dude...seriously. It's the literary equivalent of Nickleback.

Why can i get away with labelling a Nickleback fan a dumbass 'round here, but you guys have to ethically draw the line when scorn crosses over into the realm of literature? Some people think that literature is instantly credible...i meet o so many people who praise everything they've ever read. It's as if they think, "Well seems as though ive put so much time into this thing, i may as well like it, otherwise it'd be a complete waste."

As opposed to a film or record, which can be absorbed/rejected much more quickly.

it's not the equivalent of Nickleback.
Nicklebacks songs are like 4 minutes and i can't make it through that.

it's more like a michael moore doc.

some intersting ideas that you have to take with a grain of salt told in a breezy easy to digets fashion. And also it pisses off people who it's suppose to piss off and pleases those who want to be pleased.

But it pisses of more than those who are meant to be pissed off.

The facts/ideas don't irk me at all, its the format. The writing is just so bad that i can't read more than a couple of pages.

i won't argue that the dialog and action are written by a third grader.

agreed.

I'm just glad that people are reading, period. you guys should hate on the kids that read harry potter next.

Amgl - Have you read Dan Brown? You must have based on the comments.

Have you read "The Da Vinci Code"? Based on the comments it seems like you have.

If so....you called yourself a dumbass.


Your comparison to Nickleback is incorrect. You claimed that anyone who has ever read or seen "The Da Vinci Code" is a dumbass. That would mean that your Nickelback line should have been. Anyone who has ever heard this "insert song title" by Nickleback song or seen this "Insert Song" music video by Nickleback is a dumbass.


Maybe you should have said that anyone who has read or seen the "Th DaVinci Code" and liked it is a dumbass. It's still a silly generalization but it's better than what you said originally.

I saw it last night it felt more like a made-for-TV movie than a summer blockbuster.

The only actor who didn't seem like he was simply reading his lines off notecards was Ian McKellen. He was the only person in the entire movie that displayed any sort of emotion and didn't look bored out of his mind.

On the other end of the spectrum, I couldn't believe how bad Tom Hanks was in this film. It was probably his worst performance in 20 years. The way he delivered some of his lines was so bad that I thought I was watching a parody of the novel.

while at a friend's house who owned the book, they got me to read a few pages. I couldn't go on.

Then they got me to read some of the parts that they insisted "you cant not like this after reading these bits!" But still, no deal.

(yeah i know, i should read the whole book before judging, but DAMN. I don't think i could.)

My rule is: I won't read anything you can buy in an airport.

Sorry Dan Brown, you get no money from me.

Good god, some of you people are insecure and pretty eager to leap to ridiculous conclusions. If you are offended because you really think amgl was purposefully making an airtight logical argument, you might want to switch over to Sanka.

Of course, if it isn't Da Vinci Code, Toby Keith, AC/DC or Cowboy Troy are all fair game.

That limits lots of books. I've seen airports with extensive collections in their book stores...even used book stores.

Good you're cool. I aspire to be like you.

finally someone's making some sense 'round here.

For reading a lot, you sure don't have a good grasp of hyperbole. Not only that, but you seem pretty intent on proving it.

I could explain how Brown's book doesn't fall into my usual reading preferences, but that wouldn't be nearly as engaging as a Panty Party about Fantasy Baseball.

I just don't get how someone who is 'in to' literature and reads widely can gobble this shit up. I just don't get it.

When did i say that i read a lot? You are right about one thing though. It wouldn't be as interesting as a "Panty Party about Fantasy Baseball"? Whatever that is?

because it took 6 hours...

because actually having read it you can more legitimately bash it...

because sometimes when all you've read is french for 2 months you'll pick up whatever you can find in english near by...

and i wouldn't say that i quite "gobbled it up." i read it though.

Would you buy a record that you knew you would hate just so you could tell your friends how shit it was even more accurately?

No, but I would invest a few minutes listening to it before I passed judgement. You said you tried reading the Da Vinci code, and couldn't get into it. Fine, you didn't like it. I enjoyed it, despite the sometimes poor writing, and somewhat predictable plot. Sometimes I'm in the mood for light, easy reading, and you can find much worse books than the Da Vinci Code.

Now people, that is a quality movie.

To me, something like On The Road is light, easy reading that is also very rewarding.

EDIT: ^^DUMB MOVE ON MY PART COMPARING BROWN TO KEROUAC...

We get it. You're cooler than a person who would read and like "The Da Vinci Code". Happy now?

haha. word.

whatever....no need to shit on this stuff. it's light and enjoyable....you already know this and i don't know why i'm going to indulge you and fluff your ego but the average person does not pick up "On The Road" for a light prebedtime read.

I just got back from seeing this, and though I was asleep for the last 45 minutes, the people i was seeing it with filled me in as to what happened.

That's one of the worst movies i've ever seen.

Sooooo many unnecessary backstories, flashbacks, and characters. It seemed more like an accompaniment to the book as opposed to a film in its own right.

I was so tired and bored by it that I fell asleep right after Ian McKellan got arrested. We were laughing the whole train ride home as to how bad it was. And i went into it with a positive mindset.

Tom Hanks sucked. Ron Howard is an awful director. I've never liked any of his films but this just puts the nail in the coffin. No chemistry between leads. No rationale or motivations behind characters' actions. No depth to characters.

The worst movie i've seen in at least two years.

Oh, and that is actually exactly what I was implying. I am cooler than a person who would read and like the da vinci code.

Even though the movie did indeed suck, AMGL is tres snooty.
If you're gonna be a culture snob, it's more effective to not broadcast the fact.