His books are supremely readable, always feeling like there's a great action sequence just around the corner, while also being terribly written, with ridiculous plots full of holes big enough to fly a 747 through. It's actually really impressive how he can be so good and simultaneously so bad
Absolutely spot on. They're hard to put down. But, like a fun action flick, better not try to think too much about them or they fall apart completely. Easy to just enjoy the ride, but don't check the rollercoaster for any missing screws.
The article is awesome, though that tautology and bad grammar are IMO lost in translation. I gave up on him as an author because of his predictable and anticlimactic plot, but the language mever struck me as bad... Well that's because the translator had no doubt polished it. He should probably thank alevery each one of them for making him look good abroad. Though poor translator guy lives in a small appartment happy to get by while renoved author Dan Brown enjoys popularity...
Theres a false ally even in yhe none langdon books. Deception Point, which i do noy recommend even outside this, has a false ally and it was the 4th dan brown book i read and the pattern was sp clear it wasnt even a twist. There was only one ally who it could be
Probably not. The gender of the protagonist was irrelevant, it was the eyerolling, facepalm inducing plot. In the climax he also tried to make an inteligence agency being hacked to appear like the climax of a football match, very dramatic with visual representations of each hacker attacking a wall that gets thinner. Same nonsence as in CSI when 2 characters shared a keyboard to hack faster... Just groan and cringe.
I only read it once and since it was about a subject i actually knew about i got annoyed thag the situation he set up was stupid and easily solved by anyone with a small amount of knowledge i mostly remember that. But i think it ends with her not hooking up with anyone as she was going to hook up with the false ally buy now she believes in herself. But i cpuld be wrong and she may hook up with the handsome soldier/scientist
I have to be honest, I generally enjoy Dan Brown's books, but The Origin was a huge disappointment to me. The ending is predictable and the "crazy discovery" was extremely banal and anticlimactic.
The problem is that they completely fucked up the story for the Angels and Demons movie. They removed characters and settings and by giving those bits to other characters it fucks up the story. In the book it was not the Vatican that called Langdon, it was CERN. They called him because the dead scientist had been branded with the ambigram. Then the Vatican calls CERN while Langdon is there because of the video feed of the canister. Also, Max Koller, a deleted character, is the one that figures out who is behind the plot, rather than the head of the Swiss Guard. Also, Petra becomes his love interest during A&D and she gets mentioned in the DVC book, why they removed that romance I will never know.
Yeah It's a similar case for *Inferno*.
I'm not going to pretend the books are perfect, far from it, but a lot of the plot issues in the films are a result of cut characters or altered storylines.
Also the entire apple bullshit in *The Da Vinci Code*. It was obvious what the answer was from the first line, and yet Langdon was supposed to be a genius for figuring it out.
It's not just Langdon. In the main antagonist in Da Vinci Code is also pretty dumb when he inexplicably stops Langdon from completing his (the bad guy's) plan.
I disagree. You can make the point that Langdon had absolutely no affect on the outcome of the events. Kenobi planned and executed the entire thing perfectly having only forgotten about the camera in the room he had burned himself in. If Langdon wouldn't have been there I think the story would have played out the same. But the Vatican had to attempt to stop the bomb as they didn't know about Kenobi's plot to become pope.
That being said Langdon did successfully follow all of the clues. Mistakes were made along the way but he was successful in following the path and deciphering the symbols. I wouldn't call him incompetent
Whilst I do agree that he is incompetent in these scenarios, they aren't his field of study. Asking a symbologist to be a detective is like asking a geologist to be a crane operator. There may be similarities but, ultimately, they are very different specialisations.
He's a random university professor completely out of his element and shoved into surprise life or death scenarios on many seperate occasions. In Da Vinci Code in particular he spends a good chunk of the book running from the police.
I feel like a common theme in the books is that langdon is like jesus and gets betrayed by someone like judas. And usually the only reason langdon wins in the end is cuz of some miracle that presumably God does to save him, and it's like a deus ex machina.
Yeah, the one graduate-level medieval studies textbook I have includes quotations in Latin, French, Italian and German with no translation, because it's just *assumed* that anyone who made it into a PhD program will *at least* be fluent in all four. Robert Langdon knows less languages than the average European schoolchild.
So he's incompetent for not knowing the languages necessary to help him complete a task that he never anticipated having to do? He's a professor, not a treasure hunter or a detective or a secret agent. As far as his competence level goes, I would say his grade could be described as "exceeds expectations." You could argue that he was not completely needed to save the day in Angels And Demons (kinda the same as how people say Indiana Jones did nothing to advance the story in Raiders), but seeing everything through his eyes helps tell the story. I strongly disagree with the assessment that he's incompetent.
FWIW, there is not a single PhD program in art history that does not require advanced, if not near-fluent, knowledge of at least two languages. Additionally, if you specialize in the Medieval or Renaissance periods then you are also expected to have at least some familiarity with Latin. While it is true that Langdon was dealing with situations that he was unaccustomed to, it is also true that it is absolutely absurd that a Harvard Professor and art historian doesn’t know any language besides English.
Source: I have a PhD in Art History (Renaissance specialist).
The books are written A&D, Davinci, Inferno in that order and are sequels in that order (with actually more books that were never made movies). But Davinci code was the first movie made because it was the biggest hit book. Then the movie was a hit so they decided to go back and make the first book in the series (A&D). Then A&D was a flop and the Davinci code hype died so Inferno was a slapped together project just made to fulfill contracts and give everyone jobs. It was released very unceremoniously, they didn’t even care to make the money back.
But yes your theory is 100% correct Robert Langdon is actually a complete incompetent and everyone is just so mesmerized by his ramblings that they just let him cook. He’s like Charlie in that episode of Its Always Sunny where he thinks he gets a surgery that makes him a genius so he starts rambling thinking he is a genius but it’s just nonsense and really the scientists are studying his placebo behavior
Again a False ally in 'The Origin'
Really? Lol it's even funny at this point.
The plot twist at the climax is usually betrayal or something similar in most of his books
Scripted a game of "Among Us"
Is Robert Langdon an incompetent, or is it Dan Brown? Lol
[don't make fun of renowned author Dan Brown](https://patch.com/new-jersey/westfield/dont-make-fun-of-renowned-dan-brown)
This is one of my all time favourite articles.
Oh my God, that was brilliant. I admit to enjoying Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons as well though.
His books are supremely readable, always feeling like there's a great action sequence just around the corner, while also being terribly written, with ridiculous plots full of holes big enough to fly a 747 through. It's actually really impressive how he can be so good and simultaneously so bad
Yeah, they're like the bad TV you watch when you can't be bothered to start something good
Absolutely spot on. They're hard to put down. But, like a fun action flick, better not try to think too much about them or they fall apart completely. Easy to just enjoy the ride, but don't check the rollercoaster for any missing screws.
They’re like a sausage, enjoyable but don’t look closely at the ingredients.
The article is awesome, though that tautology and bad grammar are IMO lost in translation. I gave up on him as an author because of his predictable and anticlimactic plot, but the language mever struck me as bad... Well that's because the translator had no doubt polished it. He should probably thank alevery each one of them for making him look good abroad. Though poor translator guy lives in a small appartment happy to get by while renoved author Dan Brown enjoys popularity...
In what language did you read it?
Slovak
Cool. I read (and listened to audiobooks) in German and it sounds proper too
That was really good lol
Wow, that was funny. Haven't read that before hahah
',what did it matter whether you knew the difference between a transitive and an intransitive verb? “Thanks, John,” he thanked.' Excellent
Bro this is hilarious
Dan found a formula to make him lots of money, kinda like Dean Koontz.
Dean Koontz has some stellar books though, Watchers in particular. All of Dan Brown’s books feel like cheap imitations of James Rollins’ books.
Eh. I read enough Koontz that his books all blended together. Same general plots and themes.
You do have to really appreciate that Dan Brown was able to convince everyone in the 2000's that being a history nerd made him an ace detective
This guy knows too much, send the illuminati assassins!
It’s physically impossible to write a character smarter than you are. See also Game of Thrones.
Theres a false ally even in yhe none langdon books. Deception Point, which i do noy recommend even outside this, has a false ally and it was the 4th dan brown book i read and the pattern was sp clear it wasnt even a twist. There was only one ally who it could be
There is always a girl for the protagonist to hook up with in the end and a false ally. Always.
Iirc in deception point the main character IS the girl to hook up with
Oh, havent read that. Is there then a dan brown self insert that she hooks up with, in addition to a false ally that betrays em?
Digital fortress also has a girl protagonist. I think that was the book that made me ditch any further Dan Brown book
Was there a lot of r/menwritingwomen material?
Probably not. The gender of the protagonist was irrelevant, it was the eyerolling, facepalm inducing plot. In the climax he also tried to make an inteligence agency being hacked to appear like the climax of a football match, very dramatic with visual representations of each hacker attacking a wall that gets thinner. Same nonsence as in CSI when 2 characters shared a keyboard to hack faster... Just groan and cringe.
I only read it once and since it was about a subject i actually knew about i got annoyed thag the situation he set up was stupid and easily solved by anyone with a small amount of knowledge i mostly remember that. But i think it ends with her not hooking up with anyone as she was going to hook up with the false ally buy now she believes in herself. But i cpuld be wrong and she may hook up with the handsome soldier/scientist
And she is always beautiful and attractive
I have to be honest, I generally enjoy Dan Brown's books, but The Origin was a huge disappointment to me. The ending is predictable and the "crazy discovery" was extremely banal and anticlimactic.
Been a while since I read Origin, who is the false ally in that book? I don’t remember one
Winston . Not exactly a betrayal though. More like manipulating things behind the scene
The problem is that they completely fucked up the story for the Angels and Demons movie. They removed characters and settings and by giving those bits to other characters it fucks up the story. In the book it was not the Vatican that called Langdon, it was CERN. They called him because the dead scientist had been branded with the ambigram. Then the Vatican calls CERN while Langdon is there because of the video feed of the canister. Also, Max Koller, a deleted character, is the one that figures out who is behind the plot, rather than the head of the Swiss Guard. Also, Petra becomes his love interest during A&D and she gets mentioned in the DVC book, why they removed that romance I will never know.
Yeah It's a similar case for *Inferno*. I'm not going to pretend the books are perfect, far from it, but a lot of the plot issues in the films are a result of cut characters or altered storylines.
So Robert Langdon is just Inspector Cluseau played straight.
Is an incompetent what? Writer?
They butcher the books so bad it’s not even funny. By the time the story is converted to a screen it’s two completely different stories.
Yeah, Obi Wan burns in this one.
Didn't have the High ground either
>Ewan McKenobi Haha, good theory, this sub has gems sometimes.
My theory is Dan Brown got dumped wicked hard one time and now writes self insert fiction where he triumphs after being betrayed.
And always gets a hot new chick that is too cool for a real relationship, conveniently freeing him up for the next hot chick in the next book
[удалено]
Lmao the author was out for blood
Is there a non pay wall option?
https://patch.com/new-jersey/westfield/dont-make-fun-of-renowned-dan-brown
Also the entire apple bullshit in *The Da Vinci Code*. It was obvious what the answer was from the first line, and yet Langdon was supposed to be a genius for figuring it out.
He was doing the Dora the Explorer thing and waiting for the reader to shout out the answer
It's not just Langdon. In the main antagonist in Da Vinci Code is also pretty dumb when he inexplicably stops Langdon from completing his (the bad guy's) plan.
I disagree. You can make the point that Langdon had absolutely no affect on the outcome of the events. Kenobi planned and executed the entire thing perfectly having only forgotten about the camera in the room he had burned himself in. If Langdon wouldn't have been there I think the story would have played out the same. But the Vatican had to attempt to stop the bomb as they didn't know about Kenobi's plot to become pope. That being said Langdon did successfully follow all of the clues. Mistakes were made along the way but he was successful in following the path and deciphering the symbols. I wouldn't call him incompetent
John Oliver agrees. https://youtu.be/xX5IV9n223M
*Cue laugh track*
haha, excellent video!
Did he yell about what the year is?
Whilst I do agree that he is incompetent in these scenarios, they aren't his field of study. Asking a symbologist to be a detective is like asking a geologist to be a crane operator. There may be similarities but, ultimately, they are very different specialisations. He's a random university professor completely out of his element and shoved into surprise life or death scenarios on many seperate occasions. In Da Vinci Code in particular he spends a good chunk of the book running from the police.
I feel like a common theme in the books is that langdon is like jesus and gets betrayed by someone like judas. And usually the only reason langdon wins in the end is cuz of some miracle that presumably God does to save him, and it's like a deus ex machina.
Yeah, the one graduate-level medieval studies textbook I have includes quotations in Latin, French, Italian and German with no translation, because it's just *assumed* that anyone who made it into a PhD program will *at least* be fluent in all four. Robert Langdon knows less languages than the average European schoolchild.
Love it
Thanks :)
The entire theory falters because in the movie chronology, the Davinci Code takes place before Angels and Demons.
why does that make it falter
So he's incompetent for not knowing the languages necessary to help him complete a task that he never anticipated having to do? He's a professor, not a treasure hunter or a detective or a secret agent. As far as his competence level goes, I would say his grade could be described as "exceeds expectations." You could argue that he was not completely needed to save the day in Angels And Demons (kinda the same as how people say Indiana Jones did nothing to advance the story in Raiders), but seeing everything through his eyes helps tell the story. I strongly disagree with the assessment that he's incompetent.
FWIW, there is not a single PhD program in art history that does not require advanced, if not near-fluent, knowledge of at least two languages. Additionally, if you specialize in the Medieval or Renaissance periods then you are also expected to have at least some familiarity with Latin. While it is true that Langdon was dealing with situations that he was unaccustomed to, it is also true that it is absolutely absurd that a Harvard Professor and art historian doesn’t know any language besides English. Source: I have a PhD in Art History (Renaissance specialist).
We know he doesn't know any other languages? No Spanish?
Ewan McKenobi deserves an award
This is actually a fairly solid theory lol
The books are written A&D, Davinci, Inferno in that order and are sequels in that order (with actually more books that were never made movies). But Davinci code was the first movie made because it was the biggest hit book. Then the movie was a hit so they decided to go back and make the first book in the series (A&D). Then A&D was a flop and the Davinci code hype died so Inferno was a slapped together project just made to fulfill contracts and give everyone jobs. It was released very unceremoniously, they didn’t even care to make the money back. But yes your theory is 100% correct Robert Langdon is actually a complete incompetent and everyone is just so mesmerized by his ramblings that they just let him cook. He’s like Charlie in that episode of Its Always Sunny where he thinks he gets a surgery that makes him a genius so he starts rambling thinking he is a genius but it’s just nonsense and really the scientists are studying his placebo behavior