I actually cannot really figure out what religious people are up in arms about. I think that many people in our society take things way to seriously these days. If you go in knowing that it is just entertainment, you will enjoy it.
-RS

PS About Tom Hanks…I cannot stand him, but he did not ruin the movie for me. I think that his character could have been played by any number of people just fine.

Have fun reading it. I was drawn into it so much that I couldn’t stop reading it. I read it in about two days (evenings, lunch breaks, and times in between).

There are over 100 chapters, IIRC, but they are quick chapters. I remember being very annoyed when they were searching for the code to unlock the second cryptex. I think it took about ten chapters for them to get it, and it was obvious about the third chapter into the mess.

Other than that, suspensful and fun! I am reading Angels & Demons now, which is the first book by Dan Brown using the character of Robert Langdon. His third book for the character, the Solomon Key, should be out next year.

The best fiction takes a lot of fact into account and twists the truth in believable ways. It sounds like The Da Vinci Code comes right out and says the story is true, which always makes for entertaining fiction.

The sentence, “Everything I say is true” is reduced to having no meaning if the statement itself is false — a work of fiction.

I don’t intend on seeing the movie for a while. For starters, when I read the book, I did not envision the main character as anyone nearly similar to Tom Hanks or any characters he has portrayed. Further, from the reviews, it seems fairly close to the text, so I am not missing anything.

As far as the contraversy, I can see why religious folks are up in arms. It is not the fact that a fictional book portrays something disimilar to biblical beliefs, but that the book makes a definite claim that descriptions of art, documents, etc are accurate. I call shenanigans to the description of documents being accurate, and so do the religious folk. If you are just describing the appearance of a document, then you can say you are being accurate as long as you describe the appearance accurately, no? Well, the Da Vinci Code goes as far as describing the contents of the documents. There are numerous instances where there are blatent innaccuracies of the description of the contents. For instance, in the book, the Dead Sea Scrolls are described as being Early Christian documents. This is entirely false, they were written by a Jewish sect that was around during the time of Christ, but they did not follow him, and quite possibly, were entirely unaware of Christ’s existence. Another document is described to suggest that translations have subtle differences that can have huge implications. In one instance, one of the excluded gospels claims that Mary Magdalene is Christ’s companion. This is meant to say she is one of Christ’s followers. In the Da Vinci Code, it is said that the Coptic word for companion can also mean spouse… however, this document is not written in Coptic; it is written in Aramaic. These sorts of inaccuracies are spread throughout the entire text. Again, no big deal, because it is a work of fiction, but the claim in the very beginning of the book is that these claims are accurate.

I loved the story, as it is full of twists and turns. If you love mysteries and suspense, you may like the Da Vinci Code. I liked the book, but I will hold my reservation on the movie until I see it… which may not be for quite some time.