<human>: I love love loved the film, but I'm unsure if i would enjoy reading the novel now.  It seems like the story really depends on the unexpected twists and turns of the plot - so I'm concerned if most of the plot points are the same, the book may not be enjoyable because it wouldn't have the sense of anticipation it should.

I'm also interested in how the characters are different in the two versions.  Are they more fleshed out in the book?  Are character interactions a big focus of the book?

I'm also concerned with themes.  Now obviously both versions will share the main themes, but I find a lot of the time movie-adaptations focus on just a few of the themes found in the book, simply because they don't have the time in the film format to really address all the themes properly.  That also results in entire characters and subplots being dropped or merged.  This is a bit more plot-concerned, but what I'm asking here I suppose is does the book deal with more themes than the movie?

One last thing, what is the quality of prose like?  I've heard enough praise to guess that it's not on the Dan Brown side of things (although I do enjoy the Langdon series but I read them before I saw the movies) or is there some really merit in it?  Could the prose make me see the story in a different way than the film, which I thought set the perfect tone?

Give me a shortened version of the text
<bot>: Since I know the main plot, are the main characters, minor characters/subplots dropped from the film, and quality of prose worth reading the book?