MiK: Illuminati | Sputnikmusic

magictikkleCwicked 01.04.09	Dan Brown doesn't do his research, you'll have better luck elsewhere. Honestly if your into that particular conspiracy any way you don't need a book just take note that anything of that variety is bullshit and always has been.
magictikkleCwicked 01.04.09	*Variety of our culture I meant to say as in religion.
MiK 01.04.09	I've always been skeptical about his books ever since I read Da Vinci Code. I did my own extensive research and it helped. At some points its hard to follow Dan Brown's work, yes, but not everything this guy says is bullshit.
Athom 01.04.09	oh noes! someone pissed off over FICTION with vaguely historic overtones. I thought Angels and Demons was a fun read.
magictikkleCwicked 01.04.09	Everything he's trying to prove has always been known in the adept mind to be bullshit, I meant to say, so he really didn't need to write a fiction story about it, people just need a reeducation not a Tom Hanks franchise.
MiK 01.04.09	Angels & Demons was fun, fast-paced, exciting... I left it that way, and didn't feel the need to do any more debating. I understand its contreversy, but theres a limit to what I take seriously in books these days.
Athom 01.04.09	its fiction, what difference does it make if its all bullshit or not? you're trying to hold it up to a different standard than what its intended to be judged against. the pseudo-historical context is only intended to make it interesting. if stupid people read fiction as gospel that doesn't make the book any less enjoyable, it just proves that they're stupid people.
Masochist 01.04.09	Dan Brown doesn't try to prove anything; he just takes his current topic of research and twists it into a story. Most of the truth in his stories come from the little side snippets; facts about the Mona Lisa, stuff about the X-Prize, etc....things that can be found in any book, and that hardly pertain to the main plot. Don't take it too seriously. That being said, I've read all four of his books so far, and I think "Angels & Demons" is the best one...that's saying something, too, because all of his books are great.
Athom 01.04.09	thank you Masochist.
magictikkleCwicked 01.04.09	The problem is, Brown capitalized on the fact that so many people took it as 'gospel' as you say, he sold his sorry excuse for a fiction tale to a movie company to profit off the sheep who'd eat it up because of its slightly controversial atmosphere. It was just another ruse, why even bother letting that scum sit on our bookshelves? Thats what gets me, not its fictional qualities, I couldn't ever give a crap about that because its a bad story to begin with.
Athom 01.04.09	not every book can be House of Leaves.
magictikkleCwicked 01.04.09	Not every book that isn't House of Leaves needs to be published.
Athom 01.04.09	got me there.
Mendigo 01.04.09	go read some Umberto Eco. and if you ever visit Rome you can see that many of Dan Brown's descriptions are really inaccurate. but the problem's about his books aren't that not everything is true, but that the build up (and outcome) is 100% the same in the three books I've read, and that he just isn't a very gifted writer. if he would write about something else but concpiracy theories, he wouldn't get a fraction of the attention he's gettin now. oh, and House of Leaves ftw! ;)
Hewitt 01.04.09	I'm actually just finishing up Angels & Demons right now, on the last 100 pages or so. I've really enjoyed it, even more so than the Da Vinci code. The people that take these fiction books too seriously are really fucking stupid. I don't believe I've ever seen a disclaimer with these books saying they are real, so people need to get over themselves and chill out a little.
Commortus 01.04.09	Dan Brown is a horrible writer
jingledeath 01.04.09	I agree with Commortus but Angels and Demons was actually quite enjoyable except for the fact that beginning of the book resembled the Da Vinci code too much.
Masochist 01.04.09	You mean the beginning of "The DaVinci Code" resembles "Angels & Demons" too much...because "Angels & Demons" came first (it was his second book; "The DaVinci Code" was his fourth). And I thought it was a good book...I think they're all good books. Good stories, good reads. Perhaps they aren't "House of Leaves," but I'd rather read those books than, say, the "Twilight" series (and if you want to talk about selling out a book series to the movies...). Oh...and to be the first one to comment on the actual list...#'s 3, 6, and 10 are at least enjoyable, with #6 being a huge standout. The problem I have with Fall Out Boy's new c.d. is that, while it's certainly more consistent than previous records (and has more of the old Fall Out Boy personality), there aren't any true stand-out songs. Nothing jumps out at you as you're listening, not like "This Ain't A Scene...." Still, it's pretty good all together. I can enjoy some of AAR's stuff, but "Gives You Hell" is getting real old real fast (though the opening track is enjoyable). I can't stand anything made with "Auto-Tune" where the singing is the focal point...ESPECIALLY from someone like Kanye, who's move to Auto-Tuned singing when he's such a proficient rapper is baffling. Anyways...not too many complaints about this list.