Title: Not comparable to The Da Vinci Code
Product review: I'm baffled by the number of reviews that compare this book to The Da Vinci Code. Unlike Dan Brown's bestseller, which propells the reader headlong at a breathtaking pace, and ladles out the exposition in bite-sized chunks of dialog, the Rule of the Four is plodding and ponderous. Almost nothing happens in the first fifty pages, except to introduce characters and wedge in page after page of backstory and Princeton travelogue. Don't be taken in by the comparisons to The Secret History (Donna Tartt), the Brotherhood of the Rose (Umberto Eco), and The Da Vinci Code, as this work is never as well written as the former, as exciting as the latter, or as scholarly as the one in the middle.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
