DA Vinci Code

Had a sneak preveiw ticket so I went and saw the movie, here is what I think. Anyone else have thoughts.


The Da Vinci Code is a poorly executed, surprisingly dull “intellectual” thriller based on the popular novel. I use the word “intellectual” loosely, because the claims made by each character are anything but intelligent.

Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is a successful professor of symbology who is falsely accused of murdering a museum curator while promoting his book in Paris. Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) comes to his rescue, and soon they are traveling throughout Paris and London trying to unravel the mystery behind the Holy Grail, an ancient secret society, and an international cover-up as old as the Church

I have to apologize. That last paragraph made this film seem much more interesting than it is. It is a movie that tries so hard to be intelligent that I almost feel sorry for it. Having studied both Church history and theology, I couldn’t help but laugh whenever Langdon or Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen) attempted to give Neveu history lessons. It’s as if they had heard of certain events, and then ascribed to them whatever crazy idea first jumped into their heads. The Council of Nicea was held to decide if Jesus Christ was God? I’m sorry, but that’s just stupid.

There is so much objectionable content in this story that the USCCB dedicated an entire website to rebutting it. The film depicts the Church as an evil, misogynistic organization. It also paints Opus Dei as misguided murderers, something they are certainly not. There is a perverse scene of ascetic mortification, multiple gruesome murders, some male nudity, and crude language. Additionally, there is a scene that contains a disgusting cultic, sexual ritual. It is not often that a film can be boring, offensive, disgusting, and banal, but The Da Vinci Code manages to cram all of these into most of its scenes.

It was hard to be offended by The Da Vinci Code because I spent most of the movie yawning. When I wasn’t yawning, I was laughing at the numerous ridiculous historical claims. No, Jesus did not have a child with Mary Magdalene. No, the Church has not tried to hide any historical facts about Christ from the world. Yes, this movie is a genuine piece of garbage.

[VOPman]

Actually, the papacy has a long history of supressing historical facts. First, there is the fact that Jesus was a middle eastern man and yet, he is depicted as a white european.

Secondly, December 25th is not the day of his birth - that date was merely chosen by a Pope to coincide with a pagan festival (the reason being that everyone was celebrating that time of year anyways, so why not also celebrate Christ's birth as well?). So why then, does the church place so much emphasis on increased spirituality during a pagan holiday? It is interesting to note that Greek Orthodox Christians, who have never acknowledged nor accepted the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, celebrate Christmas on January 10th.

Thirdly, why is there so much supression of women as leaders of the Roman Church? Early Christianity was outlawed so it's rituals would have been practiced in secret and at home. Who usually rules at home? Who prepares the meals, welcomes the guests, and decides the course of events at home? We all know that even in today's society, the vast majority of home life is governed by women. This is true now and it was certainly true 2,000 years ago when the "old fashioned" notion that housework was women's work reigned supreme. That being said, it stands to reason that women would have had prominent roles in leading and in participating in early Christian gatherings.

Fourth, where is scriptual justification for a Pope? If God is everywhere and for everyone, then why do we need an earthly intermediary? If God commanded that we should have no other gods, then why do believers in the Roman Church pray to saints (invoking their names is the same as praying)? Aren't saints selected by Cardinals? Why do they get to decide on the divinity of other mortals?

Fifth, there is nothing in the New Testament which specifically rebuts the assertion that Jesus was married and had children. He was a jewish man, afterall. It was unlikely for a man of his age to be single. The "scripture," as presented in the form of New Testament, is a collection of books, essays, and letters which were compiled, voted on, and selected from hundreds of writings on the topic by a council of bishops some several hundred years after Jesus's life ended.

I heard on NPR today that a clergyman of the Roman Church was calling for the movie to be banned because it was "blasphemous." I think the movie/book raises doubts about the Roman Church and their credibilty. Blasphemy is defined as "a contemptuous or profane act, utterance, or writing concerning God or a sacred entity." Does the church and it's clergy now consider themselves to have been elevated to the ranks of divinity or to some sort of "sacred entity"?

You may read this post and consider me to be an agnostic or even a blasphemer. Well, if having faith in God but not in a church which has established a 1,500+ year reign of genocide, corruption, and scandal is blasphemy, then I am guilty. What true Christian wouldn't want to be excomminicated and, therefore, disassociated from the true "whore of Babylon?"

I don't plan to see the movie because most of the reviews seem to call it mediocre or maybe just a little better.

I am reading the novel. It is entertaining and is a good read. So far, it moves pretty fast and is hard to put down.

Now, for all you sanctimonious experts - you need to get a life. It is just a very entertaining novel. And yes, the author exercises literary license. Get through your heads - it is a work of fiction and it is for entertainment only.

There was an article the other day about members of the clergy, some of whom were Catholic, who read the book. They are informed, and they pretty much seemed to agree that it is an entertaining novel and nothing more.

Anyone who gets stirred up about it is probably weak in their faith, or is just some sanctimonious fuddy duddy who is all wrapped up in their exalted opinion of themselves and their own opinions.

Give it a break people - it is just a novel, and an entertaining one at that.

:idea:

IT'S FICTION NOT A HISTORY BOOK, PEOPLE!!!! DUHH!

[mystikwarrior]

The Council of Nicea was held to decide if Jesus Christ was God? I’m sorry, but that’s just stupid.

Well, the Council was called to settle various differences of opinion amongst Bishops from around the world following Constantine's final victory over Licinius which ended Christiam persecution. The controversy of the idea being taught by Arius that since the Father 'begat' the Son, the Son must have at some point not existed at all and his substance of being was the same 'nothing' from which all creation ensued was center-stage immediately and most of the Council was spent arguing the point and issuing the Nicene Creed that states the Son was "one in being with the Father".
A matter of semantics. But not 'stupid'.

The film depicts the Church as an evil, misogynistic organization.

I'll go along with that interpretation.

When I wasn’t yawning, I was laughing at the numerous ridiculous historical claims.

Just shows that you have bought into the 'party line' 110%. The Church has you hooked and you wil follow it, even if that path leads you away from true fellowship with God.
You say Jesus and Mary weren't married and had no child? How do you know? You have only a selection of letters and writings compiled over centuries; by the Church I might add, to bolster your claim. The fact that it 'isn't' in the Book doesn't mean it didn't happen. Or are you one of the many who believe dinosaurs are a creation of the Devil? They sure don't appear in the Book.

I'm with VOPman. Organized religion; the 'Church', is rife with contradiction, corruption and more than a little blasphemy of its own. Indeed, the Catholic Church is merely Peter's interpretation of what a church should be. The Apostle Paul had a different interpretation. Peter founded his Church on a perceived mandate by Christ. Paul through his letters founded what is now modern mainstream Christianity in the form of the Protestant churches. Later persons have come along who also wrote letters and books containing words and guidance they allegedly received from God. In a strange twist, these persons who are no different than Moses or other Biblical authors are branded as heathens and bearers of false religions. Joseph Smith and his Mormons. Mohammed and his Muslims.
I'm no agnostic. I believe in and follow God. But I'm burnt out on organized religion and their doctrinal infighting on who has the main hotline to the Man upstairs, not to mention the extremely hypocritical way they lead their lives.
The Da Vinci Code is a novel. A piece of fiction. The fact that the Church and its followers are in such an uproar about about it makes one wonder just how much fiction it really is, though.