Just bought tckt for THE DAVINCI CODE movie!!!
May 19th, 2006, 11:47 AM
#23
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't read the book yet, but would like to see the movie for the scenery/locations before we leave on our trip next week (to raise the anticipation level, I suppose).
However, I don't think I'm willing to brave the theater on opening weekend.
I guess I'll see it when I come back and use it to reminisce on all the great things we saw during our trip.
However, I don't think I'm willing to brave the theater on opening weekend.
I guess I'll see it when I come back and use it to reminisce on all the great things we saw during our trip.
May 19th, 2006, 11:48 AM
#24
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I couldn't care less about the way the Catholic church is portrayed in the novel, but it was horribly written. I am surprised that Dan Brown didn't start the novel off with, "It was a dark and stormy night..." Some adjectives I would use to describe "The Da Vinci Code": trite, superficial, hackneyed, cliched.
This novel is for people who don't like to think, or maybe can't think. Does thinking give you a headache? I can only imagine the movie!!! It probably ranks right up there with the smarmy "Titanic."
Mrs. E Worthington-Manville
This novel is for people who don't like to think, or maybe can't think. Does thinking give you a headache? I can only imagine the movie!!! It probably ranks right up there with the smarmy "Titanic."
Mrs. E Worthington-Manville
May 19th, 2006, 11:53 AM
#26
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard the movie is close to the book...but then the book was hardly well written.
In my opinion, it's a great story, told by a so-so writer...but it won't stop me from going to see it.
It's worth it just to see Audrey Tautou.
Jules
In my opinion, it's a great story, told by a so-so writer...but it won't stop me from going to see it.
It's worth it just to see Audrey Tautou.
Jules
May 19th, 2006, 11:54 AM
#27
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<I'd worry more about people who seek advice from a fictional teenager who if she did exist would now be dead 400 years>
Personally i'd worry more about people who seek advice from a fictional Jesus who if he/she did exist would be dead about 2,000 years now.
May 19th, 2006, 12:55 PM
#29
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Francophile - I agree with you I will go see the movie, for the scenery, however not this weekend. I want to avoid the crowds.
The book was okay, but I didn't love it. Maybe because I never finished it
The book was okay, but I didn't love it. Maybe because I never finished it
May 19th, 2006, 12:55 PM
#30
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must admit that the book was not the best piece of literature I have ever picked up.
However, let's not be literary snobs, please! Anything that gets people reading is a good thing. Not everyone can make it through "Ulysses"...
Maybe (on average) we're a more educated bunch on this board, but I'm finding the criticism against people who liked the book to be more offensive than the fictional story told by Brown (and I'm a practicting Catholic).
However, let's not be literary snobs, please! Anything that gets people reading is a good thing. Not everyone can make it through "Ulysses"...
Maybe (on average) we're a more educated bunch on this board, but I'm finding the criticism against people who liked the book to be more offensive than the fictional story told by Brown (and I'm a practicting Catholic).
May 19th, 2006, 01:08 PM
#31
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason that people have their knickers in a knot over this book/movie is that Dan Brown states in the beginning of the book that everything in it is based on fact and is true. Therefore it is not easy for many people to simply look at it as a piece of fiction.
The writing is attrocious and Brown's fact checking is abysmal. It is riddled with errors that he claims to be true. Worse, an astonishingly high level of readers believe everything in it to be completely true. Everyone loves a good conspiracy.
The Catholic Church is concerned because it makes them appear to be involved in a massive coverup. Nevermind that there is no proof of such a coverup.
The writing is attrocious and Brown's fact checking is abysmal. It is riddled with errors that he claims to be true. Worse, an astonishingly high level of readers believe everything in it to be completely true. Everyone loves a good conspiracy.
The Catholic Church is concerned because it makes them appear to be involved in a massive coverup. Nevermind that there is no proof of such a coverup.
May 19th, 2006, 01:23 PM
#32
<< Dan Brown states in the beginning of the book that everything in it is based on fact and is true.>>
PalQ I don't have a copy handy but did he in fact claim that EVERYTHING is true?
My recollection is that he listed several items of information at the beginning of the book that he stated were true, which (if this is indeed the case) is a far cry from saying that *everything* in a novel (an art form that by definition is fiction) is true.
If he were claiming that *everything* were true, would he not have published it as nonfiction?
In any case, I'm with the folks who want to see it for the location shooting. I was at the Louvre the night they closed early to film DVC there; in fact the next morning I had coffee at Cafe Marly and watched the tech guys go around to all the lamp posts and remove the diffusing film from inside; I guess they had done that to get a particular effect from the lights; it will be fun to see how they turned out.
PalQ I don't have a copy handy but did he in fact claim that EVERYTHING is true?
My recollection is that he listed several items of information at the beginning of the book that he stated were true, which (if this is indeed the case) is a far cry from saying that *everything* in a novel (an art form that by definition is fiction) is true.
If he were claiming that *everything* were true, would he not have published it as nonfiction?
In any case, I'm with the folks who want to see it for the location shooting. I was at the Louvre the night they closed early to film DVC there; in fact the next morning I had coffee at Cafe Marly and watched the tech guys go around to all the lamp posts and remove the diffusing film from inside; I guess they had done that to get a particular effect from the lights; it will be fun to see how they turned out.
May 19th, 2006, 01:27 PM
#34
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS long as this book was on the best sellers list(s) and the number of copies sold says those of you that didn't care for the book are in the minority, but are entitled to you opinion.
I found the book to be one of the most compelling stories I've read. I didn't take it for it's pro or con Catholic lines, just a very good story. I can't imagine the movie being able tell the story in a 2+ hour time given the complexity of the original.
Here come the flames...
MvK
I found the book to be one of the most compelling stories I've read. I didn't take it for it's pro or con Catholic lines, just a very good story. I can't imagine the movie being able tell the story in a 2+ hour time given the complexity of the original.
Here come the flames...
MvK
May 19th, 2006, 01:37 PM
#36
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"My recollection is that he listed several items of information at the beginning of the book that he stated were true..."
You are correct, but his statement is more inclusive then you imply.
He says, "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
And that is not correct.
Keith
You are correct, but his statement is more inclusive then you imply.
He says, "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
And that is not correct.
Keith
May 19th, 2006, 01:40 PM
#37
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan Brown does NOT in the beginning of the book state that everything is true.
He states that the Priory of Sion and Opus Dei are real organizations, and that descriptions of "artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals" are accurate.
He did exhaustive research on the subjects, and found an interesting basis for a FICTIONAL thriller. These are real theories and controversial ideas, whether you believe in them or not. But Brown simply crafted a novel around something he found interesting.
It amazes me on a daily basis how obssessed people are with this book, and how against it people are. Why is no one angry at any of the authors that wrote NON-FICTIONAL accounts of these theories?? (Holy Blood, Holy Grail, etc...)
Relax, people.
He states that the Priory of Sion and Opus Dei are real organizations, and that descriptions of "artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals" are accurate.
He did exhaustive research on the subjects, and found an interesting basis for a FICTIONAL thriller. These are real theories and controversial ideas, whether you believe in them or not. But Brown simply crafted a novel around something he found interesting.
It amazes me on a daily basis how obssessed people are with this book, and how against it people are. Why is no one angry at any of the authors that wrote NON-FICTIONAL accounts of these theories?? (Holy Blood, Holy Grail, etc...)
Relax, people.
May 19th, 2006, 01:47 PM
#38
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really don't get why institutional religion thinks that it's immune to questioning. While the Catholic church may not have been guilty of a cover up, few people know the arbitrary and agenda-driven nature of its decision-making that gave us the church we know today. If the church were truly concern about promoting fact over fiction, orthodox believers would happily discuss such things, and the Da Vinci Code wouldn't be as controversial as it is.
Personally, I hated the book because of the writing style, but I'm all for any work of art that makes powerful institutions like organized religion worry about losing control of peoples' minds.
Personally, I hated the book because of the writing style, but I'm all for any work of art that makes powerful institutions like organized religion worry about losing control of peoples' minds.
May 19th, 2006, 02:05 PM
#39
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dallas...Duck!
INCOMING!
Maybe the negative reviews are "prompted" by the organizations that are threatened by the storyline?
I read the foreward and took the entire story as fiction. I didn't even know what the book was about, just heard all the chatter and decided to find out for myself...3 years ago.
Brown's other works such as "Angels and Demons" was much less believeable and "Deception Point" was off the scale.
MvK
INCOMING!
Maybe the negative reviews are "prompted" by the organizations that are threatened by the storyline?
I read the foreward and took the entire story as fiction. I didn't even know what the book was about, just heard all the chatter and decided to find out for myself...3 years ago.
Brown's other works such as "Angels and Demons" was much less believeable and "Deception Point" was off the scale.
MvK
May 19th, 2006, 02:05 PM
#40
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"...the number of copies sold says those of you that didn't care for the book are in the minority..."
How do you get that? First of all, not everyone who bought the book necessarily enjoyed it, and the people who <i>didn't</i> buy one outnumbers those who did by probably 120 to one.
How do you get that? First of all, not everyone who bought the book necessarily enjoyed it, and the people who <i>didn't</i> buy one outnumbers those who did by probably 120 to one.
