DaVinci Code

Okay, so I read the DaVinci Code over the weekend, and while it was an enjoyable book, it was an odd experience for me. My normal genres don't really include this sort of contemporary maybe-fact-based fiction, and the style was not one that I generally read on a day-to-day basis. The constant flashbacks caused continuity problems for me, but overall I would recommend the book.

However, there are some problems, mostly stemming from the upcoming movie.

1. Tom Hanks? Come on - the main character in the book was described as having a deep baritone voice, and looking like "Harrison Ford in tweed". That doesn't say Tom Hanks to me. But I'm sure he'll do a spectacular job - he's that good an actor.
2. I don't know who they've got playing the female lead, but in all the publicity pictures I've seen, she's a brunette. The fact that Sophie was a red-head (or at least auburn) was a minor yet critical plot point in the book. So I think the casting director must have slept through his book-reading.
3. Now, granted, this book has been out for 3 years and I'm just now picking it up ($4.25 for a paperback at Costco was too good to pass up). But from all of the previous publicity, the TV shows, etc. I thought that the code was actually written by DaVinci and was evidenced in his paintings/art/folios. The book was good, but the media seemed to misrepresent it.

Now, the funny thing is - this is just the kind of book that I've got rolling around in my head. Now, if I write my book (about an archaeologist with startling theories that a secret society and the church are trying to keep from going public), *I*'ll probably get sued by Dan Brown for plagerism! Granted, my archaeologist is most likely to be planted firmly in the 24th century, if published, it'd be categorized Sci Fi imprint, and is unlikey to get any of this sort of wide press and media attention...

Maybe a lawsuit wouldn't be such a bad thing. Or maybe I should wait a few more years...