also heard theories about Leonardo DaVinci. I won't lie, I found it delectable to have all this information wrapped up nicely in a readable book. The connections between the cult, the grail and DaVinci, all very nice. Thing is, it's not really the author's accomplishment, is it? His only achievement is that he wrapped it up in a big story made of Bezu WTFs and other improbabilities. So I don't really get all this hullapalooza about the book. Yeah, it's nice, but it's old news and it seems unfair that Dan Brown gets all the credit for it.
As for Mary Magdalene. I don't know much about her. Nobody does. We can only speculate can we? So I don't know whether she was just a figment of people's imagination, along with Jesus, or whether she's a victim of the evil Roman Catholic church who turned her into a whore when she really was the loving and honest wife of our Lord Jesus. No clue. But I know one thing. IF she really was Jesus' wife, then... so what? That still only makes her a mortal woman and I totally refuse to accept any notion that she might be worthy of whoreship - oops, that was an honest typo but I'll leave it because it's funny! Anyway, - worthy of worship. Jesus was born as a human but he was divine and upon his death he fulfilled his transformation. Mary was just his wife. Maybe he loved her and maybe she bore his mortal seed, but I still don't see why she should be worshipped. But maybe that's just me.
Oh I should probably say something about the end, too. It was also a bit predictable, IMO. For one that thing that her family wasn't totally killed off (which is yet another plot hole. Can you really make half of your family disappear and nobody ever asks any questions? I doubt it) and then that they don't find the grail. There have been other books and movies about this and unless you want to slip into the Indiana Jones routine you kinda have to find a cop out like that. So woohoo, it's the Maltese Falcon! We search for something like crazy and then we find out, oopsy, it's not there. Makes you wonder, why the fuck did Saunière go to these lengths to lead Sophie there when the Holy Grail wasn't anywhere near there??? I could have written on his stomach "Sophie, I lied, your grandmother and brother are still alive, here's the address, sorry for the hassle." That would have been a lot easier and it certainly would have saved Langdon a lot of trouble -.-.
Okay, now after all this ranting let me assure you, I didn't hate the book! I found it quite amusing and considering it's length it was a rather quick and entertaining read. And I totally credit Dan Brown for all his cryptologic twists and turns. That sure was brilliant. I still don't buy it that you really can solve it just like Langdon did, but hey, it's a work of fiction and to quote my esteemed professor "We have to ask ourselves just how much it claims to be reality." So yeah, I can live with that. My aforementioned points still stand and if I had a chance I'd edit rigorously. But I won't so I'm just gonna live with it and end with the notion: read it, but don't expect that it rocks your world. Unless you never really heard ANYthing about this, then it might probably surprise you a bit.
Additional mini-rant brought to you by the impending movie:
OMG are there possibly ANY French actors out there who aren't Jean Reno and Audrey Tautou?!? Seriously, it seems like Hollywood only has those two names in their card index listed under "Frenchies". That and maybe Gérard Depardieu... Although I have to admit that Jean Reno is rather fitting.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-04-02 01:45 pm (UTC)Now, the no.1 problem I have with the ending is that the secret was never meant to be revealed! All that danger and bloodshed for two thousand years for nothing? No revolution? That is what bothers me. It seems a bit, well, boring. :-)
no subject
Date: 2006-04-05 10:11 pm (UTC)I think the main reason this book became so insanely successful was because most people hadn't heard of the Grail legend. I'd just played Gabriel Knight 3, so I was kind of yawning through all the "revelations." Ironic that the authors of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" are suing Dan Brown for "stealing" all their ideas. I don't think they're exactly right, but I am actually glad their doing it if only so that their work and other previous ones on the Grail topic get some attention and people don't think Dan Brown is some genius. He is excellent at taking existing ideas and making an interesting mystery/thriller out of them, but his writing really sucks in all other aspects: character development, dialogue, style, and, well...depth. :P
I have watched a lot of French films the last for years for my French minor, and it is funny when you start to see the same damn people in every movie. However, some of the most famous actors in France are mostly unknown by the average American. The only French people they recognize are Audrey Tatou, Jean Reno, Gerard Depardieu, and maaaaaaybe Juliette Binoche.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-05 11:10 pm (UTC)It's really the same shit every time when a movie is made that gets a lot of exposure. *sighs* I mean, they basically had years to complain when the book was out. It's not like the book was a secret among the mystery fans and only was talked about once the movie was made. It was pretty much an instant hit as soon as it was published. They had plenty of time to complain.
And yeah it's really just the same guys all over again, isn't it? But it's the same for every moviemaking nation, really. Some guys get all the exposure for some reason. Every now and then some guy ends up in a big production and everyone from his country goes "Yay! He's a big star here!" but it's no more than a bleep on the radar for everyone else.