I'm not watching the Da Vinci Code Movie

Postmaster said:
I won't watch it too heretical for me.
Click to expand...
No concern about it being heretical, here. And I don't know anything about it! Isn't Tom Hanks the Dan Brown dude? Hang on, didn't he write the book? I must be confused. If he's in it, I think I'm already disinterested. But ...

I should at least hit movies.yahoo & read up! The thing is, we already know about the Knights Templar, or at least, we can know. And the info is probably much more accurate. I hate to admit a bias, and perhaps I'll have to, uhh, watch this silly thing just to see if I can "catch the hype." But the whole, Jesus & Mary chain thing, well ... why harp on it? Jesus had plenty of female followers, possibly even the closest of disciples. What am I saying!!! Not possibly, definitely! So what? The Essenes weren't sexists either.

Hang on, I want to argue that the Son of God was a sexist. I mean, isn't God? :eek:

Thought so. :rolleyes:

cheers,

taijasi
 
I said:
Possibly better treated as fiction?
Click to expand...
That's what screenwriter Akiva Goldsman says here.
``It's a story, fiction,'' Goldsman, 43, said in an interview. ``Speculative fiction is an extraordinarily old form. I don't think any area is exempt from that, any set of beliefs. That's what we do. We imagine.''
Click to expand...
 
Postmaster said:
I won't watch it too heretical for me.
Click to expand...
Funny, same reason I didn't go to 'The Passion'. Most 2 hour movies are made from 2-400 page books...and artistic license runs rampant... Can't imagine all the stuff that had to be made up to create a 3 hour movie from a couple of pages.

Did the 'Last Temptation of Christ' have the same stir?
 
Yes it did.

There were denunciations from fundamentalist pulpits, demonstrations outside of theaters, and learned treatises in newspapers and magazines about how "historically" innacurate the film was, even though it was FICTION.

A video store owner even told me he had to take copies off the shelf because of the verbal abuse he suffered from some customers. It was adapted from a wonderful novel by a Greek author, Nikos Kazantzakis. A very good book, better than Brown's, and so artfully taken to the screen by Martin Scorcese. Peter Gabriel even did the haunting sound track

I guess my questions are, if certain Christians are so upset by fictional adaptations and interpretations of a version of the life story of someone who lived 2,000 years ago, why are they ? Is it because no one really knows for certain what really happened back then except through the eyes, memories, and stories of others ? Do we disrespect the learned opinions of the Jesus Seminar so much that we totally disregard its considered verdict that not much of what is in the cannon is factual ? And if the power of belief is so powerful, especially when politicized and used to manipulate the beliefs of others, can false beliefs evolve into having the power to subjugate innocent believers and take precedence over the truth ?

My intuition is that this is the situation, and that we are all left to believe what we will and feel in our hearts is right for us. My intuition is that this is what Jesus intended for us. Everything else boils down to forms of political manipulation and propagandistic brain washing.

Don't think for yourselves. Believe what we tell you. You'll be better off in the long run.... Maybe.

flow....:cool:
 
Censorship is by far a greater injustice to the intelect of man than any heresy. Self-censorship on the grounds of heresy in a work of fiction just seems to me rather childish, I'm sorry no offence, but thats what I think. The book was pretty awful and I would not pay to see the movie but will probably see it when someone passes me the dvd.

I echo your words on Nikos Kazantzakis Flowperson. A truly wonderful writer. And the film of 'The last temptation of Christ' I consider a superb film too. Probably my favourite religiously themed movie of all time.


What is interesting in the UK about the Dan Brown bandwagon is the amount of effort and time thats gone into rubbishing his 2nd hand assertions. The amount of free publicity he has recieved is quite phenomenal and can only add to the sense that the establishment has something to hide.




David
 
Thank you David:

I was about to post an apology for my semi-rant in a relaxation area of the boards. I agree with you that there is a shrillness to all this on both sides that is reminiscent of children screaming for candy in a supermarket checkout lane.

flow....
 
I can't wait to see it tomorrow. I think it's a good work of fiction, and a little controversy is good to get the heart pumping. The best movies are the ones that cause a stir in the general population. Good for Ron Howard!!! Even the History Channel has gotten in on it!
 
seattlegal said:
That's what screenwriter Akiva Goldsman says here.
Click to expand...

Quote:
``It's a story, fiction,'' Goldsman, 43, said in an interview. ``Speculative fiction is an extraordinarily old form. I don't think any area is exempt from that, any set of beliefs. That's what we do. We imagine.''

Ron Howard said pretty much the same thing, the only problem is that this is a movie based on a book which claims to be true.

Just a thought, they say there's no such thing as bad publicity, so could this suggestion of a scandal actually lead to an increase in church attendances?
 
Could someone please post, who is familiar with this book, hype, and/or movie, a few short bullet points about what is "most controversial" (I know it's more than just one thing) about Dan Brown's book, and this DaVinci Code thing? I confess my ignorance, and yeah, I could go googling, but forgive me just this once! :p Either a short synopsis (I read the blurb at movies.yahoo.com), or a few key ideas. All I think I know about right now is the Jesus & Mary Magdalena thing. That's by no means "it," is it??? Right?

Thanks much in advance,

taijasi
 
The book is a basic pulp thriller that feels less like a novel than a screenplay for a holywood movie, his intention entirely I think.
He contends in the book that Mary of Magdala had a child by Jesus and that a line of descendents continued down through the ages to the present day. A secret group of people was privy to this information, linked to the Knights Templar, and they were sworn to protect this secret and the Holy bloodline down through the centuries. This group was meant to have several famous people amongst its members, for example Leonardo Di Vinci. Meanwhile a branch of ruthless christians, a part of Opus Day in the book, were intent on finding and murdering this bloodline, presumably to protect the status quo. So its a basic thriller, goody chased by baddy, goody wins.

And thats about it. Much ado about nothing in other words.

Regards

David
 
I must say, as a big Knights Templar fan, and also a huge proponent of Freemasonry, I sincerely hope that what emerges (along these two lines) is not pure fluff or outright controversy, but in the very least, something worthy of generating more interest ... and some honest-to-goodness research, Googling included! ;)

I think people should really come off it, and get over the radical notion that maybe Jesus and Mary M. could have a bloodline. This is, imho, mostly just a desire to concretize the symbolism and inner significance (in which I believe) of true Apostolic Succession. The Templars guarded many secrets, and even some of these had their material-enough representations (Lance/Spear, Cup, Ark, and the prerogative to establish the modern banking system). Whether or not dear Leonardo was ever a Grand Master (long, long after Black Friday, when the KT were driven underground), I have never discovered ... but the man was clearly a gifted genius, and I'd say an esotericist - likely enough! I wonder ...

Anyway, at least this kind of film gets us out of the popular cruddy, canned formula types, the cheesy horror flicks, the excessive gore, and all the other stuff that Hollywood foists upon as "entertainment." I think I'm already sold! Shoot, it should be good for a few chuckles, and it even piqued the interest of my politically-conservative, staunch atheist friend. He assures me it's my kinda book, at any rate ... :rolleyes:

cheers, and thanks,

taijasi
 
Ummmm... as an aside, while I do not recollect that this was mentioned in the book by Brown, some legends have it, and I've read about this in several places, that after the alternative Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and their two children migrated from the holy land under the protection and sponsorship of Joseph of Aramathea (really James the Just); and, after staying a time in the south of France in the Languedoc region somewhat near Marsailles, they eventually ended up in the area of what is now Glastonbury in the west of England.

There is evidently an ancient chapel/church there that commemorates this, and even bears inscriptions to this effect.

Any of you across the pond in "merry olde" know of this ? If so, could you please add to what little I know about this if you can. Thanks.

flow....:)
 
I have read somwhere that Jesus stayed in Britain from when he was a boy till about 3years before his crucifixtion, but never have I heard of a post-ressuerection return. I think the story goes that the Virgin Marys' uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, who was a merchant who shipped Tin ore from Cornwall to Palestine, took the young Jesus to Britain with him. The Doomsday book, a survey or audit of all the lands in Britain conducted in 1086, mentions a parcel of land at Glastonbury exempt from taxes as it was given by the then king to Joseph of Arimathea.
The story goes that Jesus built a house and a chapel on these lands. Also there is a mine in Cornwall, if I remember correctly, that is called Jesus's mine. And the folklore says that the craft of smelting ore to get Tin was knowledge given to them by Jesus.

Thats about all I know tho.

regards

david
 
Well, for what it's worth, esoteric legend has it that St. Patrick was the Christ .... either incarnate, or "overshadowed" - which is what was supposed to have happened with Jesus. Now, what novel notions these; apparently, William Blake didn't find them so strange - as the poem and hymn suggests:

And did those feet in ancient time
And did those feet in ancient time,
Walk upon England's mountains green?
And was the holy Lamb of God
On England's pleasant pastures seen?

And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic mills?

Bring me my Bow of burning gold,
Bring me my Arrows of desire,
Bring me my Spear—O clouds, unfold!
Bring me my Chariot of fire!

I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England's green & pleasant land.
​
:)
Andreas-taijasi
 
Why would I support something that is potentially destructive to something that cost many of lives to accomplish, to an idea that is great and to something that has and will continue to save people? I try to promote Christianity not destroy it. Personally though, I think this film will do more good then harm! Brings Christianity back into the spot light and as soon as people get bored of the idea Jesus had a girl they'll be interested in what the Church has to say. Someone who knew was getting himself in trouble for teaching of social equality, forgiving people unlimited times and floving your enemies couldn't have been too interested in having kids and getting married?
 
I think the premise of the DvC is probably crap, but I'm going to see it anyway. I like that religion has it's collective panties all in a bunch over it. Reminds me of when I went to see Monty Python's Life of Brian in the theater twenty five years ago. There were these old Catholic women kneeling on the sidewalk reciting the rosary over and over and begging people, for the sake of their immortal soul, not to see the movie. Then, of course, there were local TV film crews shooting the spectacle. I don't think they realized how they were contributing to the publicity of the event. Hey, to each their own. A lot of people went to see the Passion of the Christ. I wasn't that interested in seeing a dramatization of Jesus getting the snot beat out of him.

Chris
 
Postmaster said:
Why would I support something that is potentially destructive to something that cost many of lives to accomplish, to an idea that is great and to something that has and will continue to save people? I try to promote Christianity not destroy it. Personally though, I think this film will do more good then harm! Brings Christianity back into the spot light and as soon as people get bored of the idea Jesus had a girl they'll be interested in what the Church has to say. Someone who knew was getting himself in trouble for teaching of social equality, forgiving people unlimited times and floving your enemies couldn't have been too interested in having kids and getting married?
Click to expand...

Thats the spirit!! Theres no such thing as bad publicity and it works 2 ways!!

To me it is not a far fetched hypothesis to suppose Jesus and Mary of Magdala did indeed get married and have a family. There is a growing body of evidence to support such an idea after all. Further, if this was the fact, I do not see how it detracts from the essential message of Christianity. If anything and for many people I would imagine, this would only make Christianity more appealing. Sweep away the supernatural invocations and tell the truth, a man or a woman like you or I is equally capable of devine communion. This is what I have always felt. To see the Christian Establishment embrace such an idea would illicit from me a new found respect. I can relate to the 'man' Jesus, I find the 'diety' Jesus somewhat repellant, a supernatural caricature rather than someone genuine.
What really sets today's peoples apart from our ancestors is our education. I think for very many of us the irrational aspects, the fanciful notions and miracles, found in the bible are no longer credible. It is a shame that a fortune seeking 3rd rate author should have hijacked this debate, adding yet more fiction on top of so many other fictions. Perhaps this is why the Establishment makes so much noise now, seeking to sew non-sense debate so that the real fundamental truths have no chance to be raised. Certainly would not be the first time.

regards

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top