The idea of fantasyland never striked me, nor did unsolid premises it presents. The sane author of The Da Vinci Code creats the foundation of his story by introducing a hypothetical ecclesiastic environment.
Story moves on pretty fast, the characters are well developed, the scenes are superbly sequenced, thrill is kept alive all the way and as the end of perfect thriller, the climax is shocking (unless you are hardcore mystery reader). However, as you reach the climax, you also reach the point of disappointment.
Not at all because of the angle of twist, but just because of the reasoning it gives. It becomes imperative to question if the facts mentioned in the book are honest?, if yes, why should Dan Brown be the first one to make it public? OR most importantly, why should it be presented in form of such critical vulnerability?. If the fact (or even a shard of it) is fallacious, then, to be frank, whole attempt of publicizing fantasy has failed miserably.
The plot, if you simply do not bother to care, is stunning. About the codes and riddles, one can very easily learn its mediocracy, hence author’s mind game. Though flaunting a Clerical appearance, this book is as commonplace as any of the Sidney Sheldon’s work.