Da Vinci Code

[racquetman]

The trailer is out for The Da Vinci Code. I couldn't picture Tom Hanks in the lead role, but after watching the trailer I think he was actually a good choice.

I thought they did a great job with the trailer. It should draw in a lot of people that haven't read the book (all 5 of them).

You can check it out here:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/da_vinci_code/

 

[j_garcia]

Dang it. Will have to watch it at home...no QT here. I liked that particular book a lot. Are the others (by Brown?) actually related to that book? I'm assuming the movie is only dealing with the one book.

 

[racquetman]

Dang it. Will have to watch it at home...no QT here. I liked that particular book a lot. Are the others (by Brown?) actually related to that book? I'm assuming the movie is only dealing with the one book.

I think the only relation is that one of the other books (or maybe 2) has the Robert Langdon character in it. This is just another one of Langdon's adventures. I don't believe there is any other relation besides that.

His next book will also feature Langdon - he's working on a story about the Masons and the clues left behind on the dollar bill or something to that effect.

 

[j_garcia]

AKA: National Treasure?

 

[racquetman]

AKA: National Treasure?

Ya, Brown posted what he was writing his next book about a long time ago, and I think someone jumped on the idea and made a movie about it. They were definitely trying to capitalize on the success of the Da Vinci Code and Dan Brown's work in general.

 

[j_garcia]

That's what I heard. I didn't bother to see that movie, because I'm not a big fan of Nick Cage. He has a few good movies here and there, but not many IMO. It didn't really look that good either...

 

[racquetman]

That's what I heard. I didn't bother to see that movie, because I'm not a big fan of Nick Cage. He has a few good movies here and there, but not many IMO. It didn't really look that good either...

I didn't have any expectations for National Treasure because I thought it was a ripoff of Dan Brown's upcoming work, but I saw the movie and thought it was entertaining. Better than I expected for sure. Check it out, if for no other reason than to look at Diane Kruger (insert smiley face with drool coming down its mouth).

 

[Audioholics]

That book was entertaining until about 1/2 way through where he provides an all-out assault on Christianity under the guise of "of course, every rational person knows...." As if you have to be an idiot to believe doctrinal Christianity. It was then one thing after another - bad information given as fact with the arrogance that anyone who doesn't believe what he says is simply ignorant of the facts.

It wasn't the story, mind you, it was the "facts" interjected inside of the story and the way it constantly jabbed at historical Christianity with an air of smug authority.

Actually ticked me off enough that I won't go to the movie.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Wow, great trailer. Especially with the option to broadcast in 1080p. It was so clear on my PC. Looks like a good flick. Cage has taken some weak films, but I still think he's a decent actor.

 

[j_garcia]

Not saying he's not a good actor, he just bugs me sometimes (perhaps the role?). I really liked him in Adaptation.

I agree with Clint. I did find the book (Code) to be quite a big poke at Christianity, perhaps a bit overly so.

 

[goodman]

I'm one of the five people who hasn't read the DaVinci Code, so I can't comment, but I did see National Treasure, which I thought was one of the hokiest, phoniest and worst movies in a year of bad movies. Nicholas Cage was no help and even the prettiest of actresses could not redeem it. There. I feel better, now.

 

[racquetman]

That book was entertaining until about 1/2 way through where he provides an all-out assault on Christianity under the guise of "of course, every rational person knows...." As if you have to be an idiot to believe doctrinal Christianity. It was then one thing after another - bad information given as fact with the arrogance that anyone who doesn't believe what he says is simply ignorant of the facts.

It wasn't the story, mind you, it was the "facts" interjected inside of the story and the way it constantly jabbed at historical Christianity with an air of smug authority.

Actually ticked me off enough that I won't go to the movie.

I don't know, Clint. I think that the media has done a lot to create a big controversy out of this whole thing. Here are some quotes from Dan Brown's website:

HOW MUCH OF THIS NOVEL IS TRUE?
The Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction. While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). These real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters. While it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit, each individual reader must explore these characters' viewpoints and come to his or her own interpretations. My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion, and history.

BUT DOESN'T THE NOVEL'S "FACT" PAGE CLAIM THAT EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THIS NOVEL IS HISTORICAL FACT?
If you read the "FACT" page, you will see it clearly states that the documents, rituals, organization, artwork, and architecture in the novel all exist. The "FACT" page makes no statement whatsoever about any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader.

Have you seen specific interviews with Dan Brown that make you think he believes what he is writing is true? Even if he believes it himself, these quotes clearly state that the theories and ideas are open to interpretation by the reader. Is this maybe too sensitive of a subject for most to look at objectively?

To me it is just a very well written, entertaining book. I don't read for pleasure a lot because I find it boring and I have a hard time picturing what I read. However, this book was written in a way that kept my attention and the subject matter, true or not, was very interesting in my opinion.

 

[Audioholics]

Have you seen specific interviews with Dan Brown that make you think he believes what he is writing is true? Even if he believes it himself, these quotes clearly state that the theories and ideas are open to interpretation by the reader. Is this maybe too sensitive of a subject for most to look at objectively?

It's mostly the way he has his characters make statements within the book that bothered me - not the premises or the activities, plot, etc. He really does put forth a "matter-of-fact" attitude (through his characters statements) about various tenets of Christianity that, to an ignorant reader, would cause them to start thinking that most of the world agrees with those statements.

I don't have the book to cite specifics, but it was all over and really hit some nerves.

There's no argument that it's fiction - but when you are reading a book that deals with fictionalized facts - many people don't know where to separate the truth from fiction - and he has purposefully blurred the two in a way that is impossible to discern at times.

If I were attempting to attack Christianity (and I'm not saying he is), this is a far better approach than a frontal assault.