The Da Vinci Code
I had heard from a number of people that Angels and Demons (reviewed below) was a better book than The Da Vinci Code. It was hard to believe after the attention which Da Vinci had received. After reading both, though, I have to agree that Angels and Demons is the superior novel. Da Vinci has all the right ingredients for another spellbinding adventure, but the symbology facts and figures which moved the Angels story along so well simply stifle the Da Vinci plotline. Too much time is spent pondering over Mary Magdalene and holy grails. It’s not surprising that the book gained such publicity when controversial myths, such as that about Mary Magdalene, are brought to the fore. But while these tales are initially shocking, you soon begin wishing for some more action and less talk. Perhaps I’m being a little harsh here; it is a clever story which wraps up nicely at the end, but after the non-stop “I can’t put down the book” antics of Angels and Demons, The Da Vinci Code feels stilted and almost slow moving. The other major problem here is that the basic plot of Da Vinci is just a carbon copy of Demons and Angles. There’s nothing wrong with following a winning formula, particularly in a detective/mystery series, but the characters from Da Vinci are so alike, and follow such similar motivations that it’s almost disheartening. The albino monk, Silas, is reminiscent of the Angels’ killer, even if Silas is more worthy of sympathy. We have another desperate priest in the form of Bishop Aringarosa. Da Vinci’s Teabing, a highly intelligent British cripple replaces the highly intelligent wheelchair bound Kohler and Sophie is a watered down version of Vittoria. Although Teabing, cliched as he is, is an enjoyable character, the others are not so well thought out. One gets the impression that the characters only serve to push forward the plot. This, in fact, is one of the complaints that people had with regard to the film. Now, I can see that any film version of this would have had to take liberties with the script in order to secure decent memorable characters. The major exception is, of course, Robert Langdon. He is as likeable as ever, and I stick by my previous theory that he is, in fact, based on Dan Brown himself!
Angels and Demons
After all the furore about the Da Vinci Code a few years ago, I felt it was time to read it properly (I had attempted a few chapters before..) and see what the fuss was about. First, however, I turned my attention to Angels and Demons, this being the prequel to Da Vinci. A number of people had assured me it was actually a better book but having only just begun The DV Code, I cannot yet make comparisons..this I will say, however: the basic plots are quite similar so far, following a rather James Bond like adventure, although replacing the suave Bond with the more grounded Robert Langdon. I think I will write an Angels and Demon vs. Da Vinci Code post eventually but for now….Angels and Demons!
The major theme here is the ongoing conflict between religion and science with wizened scientists coming up against equally wizened cardinals, and Vatican City finding a new competitor in CERN (a giant physics lab in Switzerland which is well worth a google) in the fierce debate about creation. Brown does not paint a simple black and white scenario here, though, with many characters, such as the first victim, a priest who is also a physicist, pulling beliefs from both sides. Brown’s novel caused me to conclude that no matter what we believe in, the point is: we need to believe in something. This is emphasised by the fact that even the cold blooded killer of Demons and Angels holds strong beliefs, certain that his killings are for a greater cause.
Robert Langdon, all tweed jacket and Harvard intelligence, finds himself pulled from his bachelor pad and lecture halls, to investigate a murder at CERN, which then leads him on a whirwind chase around Rome and the Vatican. Brown amazes us, as much as Robert(!) with the high tech gadgetry of CERN and even of the Vatican. Toss in some crazy villans, an attractive younger woman and a few near impossible escape stunts and you have James Bond…professor style. Langdon unravels the mystery using his deep knowledge of symbology and art history, but this by no means dampens the spirit of adventure. Langdon himself has to be the most sympathetic character and he rings true, perhaps, because he is somewhat modelled on Dan Brown himself. It’s just a theory but Brown is a smart guy with an interest in art history and Langdon is a smart guy with an interest in art history….
Whether you read Dan Brown novels for excitement or education, however, you will find yourself picking up the most amazing facts, methodically researched by Brown, who is careful to state at the beginning of the novel that certain parts are, indeed, factual. The amazing setting of the Vatican is built up in our imaginations as Brown reels off one mind blowing fact after another. While the novel could simply be a vehicle which Brown uses to show off his insight into papal affairs, among other things, in this case, the facts and stats add to the story and move it along, allowing us to share Robert Langdon’s wonder and awe.
Going to the Movies
Going to the Movies is written by Syd Field whose extensive knowledge in the field of screenwriting has earned him much acclaim over the years. He is a good source on the movie industry that is Hollywood having worked on several sets over the years and having met such figures as Sam Pekinpah (who gave Syd a first look at the script of The Wild Bunch) and Jean Renoir among others. Although Field has published numerous books on the skills of screenwriting and on how to break into the industry, this book differs in that it acts as a semi-autobiography, thereby flourishing us with anecdotes about the luminaries with whom he conversed, as mentioned above. Although stubborn when it comes to his thesis on screenwriting, Field, at least, does not glorify himself too much with regard to his place in Hollywood or within the academic field. His ever humble way of recounting his stories make this quite an enjoyable read; the reader feels more at one with Field who himself finds it hard to believe that he had the chance to come across such famous film-makers and writers. The one flaw with this book is that when Field discusses his own struggles with research, writers block and screenwriting theories, the story loses its flow and becomes quite tedious in parts. Field seems to be methodical in nature, and I for one could understand his approach to writing, but when explaining this process, Field could easily lose some readers who may wish to simply hear more of his success stories and meetings with the stars. After ‘Going to the Movies’, I had enough of Field’s tales for a while, but I am planning on reading the fruits of his labour and possibly learning something about the art of screenwriting.
