Well, sort of. If you read past the title of this Huffington Post piece on the subject, the review (from L’Osservatore Romano) doesn’t sound all that positive (I guess calling it “harmless” is kind of positive).
My understanding is that in Brown’s previous book, the Catholic Church was accused of murdering millions of women and of perpetrating the greatest conspiracy of all time in furtherance of its anti-women agenda. Whereas in Angels and Demons, the Church is the victim of a giant conspiracy, and is accused of having killed a few thousand people in furtherance of its anti-science agenda. So I suppose that’s progress.
A list of some of the factual errors in the book version can be found in this post by John C. Wright (the style of which is just spectacular, by the way). Can it really be that Brown said in Angels and Demons that Churchill was a “staunch Catholic”? I mean, it’s one thing to get things wrong when it comes to Catholic theology, or French geography, or theoretical physics or whatever, but surely anyone with even a basic understanding of either Churchill’s life or of British politics would realize that doesn’t scan. Does Brown not have an editor?One other random point: In the trailer, there is a scene where Tom Hanks demands access to the Vatican’s secret archives and is rebuffed by Church officials. Of course if you go to the Vatican’s website, there is a link off the main page called “Vatican Secret Archives.” I’ve always found that a little strange. I mean, I realize that the Holy See isn’t all that tech savvy, but I mean, come on. They should at least have it where you need to move the cursor over a random part of the screen to see the link.