Dan Brown's acclaimed novels are excellent reading material, the kind of books you can pick up and finish in short time and enjoy. They present ideas and histories that cause controversy, yet can be digested and recognized for what they are; good story telling. Unfortunately, Dan Brown's novels haven't made for great movies.

As the article states, his Da Vinci Code followed as a weak action movie with a lot of information about hidden history, secret groups, and the one revelation that should have been a surprise if everyone and their mothers hadn't already skipped to end of the book. Hopefully the newest movie will be better paced; honestly, I thought Angels and Demons would have made for the better first movie because of the great imagery that was presented in that novel. The only reason the film makers went with the Da Vinci Code first was to drum up box office numbers with its controversial material about Christ. At least Tom Hanks did away with his funky hair style in Angels and Demons, lets see a whole article devoted to that!

It seems rather obvious that you've never actually read any Dan Brown novels. If you had, you'd realize that the books are quite compelling, if truth is exaggerated for dramatic effect. I remember picking up Angels and Demons long before The Da Vinci Code ever became popular enough to get its prequel any spotlight. I was only 17 and I was hooked. Also, I hate history. It's terminally boring. But I was engrossed from the first chapter on.

I haven't seen the movie, but I did see the Da Vinci Code movie and found it dull at best. So I don't doubt that the movie is a poor translation this time around either.

Sorry, JD, but "the books are quite compelling" can't be made as a definitive statement. What compels one person doesn't necessarily compel another. I HATED the Da Vinci Code, and think Dan Brown is an awful writer, but I can't just come out and say "The Da Vinci Code is one of the shallowest pieces of tripe I've ever read," as much as I'd like to.

Actually, Gumbercules, you CAN say that. That would be a statement of your opinion and experience. What you couldn't say is that it's the worst book ever written. Because, obviously some people like it.

I haven't read either book, nor have I watched either movie. I just like reading peoples reactions to controversial material.

i must watch the film

Basically it seems like an ignorant statement for a critic to make: that the writer of the book upon which a movie is based is responsible for the failure of the movie. I've seen both movies and read both books. I think the movies are dreadful, because the action, etc. does not translate well from the books, which (given what they are) are quite wonderful and, yes, thrilling.

The only person who posted something pertaining to article, and not pertaining to those commenting, was Gumbercules. Good grief, what's the matter with having an honest opinion and being able to state it without someone else coming along and calling them out on it.

People, don't insult one another calling them out on bad syntax, hyperbole, and using words longer than four letters expressing their honest opinions. I've read alot of people complaining that SciFi Wire has gone down the tubes because of its articles and writing style, but what irks me the most are those commenting about trite matters. And yes, I am aware of the irony of commenting on the nature of those commenting with snarky remarks.

Now, really, where is the article that should have made headlines from the first announcement that this movie was getting made; Tom Hanks' new hair style.

I thought that Angels & Demons as a novel was better than The Da Vinci Code... I just wish they had picked an actor like Johnny Depp to play langdon instead of tired, old Tom Hanks... he just doesnt fit the image of Langdon... it all depends on what you read... personally i have enough stress and boring things to read at work, so i like pulp fiction type novels and sci-fi... and the believability of a story is kind of a lame thing to point out, its fiction, its not supposed to be realistic... sorry ranting... but i liked Angels & Demons much better...

Almost as bad as the DaVinci Load. Not as offensive, but just as boring. Not as bad as Tom Hanks hair from the first movie but you can check your brain at the door. Figured out the ending & who the bad guys were & walked out after 1/2 hour.
I know this is "Fiction" but many idiots out there think these elements ring true in the Catholic church. If the Catholic Church is said to have murdered members of the Illuminati (which the didn't) of which Galileo was a member: Galileo died almost a century and a half before the Illuminati were founded!!! Time for some fact-checking. In the movie they said the Catholics are portrayed as believing “Stem Cell Research Is Murder,” when, in fact, the Catholics are PRO-stem cell research, except for procedures which destroy embryos (aka: babies.) The movie said Pope Pius IX is said to have bludgeoned the genitalia of male statues ... this NEVER happened. Pius IX lavishly funded the arts. Despite all the factual errors the pacing was dreadful. The CGI vatican was annoying. Good night Gracie! ZZZZZZZ! The money spent on that moovie would be better spent on a book... but make sure it is someone other than Dan Brown. :)

i have to say that i really didn't care for the movie A&D. i had just read the book, and i felt the movie was pretty flat at best. i wasn't really that concerned for the characters or the Vatican, and i was annoyed about how they changed the story.

i have to say though that i enjoyed reading both A&D and DVC. they weren't super deep, but they were fun and exciting, and they were realistic enough to get people wondering about Jesus' possible descendants or the Illuminati. so, for DB, two thumbs up for making it feel real and weaving a lot of questionable history in there for that very purpose.

i'm writing my own novel, which includes a bunch of actual no-shit history, but i would like to create the sense of urgency that DB's books did in me and obviously a lot of other readers.

Both novels by Dan Brown, Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons are excellent. Perhaps a different director who doesn't feel the need to always include his BFF, Tom Hanks, as the lead might have been able to give a more honest and exciting visual interpretation. Neither movie came close to capturing the core essence and profound attraction of the novels' characters and plots. And Tom Hanks, although a good actor, was a poor casting choice for both The DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons. Casting Hanks sank both transitions of the novels to the film medium immediately. The novels, though, are incredibly exciting, written with strong plots and very interesting, compeling characters. Unfortunately Opie drove a nail through both of them.