I mean, Robert Langdon and Sienna Brooks are running for their lives, yet he still has time to flirt with the girl, explain the intricacies of Botticelli's painting, Dante's epic poem, and Florentine history and architecture. "Lira for your thoughts?" Puh-lease.
But you gotta give it to the guy - he really did some research for his books. That's a lot of Google searching, Wikipedia reading, and Street View navigation. All the places that Langdon visited are described in excruciating detail, it's as if you're there. Heck, the book reads more like a travel guide. So many details that are not even relevant to the story. Does it matter if Langdon was wearing a Harris Tweed jacket and not something else? Does it matter if the USB stick holding the doomsday video is red? Does it matter if the Turkish man was driving a Bently and not a Toyota?
It's as if Dan Brown came up with so much researched materials, that it's a waste if they're not mentioned in the book. So his characters end up being mouthpieces spouting all these facts and figures and trivia and scientific theories that they all start sounding alike.
Dan Brown always prides himself that almost everything presented in his books are true. While certain things are factual, I would say their relevance is sometimes exaggerated for dramatic effect. And the plot twist at the end? Not cool. The spiky-haired girl that was hunting down Langdon? She was just shadowing him. The doctor in the hospital that was shot in cold blood? Blanks. And the doctor was one of their guys, too. Sienna Brooks? Zobrist's lover and confidant. So why did she tag along with Langdon in 90% of the book then? The deadly plague that's supposed to kill everyone? Just a infertility virus that has a 1-in-3 chance of success. Great, a virus that can do maths.
All these would've been okay if there is a strong plot and convincing storyline. Nope.
No comments:
Post a Comment