But this book could have been so much better. The plot and storyline are actually pretty good, but the timeline is beyond ridiculous. The entire 700 pgs takes place in less than a day. There are too many scenes in which people have less than an hour to:
a) solve part of the Illuminati riddle that has never previously been solved in the last 400 years
b) travel across the city of Rome from point A to point B to get to the next murder scene
c) go through some crazy murder/fight/church fire/attempted drowning/media scrum
d) get back to the Vatican archives
e) figure out the next clue, and
f) get to the next spot in Roem where the murder is going to happen

Sometimes all of the above takes place in less than 40 minutes. It’s just ludicrous. Sometimes they have to do even more in an hour than I’ve listed above. The thing is, this insulting time line didn’t need to happen. Why couldn’t Brown have made the 4 cardinal murders take place over 4 days instead of 4 hours? Why did he have to start the book off with Langdon waking up in the US and flying to Switzerland in about an hour (and losing about 6 hours in the process due to time zones).
Another silly sub-plot Brown would have us believe is the little flrity love-thing going on between Vittoria and Langdon. Not only are they in the midst of this insane time line running all over Rome having face to face encounters with an assasin while trying to save the Vatican and all of Rome from blowing up, but are we supposed to believe that Vittoria might be in a somewhat flirty, romantic mood when her father was murdered that very same day? And murdered grotesquely I might add - with his head twisted around backwards, his flesh branded with a hot brand, and his eyeball removed.

There are many other points like this where I had to put the book down and shake my head. By the time I got halfway through I was more intrigued by how bad the book was than by the story. I had to find out what next Dan Brown would have me believe. Langdon’s survival of the helicopter fall has already been beaten to death in the above comments, so I won’t go on about it except to say that by that point it wasn’t just difficult to believe, it was comical. I remember saying to myself “Right, of course”. Iread that par out loud to my wife who also got a kick out of it (and who also liked TDVC).

Such a shame that there had to be so many silly parts and a completely insulting time line and romantic twist. As I said in the beginning, it didn’t have to be this way. The plot itself is good, but the book could have been so much better.

Good Content - [url=http://www.intersponse.net]website traffic[/url] Will recommend. Website Traffic Visit us as well…

To Arnold I can most definitely tell you that I have a knowledge of Science and Religion

Alright now to dissect, I disagree with this review. Not only is the plot much more interesting that DVC but it’s much more imaginative.

Sure Dan Brown added in his bullshit into the story every now and then with some facts. But let’s forget the bull for a second and look closer at this. The book is told through symbols.

The Anti-Matter is symbolic and is explained by one of the rants. And that is symbolically true and even though it probably won’t blow up Rome. It is used in replacement of Nuclear Weapons.

Anti-Matter is Science just like Uranium they are both grey shades. Uranium can be either used to generate renewable power or cause mass destruction. Brown used the Anti-Matter to convey how new science can be good and bad.

Also it’s an imaginative book who else has used Ambigrams and Elements in the way Brown did?

And the Sidekick and the Carmenlengo. They are used moralistically to represent two sides of a debate. We’ve got Vittoria who’s trying to make Scientist and Religious get along and the Carmenlengo who was hinted to be prejudiced against science from his first rant

Don’t believe me? Read the words closer it subtly depicts Religion in a more favourable light.