EndPage

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!