Comments on: Conspiracy Theory

By: matthew

matthew — Wed, 17 May 2006 10:40:19 +0000

I have been reliably informed by my other half that the De Vinci Code is ‘alright’, and so have resolved to read it while sitting on a beach in Fuerteventura, two weeks from now. It will be swiftly followed by Tad William’s War of the Flowers, which I’m certain will be far, far better, and almost certainly will never be made into a movie.

By: Lyle

Lyle — Wed, 17 May 2006 08:51:54 +0000

Da Vinci Code is - to be honest - shit. It’s appallingly written, and it’s shit.

See, now if the Have Your Say comment had written that, everyone would’ve understood.

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 16 May 2006 20:30:18 +0000

Pete - you’re right. There a multitude of sins and errors with this current stylesheet. That’s because I got bored half way through sorting it out. For you, I will make an effort to make the links more noticable. I might also fix the blockquotes too.

Amber - you have hit the proverbial nail on its wrought iron cranium.

By: Amber

Amber — Tue, 16 May 2006 17:44:46 +0000

Funny comment, although I completely agree. Da Vinci Code was one of the hardest books I’ve ever managed to force my bleeding eyes to read. As a writer who would like to be published someday, I usually hold my tongue when it comes to criticizing other writers. I know what a tough process it is. But I make an exception for Mr. Brown, mostly because I don’t think he even cares to become better. His prose is full of cliches, flat characters, and unoriginal composition. He does manage to tell a decent story though, and so the movie might actually be pretty good.

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 16 May 2006 16:36:08 +0000

Off-topic (so delete this if you must), it’s very hard to tell the difference between links and text with this colour scheme. Please can we have a paler blue or underlines?