the rule of (f)bore

Having just finished the book "The Rule of Four", I feel a bit betraied by the praises its has gotten since published. Not long ago I read the "Da Vinci Code" and did a search on it on the internet, to find another book which got praised like "If you loved the Da Vinci Code, you should read this".. and so I did, but to find out the two books have but the code breaking stuff, in common. Well - this is actually no problem as afcoz the two books should be somewhat different, else there is little point in reading both, but "The Rule of Four" just never really caught me, the way Da Vinci Code did. At first I just thought it was the writing style but now I think its the lengthly and boresom descriptions of past actions and references that simply just has nothing to do with the story. The plot leaves you thinking: was that really all there was to it? Well - I might read it again in a couple of year, perhaps the story will be better the second time... I digress..