Write your own review!
As forumulaic as the driven wind>.
The Reviewer at the Open Critic has this to say about Angels and Demons"
James R. W.Armstrong
Dan Brown's thriller puts human face on age oldwar of religion and science
"Angels and Demons is as formula driven as the driven snow. That’s neither good nor bad. What makes a book transcend the formula is if we forget the formula itself. On this point Dan Brown succeeds. Perhaps too well … as a writer I marvelled throughout at how well he was applying the standard. It was so well applied that instead of wishing he would cover it with at least a modicum of care, I applauded each step along the way as he broke into smaller and smaller bits; racing for instance to rescue the ’soon to be slaughtered,’ not just once but once every 6 hours." ( www.theopencritic.com )
The rest of the review continues on in a similar vein. I have to say I agree.
I thought that I'd be 'let down' after reading Brown's now-famous The DaVinci Code. Not so! In 'Angels and Demons,' we are led on a thrilling race through modern Rome in a desperate attempt to save four cardinals - any one of whom could become the next Pope- from death. And to save the Vatican itself from destruction from the most powerful bomb ever devised.
My favorite book!
In Brown's story, the predecessor to The DaVinci Code, we meet that novel's hero, Professor Robert Langdon, and the brilliant and mysterious scientest, Vittoria Vetra as they try to catch the terrorists.
Once again, the ending is stunning and will leave you astonished and, like me, deeply moved.
This is my favorite book ever written! I started reading it, and couldn't stop until I finished. I have reread it so many times, I've memorized it, literally! I absolutely love this book!
OK so we have anti-matter and the world's best scientists but they can't find a 'wireless' camera that is broacasting a tv picture? Simple RF triangulation... talk about suspension of disbelief. Huge hole in the plot.
The book was well written, and i enjoyed it, despite being catholic. People should just accept that it is a NOVEL, and he is not trying to give us facts. The reason that it is not a five is that Langdon is too clueless compared to the DVC. Good read though.
Angels and Demons
I thought that the first four chaptersof Angels and Demons were BRILLIANT, and from there on, the book just got better and better! I don't know where Dan Brown gets all his ideas from, but he is a top author. I love his books, Angels and Demons and the Da Vinci Code.
i couldn't put it down... fast enough
I stayed up for three hours reading Angels and Demons because I didn't want to put it down!!!! Understandably, I was extremely tired the next day, only having an hour of sleep!!!!!!!!!!!
All of Dan Browns' books are original, fnny and clever, if you haven't already, READ ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!! Cheers bubi ###
I'm sure DB is an interesting guy and his passion for art must run deep... but I was truly embarrassed for him as I read Angels & Demons. This is not a novel a serious Catholic can respect. I'm not an expert on Rome, artwork or Galileo (heck, I'm not even sure if I spelled his name right), but I have a basic grasp of the Catholic faith, and a great respect for it. To earn a reader's willingness to suspend disbelief, an author has to have an inkling of how his characters might think. Brown clearly had no guidance from a Catholic clergyman -- or even probably from a knowledgable Catholic lay person, for that matter -- as he wrote.
Dan Brown wishes he was Robert Langdon
The minimum amount of time priests-in-training spend studying philosophy, theology, Church history and other such subjects is six years. Those at the Vatican typically spend much longer. Brown, however, has them speaking at remedial levels of understanding, as though they just emerged from their first high school Catholic Moral Theology class. At one supposedly climactic point in the novel, he actually has a priest speaking "to" the very concept of science, as though it were some kind of being! At another, he has a Catholic priest having a supposed revelation from God that causes him to completely misinterpret the Scripture verse "thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church." He calls the "most sacred" thing in the Basillica of St. Peter the tomb of St. Peter -- completely neglecting to mention Christ Himself in the tabernacle. Also, it doesn't help that Brown puts his story in a backdrop of half-truth, half-stuff-he-just-makes-up (e.g., only cardinals present in conclave can be elected pope). I could go on.
At least his recklessness in treating his subject matter didn't ruin good storytelling. There was very little of that, Brown uses a lot of cliches. He employs far too many predictable would-be "cliffhangers." And if a reader knows anything about foreshadowing, hardly anything in this book would come as a surprise.
Finally, I have a moral problem with the book, too, and would caution anyone serious about their relationship with God to consider it -- particularly my brothers and sisters in the Catholic Church. The book uses Christ (i.e. the Church) for strictly entertainment purposes, devoid of moral value -- so is a reader of the book using the notion of our Sacred Lord for a "cheap thrill," in a sense? Am I too serious? Think about it -- after all, God did take the initiative to, literally, write something in stone for mankind to look at. Is using God as a character in a suspense novel with scant or no moral value using God's name "in vein?" This thought did kind of make me squirm as I read, especially in light of the author's lack of both respect for and understanding of the Church. I'll offer you this comparison: C.S. Lewis first conceived the fine book "Screwtape Letters" to convey the thoughts of devils as they tried to tempt a man, and angels as they tried to guide him closer to God. After prayer, Lewis wrote the book only from the devils' perspective. His reason?: He had too great a respect for angels to even pretend he could know their wisdom. In other words, he had a sense that there was something too sacred to write about. In my own life, I would like to keep such a sense of the sacred, and that includes not (again) picking up a book that uses Christ (i.e. the Church) without a higher purpose than simply to entertain. Please, do think about it. May God bless!
I quite liked the DVC, but thought Angels and Demons was a pathetic, pedestrian, and basically stupid novel. The most glaring fault is that Langdon is constantly suprised, blown away, and struck dumb by the events of the book. It seems like every page he has a breakdown where his legs "turn to jelly" or he feels shock "in the pit of his stomach". If he really was a world-class scholar, he would have realised in the first stages of the story that he was going beyond his realm of experience. He is portrayed as reacting like a dim-witted fool.
Besides which, who else thinks that Brown desperately wishes he was Langdon?