SNG ROTS Novelisation

fyi, Stover's ROTS Novel is at #9 on Life's list of Most Popular Fictional Material. pretty good, huh? Hopefully, it'll grow to kick out the Da Vinci Code. That thing's been at #1 for waaay too long.

 

Hey benTantilles,

Sorry to go off-topic here... have you read The Da Vinci Code? It's a good book!

Cheers,
JediJean --> whose favourite book right now happens to be The Da Vinci Code... but then again, I haven't read ROTS yet... hmmm, not sure if I'd want to read it before I watch the movie though...

 

The Da Vinci is what I characterise as fashionable anti-Catholicism. Not to mention, dishonorable conduct on the part of a publisher who passes off rubbish as fact.

Ah whatever. The book isn't that well written anyway. I've read better books by Issac Asimov and Frank Herbert.

 

The Da Vinci Code was never meant to be fact, just fiction, but it was so cleverly written that it seems so believable... kinda like when you watch National Treasure... you kinda wonder if it could be real and true? Perhaps I'm one of those more liberal Catholics, but I found it intriguing all the same.

 

well if u were more open than be defensive about it u'll see many truths in the book. I have not read da vinci but i did read angels and demons. the story is BASED on facts altho the story is fiction. dan brown rocks !

 

One of the reasons The Da Vinci Code became such a huge international hit is his claim that it's based on fact. It's the same reason the novel has been so publicly criticized (especially by upholders of the Christian faith).

Sure, it may be a "fact" that Leonardo was a Grand Master in the Priory of Scion (was that what it's called? I read the novel some time ago so I may not remember it correctly), that the person beside Jesus in the Last Supper painting is Mary Magdalene, and that Leonardo and his followers were Ninja Turtles -- oops, I meant keepers of what I will call the "Holy Grail secret" as described in the novel. Even if these "facts" are true, as Dan Brown claims, it only shows that some people believe in the "Holy Grail secret" -- it doesn't say anything about the truth or fallacy of that secret itself. That is still a matter open to debate, and -- like the debate over whether God exists or whether Jesus was the son of God -- is likely never to be resolved in this world (no offence meant).

I'm an agnostic myself, and I enjoyed the novel as a story about something that may or may not be true. Christians would of course treat the novel as pure fiction with no possibility of fact, but I would like to point out that they can enjoy it just as they enjoy Star Wars or other fantasy stories.

(Another reason for the novel's popularity may be the novelty of the idea about what the "Holy Grail" really is, though it is, of course, not that novel an idea -- I have read this theory on the Internet before Dan Brown wrote his bestseller. But fiction is often the most effective way of reaching to the masses.)

 

To me, Dan Browns : The Da Vinci Code is a book to let bengs sound REALLY intellectual and crap like that.

 

Xeno, have you actually read the book as to make that comment?

 

Ya, borrowed the book from a friend to read. Most of the stuff in it sounds barely plaussible, mainly fiction for me to say so...

 

Well, in case no one noticed, Dan Brown did lay claim that what he wrote was fact. Go read the first few pages before he starts the novel.

That's what irked most people.

And given the state of politics here in the US, one gains an insight on how the liberals view the Church.

And yes, I do agree with Xeno's blunt assessment. It's a lot of intellectual crab made to sound plausible when it isn't.

The storyline isn't particularly innovative either. Then again, how many would really read a complex story?

Xeno: if you ever had Toddy Christopher as an English teacher, he'd label it as trashy American nonsense. With good reason. A lot of American books aren't particularly innovative. Only a few.

 

y isnt anyone talking bout angels and demons...

 

I did indeed read Dan Brown's opening claim before reading the novel, and that was indeed the point I was trying to make in my previous post:

I don't remember his exact wording, but I remember that he claimed that the Priory really existed and that Leonardo Da Vinci was a Grand Master. He also claimed that the Christian sect he mentioned (can't remember what it's called) really exists and they use such devices as the "chalis" (or however you spell that) on themselves.

Like I said earlier, the existence of the Priory only shows that there is a brotherhood that believes that HG=MM, but it doesn't prove the truth of what they believe in.

 

The allegations of that Catholic Sect Opus Dei aren't quite proven. That definitely exists.

But truth to tell,it's quite implausible for a highly secret society to "accidentally" leave a name list of its leaders in a record library. In fact, some people think it's a fake.

As for Angel and Demons, some of the descriptions might be accurate, but to what extent, I'd have to pay a visit to Rome to find out. Apparently, from what i have heard, the author did make some errors.

 

Ya I read that Dan Brown made some glaring errors in his novels. I'm not an art historian myself so I wouldn't know. =)

 

well, its good enuff for me, i kinda like the camerlengo, pity he happened to be the bad guy...

 

Technically, the Church doesn't condone test tube babies. The Church regards it as artificial. Again, the book gets even basic dos and don'ts wrong.

Any how, I haven't read the book in a while, not to mention the book is half way across the globe from me.

But back to the topic, my opinion on the novelization is that it's too condensed in my opinion. There are few or no details of the space battle above. Ah whatever, I'll just see the movie to discover what it is.

 

Knowing Lucas and the way he works, he probably didn't provide very many details to the writer about the battle scenes.

Perhaps this was deliberate, so that when the movie comes out, no one can say that the book was better than the movie, or that the movie did not live up to readers' expectations... kinda clever of Lucas, if you ask me

Also, it gives Lucas more room for creativity in the way that he crafts those scenes... after all, he does have a documentarian style of making movies... which means that he doesn't know how the story will turn out when he first begins working on it... but rather, he lets the story tell itself as it unfolds.

I guess it just remains to be seen when the movie reaches us next month.

 

I personally don't like too many details of space battles and other action scenes in books...I usually gloss over them because...I don't know, they just don't seem that interesting when I read them. I prefer novelisations -- and novels -- that provide more plot details and character depth. Let the action speak for itself in the movie. Just my opinion.

 

wmgan,

I agree with you on this... maybe it's the fact that I'm female or whatever... but battle scenes are just not my cup of tea when it comes to the books, I'd rather learn more about the plot and the characters.

Sometimes it feels like battle scenes are just fillers, but at the same time, I guess it depends... the outcome of a battle could move a plot along, or something that happens in a battle could be saying something about a character in the book... so it's hard to say for sure.

 

Mr Christopher took me for Term 1, as you said... He said Dan Brown is a lousy author who makes fiction and stuff which is not real sound real.

 

I don't know, but part of the reason is that I like to see things blow up. Star Wars has plenty of that.

On the storyline side, Star Wars has never been strong in that suit.

Xeno: Toddy took my class for 2 years, and we discovered a lot about him, like his den in that corner of the school, and once he went in and someone knocked him over by accident and he went into a tirade and went out leaving us all stunned.

 

Well, Jean, I'm male, so I'm sure gender has nothing to do with it. =)

 

Nah, gender has nothing to do with it.

There will always be a bunch of crazy people who love fancy weaponry and like to blow things up for the sheer fun of it.

Even girls aren't immune, that's why you have them in the army. Anyhow, I never did get to blow things up, no thanks to medical problem which should have been detected earlier by some )(#*&$)#&%@), but I bet I'll get a chance once I graduate.