Da Vinci Code

[NonLemming]

Saw the film today and found it entertaining. About a B-. Not a great movie, but enjoyable to ride through. The book was better, but that's always the way. What do you folks think?:D

[Mia14]

I don't know if I want to see it or not because I read the books and absolutely loved them. I've heard that people who read the books hated the movie and people who didn't read the book liked it. Friends of mine are making plans to see it, so I probably will eventually...:rolleyes:

I think it's funny how worked up people are getting over the DaVinci Code and the religious aspects of it. My girl's mom told her brother, Joe, that he can't see it because his religious beliefs aren't strong enough to stand up against the fiction. :lol:

I think there's a lot of truth to the book, worked in with the fiction, and it makes it more fun.

[His Witness]

This is just another attempt by the Enemy to deceive the very "elect" of God. I hope people view it as Fiction and not Fact.

[dewdrop_world]

This is just another attempt by the Enemy to deceive the very "elect" of God. I hope people view it as Fiction and not Fact.
I agree it's obviously fiction. Cable TV, actually, has been doing a pretty good job of debunking the theory with numerous programs on TLC, History Channel, A&E, probably some others.

What is dislike is smear campaigns, to which the Catholic Church is edging dangerously close. Simple knowledge of the facts is enough to prove that the novel is little more than a "ripping good yarn." There is no need to paint it as the work of Satan. That just makes religion look paranoid and insecure.

James

[Daniel]

This is just another attempt by the Enemy to deceive the very "elect" of God. I hope people view it as Fiction and not Fact.


Even a casual reader of reviews will note that despite being something of a good yawn...oh sorry...I meant yarn, the movie has only been lauded for one thing, the performance of the noted out-gay-actor, Mr. Gandalf himself: Ian McKellen.

I think they call it acting.

[Zerbie]

Anecdote:

Hubby & I are at a bookstore (last week.) In the religion section, facing FACE OUT to be easily visible, is a book DEBUNKING the Da Vinci Code and arguing it point by point.

Hubby picks up book, shaking his head:

"When else have you ever seen a book DEBUNKING a work of fiction before?" As if they thought the novel was supposed to be something other than a made-up story. It's a STORY!!!!! Would anyone publish a book debunking oh, say, Tale of Two Cities? Or Peter Rabbit? Point by point?

:rolleyes:

[keltic63]

Anecdote:

Hubby & I are at a bookstore (last week.) In the religion section, facing FACE OUT to be easily visible, is a book DEBUNKING the Da Vinci Code and arguing it point by point.

Hubby picks up book, shaking his head:

"When else have you ever seen a book DEBUNKING a work of fiction before?" As if they thought the novel was supposed to be something other than a made-up story. It's a STORY!!!!! Would anyone publish a book debunking oh, say, Tale of Two Cities? Or Peter Rabbit? Point by point?

:rolleyes:

are the threads that hold the integrity of Christianity so tenuous that modern fiction can erase 2000 years of history and tradition?

so what's going to happen? some RC Cardinal will read the Da Vinci Code, renounce his vows and become a pagan?

[Mia14]

I'm not saying the DaVinci Code is completely true - I know it's fiction by far, but there are parts about symbols in today's society that I took for truth. Parts about freemasons and some of the pagan symbols were interesting and I thought that parts like those might be truth worked in for fun.

I honestly don't think anyone who converts because of a fiction novel or movie was that strong in the faith in the first place. Someone that easily shaken must have been looking for an excuse not to believe.

[schoolboi]

I will be seeing the DaVinci Code if for no other reason then Falwell has been making a big stink about it and I want the movie to do well in Lynchburg.

As a side note if a fiction novel can destroy your faith, I think its time to buy a new God.

[pnggrad79]

I went to see the movie, and although parts of it had elements of truth, the assertions and assumptions they made were fictitious and hard to prove. I am not so arrogant as to believe that God preserved only what He wanted preserved and that is what exists today. I think there is a lot that Constantine changed or altered, and I think there is a lot that we don"t know about. It is also arrogant for people to assume they know the mind of God and spout off what they think He is all about. It simply is preposterous to think that all of the Bible texts are in their original form and exactly how the authors wrote them, and exactly how God intended it to be. We have to depend on what God tells us by his Spirit and we have to go with what we innately know is right. I , for one, don't believe for one second that for the four or five centuries that the Catholic church had sole possession of the Bible that some altering didn't go on and biblical texts were rewritten or even deleted. The Catholic church back then was all about power and money, otherwise we wouldn't have had Martin Luther posting his 95 theses on the door of the church. No one can tell me that sacred texts weren't altered or hidden to further the power of the Church. What did survive is a miracle at best. :(
All that to say that the DaVinci code was fictitious, but I do believe there is a lot we don't know about and until we do know, we don't need to go spouting off about it. That is arrogant.:rainbow:

[NathanATX]

This is what I found interesting in "The DaVinci Code:"

Christian history
Evolution of creeds & doctrines
Church/State power incest (historical and current)
The absence of women in the church leadership
The sex positive beliefs & rituals of the Priory of Scion (mythical or not)
Opus Dei & the self mutiliation rituals
Thinking about what Christianity might look like if Christ had married, etc...

[Dash]

Saw it Saturday night. Liked it a lot. My friends were not quite as enthusiastic as me, but they liked it too I have read the book...in one sitting...couldn't put it down. On the other hand, that was some time ago, and I didn't remember much from it, so all the twists and surprises were fresh to me.

Thought the score was heavy-handed. That was my one complaint.

I particularly loved some of the flash-back scenes. The one of the Coucil of Nicea was gorgeous!

[Emproph]

As a side note: If a fiction novel can destroy your faith, I think its time to buy a new God.
:tup: That's a good one. :lol:
I will be seeing the DaVinci Code if for no other reason then Falwell has been making a big stink about it..
I not only plan to go see it for that exact same reason, but I also plan on believing absolutely everything in it.

[awediot]

I'm a little over-hyped out about the whole thing and kinda surprised not to find little albino bad guys, "Father" whoever, and Mrs. Jesus action figures in McDonald's Ark of the Covenant Kids meals. Think I'll wait for the DVD.

Being fiction or not, the very confusion of fiction or not is the shadow eclipsing whatever light it might contain. It is precisely those with tenuous, swayable faith that will be most effected by it or buy into it out of popular spite. When all the controversy fades, the sad part is that it will take with it more of a terminal religion's last gasps and leave just doubt and confusion in its wake. It won't pull the plug, but it gets alot more hands on the cord... kinda hard to translate into a HappyMeal gimmick.

[tdogg]

Well, I'll probably see it only because my GF wants to, that and I think Tom Hanks' haircut is somewhat intriguing...:cool: Hey, it's just a movie, and to make a huge deal out of the subject is IMO ridiculous but nothing uncommon. :lol: Personally, I would NEVER watch The Exorcist tho - for fear of dealing with demons...:eek:

It's kinda funny to me, all the hoopla over Hollywood movies and how it relates to real life, our beliefs and opinions. :D But, if Falwell is making a stink about the movie and telling his followers to boycott it, then that is reason enough to get me to the theater and watch the DaVinci Code, that and the greasy fattening popcorn...;)

I find it kinda conflicting, that (according to the Bible) God wasn't able to create 2 perfect humans that could stay perfect and sinless - but (according to those who take the Bible literally, even if only select parts) he could inspire His Word to be written by numerous humans, and have that text translated time and time again by numerous and various humans, and have all the translations currently in use today be completely and undeniably perfect. Just my observation.....

[Emproph]

I find it kinda conflicting, that (according to the Bible) God wasn't able to create 2 perfect humans that could stay perfect and sinless - but (according to those who take the Bible literally, even if only select parts) he could inspire His Word to be written by numerous humans, and have that text translated time and time again by numerous and various humans, and have all the translations currently in use today be completely and undeniably perfect. Just my observation.....
And it just gets more absurd from there. -I'm working on a thread. :)

[schoolboi]

This says it all for me:

Bishop Carlton Pearson Asks: Why All the Paranoia Over the Da Vinci Code? (http://www.newdimensions.us/content.cfm?id=151)

[Jamie McDaniel]

Warning: Slight spoilers in this post if you haven't seen the movie.


I saw the DaVinci Code this weekend. I was hoping I would like the movie given all the hype (I haven't read the book), but overall I found the movie unbelievable. The way a man who was fatally shot was able to leave a complicated coded message, the way the main characters constantly escaped harm (pigeons flying at the bad guys, bullet case lodged in the door, etc.)

I did like Ian McKellen's performance (much better than Tom Hank's) and the fascinating idea of Mary Magdalene being the Holy Grail.

[tdogg]

GF wants to see it, so I probably will with her, but it hasn't really interested me much - I do like Tom Hanks and movie clips made me actually sorta want to see it, doesn't sound like this will be on of his good movies tho. Never really had much interest in reading the book either.

Saw Mission Impossible III over the weekend tho, it was great!

[morningrob]

A note on the whole fact or fiction thing.

I was on the train about a week ago and an interesting little conversation happened. Two people in front of me said that they (I presume they is those who are publicizing the movie) said the movie was fiction, but the book is based on history. I smiled and said nothing. But then the people in front of them said that they heard that and they started talking about how the book is true. I then thought I would get involved and discuss how most of the historical stuff is not really true. At first they wanted to know how I knew that. After I mentioned I was PhD student studying theology they then sort of beleived. But they were asking alot more stuff about the book.
While it is nice to know that many on here discuss it as a work of fiction- there are alot of people, and not uneducated people, who believe that the conspirary theory stuff is true.
It should be noted that Dan Brown really walks the edge of saying whether he believes the historical stuff. By that I mean that he has made conflicting statements. In light of this, I actually do not think it is all that inappropiate to have the "Debunking" books

[Daniel]

Finally saw the film this weekend after reading about it everywhere and not having read the book (yet). The reviews were right: McKellen holds up his end of things as the plot twists this way and that. The other characters seem flat by comparsion, even the albino monk who appears naked more than once. But more than anything, the movie stirred the oft recurring desire to see Paris.

We've been to the London church that is featured in the film.

http://www.templarhistory.com/roundchurch.html

It sustained heavy damage after being bombed in 1941 which blackened the recumbent Knights and destroyed the famous 17th century organ. Hubby had heard an organ by the same maker in another London church and reported how beautiful it sounded: gleaming, full and unforced. Sadly, like the supposed tomb of our Lady, it is now lost.

[Rick336]

I was going to go see The Da Vinci Code this weekend until I read the reviews of it. Almost all of the reviews I've read hated it. They don't hate it because of the subject matter; they hate it because they say it's just a badly made movie. "Boring" they say.

I'm surprised. With all the hype this movie has gotten I expected it to be one of the best movies of all time. But I don't want to waste eight bucks on a boring movie. I think I'll just wait until it comes out on DVD in September and rent it then.

I'll go see Cars instead.

Rick

[Vanessa White]

but I have a friend who definitely advised me to read the book first, otherwise a lot may get lost. And, I am very disconnected from the whole general aspect about the story, except the premise that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that they had children together. That does intrigue, though not, frighten me about where the truth of anything it says lies. I also have heard that reading ANgels and Demons first is somewhat recommended as the beginning of the whole story. I had no interest previously in reading either one of them, but now I am kinda curious and intrigued. Any thoughts from the readers here on whether I need to read both books to get the full picture??? Have a good weekend everyone. Vanessa

[Mia14]

Read the books first. I think some things in Angels and Demons are kind of spoiled for you if you read the DaVinci Code first. If you want to borrow it, I can lend you my copy of Angels and Demons.

The movie wasn't nearly as good as the books, but it wasn't really horrible. It pretty decent as far as movies go - seen worse, seen better - but the theory that Christ might have children is far more interesting. I wouldn't rent it after seeing it already in the movies and I definitely wouldn't buy it, but its worth seeing once.