Da Da Vinci code

quote:

Originally posted by David Legge:
Anyone seen the film? Is it worth seeing, I mean, is it entertaining as in "cheap escapism entertainment for the proletariat" ? My SO has been bitten by the hype and wants to go.

I haven't seen it, but 'starring Tom Hanks' tells you all you need to know IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by David Legge:
Anyone seen the film? Is it worth seeing, I mean, is it entertaining as in "cheap escapism entertainment for the proletariat" ? My SO has been bitten by the hype and wants to go.

/dl

The critics have said it is a boring load of rubbish - but I suspect a chrisitian conspiracy to estroy the credibility of the film.

Galileo was 'silenced' by the Catholic Church when he proved Copernicus' heretical assertion that the Earth orbited round the Sun.

So anyone who has a pop at Christianity and the Catholic Church is alright by me.

Dan Brown is no fool - he's simply written a bloody good yarn about 'The Big Issues'. I look forward to enjoying the film as much as the book. This is not cerebral stuff - just lightweight entertainment.

Pure fiction - just like the Bible.

John.

quote:

Posted Sat 20 May 2006 01:01
Galileo was 'silenced' by the Catholic Church when he proved Copernicus' heretical assertion that the Earth orbited round the Sun.

So anyone who has a pop at Christianity and the Catholic Church is alright by me.

John

You cannot criticise todays Christianity for something which was done a few hundred years ago. Religion may have its problems but overall it is still a force for good.

I agree with your comments about the book. Dan Brown has taken a lot of old tales and legends and woven them into a good story.

He scores because no one knows for certain whether Jesus had a child or not.

Regards

Mick

Dear Mick,

Are you suggesting the Holy Bible may not be being entirely accurate in its reporting of Jesus' life?

Don't worry on my account. I find the whole thing so riddled with inconsistency as to be beyond worth worrying about the truth of it!

I agree about the Judeo-Christian ethical code being a net force for good, but on the whole I find that the religeous-political leadrships of the various churches and faithes have on balance been a very bad thing, whether we consider the historical context, or, in fairness, even this very day. I find US Christain fundamentalism just as worrying as any other brand of religeous fundamantalism you can cite!

As for Dan Brown's book, I have no idea what the fuss is about. I have not read it, and ceratinly will not be clearing the decks enough to bother (or see the film either), as there are enough real problems to worry about without concerning myself with myths!

All the best from Fredrik

The Da Vince Code has broken opening day box office records in ITALY despite the Catholic church calling for a boycott.

quote:

Religion may have its problems but overall it is still a force for good.

Mick,

Protestants vs Catholics in Ireland?

How many dead?

cheers, Martin

Calling for a boycott is like telling a child not to touch his willy.

There was me thinking MI III was factual, too.

Oh come on, next you'll be telling me that the documentary with mel gibson in it called Braveheart isn't 100% accurate!Surely not.
Oo Oo, & then there was that one about how those fab american heroes got hold of that tricky little german typewriter thing off a gerry sub & saved us limeys from losing that great big war thingy!
matt

.

Having read the book I can say that while it contains some interesting ideas none of those are actually Dan Browns and his contribution is to create an exceptionally weak plotline and some very shallow characters to go with it. The book contains pretty much every cliche there is - it's not the worst book I've read, but it really is quite poor. I wouldn't necessarily have ruled out the possibility of a decent film being made from it, however the selection of Tom Hanks as the main characters does make that pretty unlikely.

The authors of the book from which most of the ideas were ripped had good reason to be pissed off. Not so much because their ideas were ripped off but because the public perception of those ideas is now going to be off such a poor bit of writing.

I've seen the authors of the original conspiracy book in various documentaries and they do themselves no favours by spouting the usual crap pseudo-science and an ignorance of statistics to "prove" their theories. Underlying all the bollocks there are a few interesting points though but it's a struggle to identify them amongst all the rest.

Have no desire to read the book....
Saw the flick on Saturday....like Indiana Jones with the fun taken out!!

Look at the picture of the last supper, is the figure to the right of Jesus man or woman?

oops

quote:

Originally posted by wellyspyder:
Look at the picture of the last supper, is the figure to the right of Jesus man or woman?

It's a man, cunningly made to look like a woman so as to fuel speculation 400 years later about whether Christ had any children (as if it matters either way).

My biggest problem with relegion, is that whilst they all appear to preach love and peace, its perfectly acceptable to murder people from other faiths, in fact some actively encourage it. I reckon dylan summed it up pretty neatly 'with god on our side'.

Also i cant really see a problem with the da vinci code, although there is nothing new in the book, it does encourage people to look into the whole religion thing, and perhaps read some more worthwhile literature on the subject.

Mike.

I don't get any of this. I read Ludlum but none of his books have ever made me want to look into espionage!

quote:

Originally posted by bob mccluckie:
I don't get any of this. I read Ludlum but none of his books have ever made me want to look into espionage!

I read DH Lawrence, and one of his books made me toy with the idea of being a gamekeeper.

I read Noddy and bought myself a Nissan Micra

Now you know what the Mona Lisa is smileing about.
" Smome bastards going to make a shed load out of a story around these Da Vinci piccies".
I love the religious ones saying this book is untrue, unlike the bible.

Howard

If ever there was a book written to have a movie spin off this is it. The only surprise was it was Tom Hanks - I'd imagined the role was scripted for Harrison Ford. Guess he's a bit old for snogging now. Load of poo IMHO.

quote:

Originally posted by JoeH:

quote:

Originally posted by wellyspyder:
Look at the picture of the last supper, is the figure to the right of Jesus man or woman?

It's a man, cunningly made to look like a woman so as to fuel speculation 400 years later about whether Christ had any children (as if it matters either way).

Ever heard of 'deniability' in politics? It's about getting a message across or an action done in such a way that you can deny any connexion to it afterwards (for example using leaks or ambiguity). That's what I thought of when I browsed for the painting after reading the book.

quote:

Originally posted by Bodger:
If ever there was a book written to have a movie spin off this is it. The only surprise was it was Tom Hanks - I'd imagined the role was scripted for Harrison Ford. Guess he's a bit old for snogging now. Load of poo IMHO.

Just seen the movie, I didn't see any snogging, didn't see much of a film either, a complete waste of good money, good actors, good locations. Now if Derrek Jarman was still alive he could have done a better job on a budget of say, 1% of what Howard and Hanks had. Peter Greenaway, would have cost more, but at least he has a sense of pace shade and ritual, all saddly lacking. And as for making a getaway in a Merc A class driven backwards, what a joke, obviously no one in the production team has ever experienced the torment of trying to drive one even going in the proper direction.