The Rule of Four
discussion
In and of itself
date
newest »



Think of it this way, you didn't watch Casino Royale becuase of the cinematography. Because that movie's job is to such you in and have you run with the character, not think about his developing role in a struggling society.
These are fun books, but that's just it, they are books, not novels.

Ah, finally a book that tells the truth about being a graduate student of English and all the adventure, fame and world acclaim we get.

In terms of Rule of Four, I really enjoyed this one as well. I enjoyed the plot, though the characters were poorly developed. The main character was the only one I seemed to connect with.

I mean, 'an erudite 'Divinci code''. Obviously I'm not intelligent enough to read this poor attempt at a novel.
Big words and good education don't make a good book.
Please don't tell me on the cover this book is for intelligenyt people, I'll make my own mind up.
Jeremy


As to the Da Vinci Code, it is not the standard but more people are familiar with it. The Rule of Four is closer though to the movie National Treasure.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Just as a side note though: Can we quit comparing this - and every other quasi-conspiracy theory author - to the DaVinci Code? Yes, Dan Brown wrote a book and a decent one at that, but if he was really that remarkable an author, we would be discussing his OTHER books as well...and I don't see anyone shouting the praise of "Deception Point."
Let's start giving these books the credit they are due, in an of themselves.