Da Vinci Code

[Bellamy]

I watched "Da Vinci Code" film tonight. It's better than I expected.

[Fanny!]

I haven't seen it yet, but I may. I've heard some bad comments about it, and some others were good so... I don't really know what to do.

[HelenCeline27]

i have not seen it yet i dont know if i will go see it or not

[Star^Shine]

i want to see it but ill go see it when i get back from Norway!!

[quaizee]

the end and some things were different, but weeee

I think it's really good despite the negative comments...

 

if you read the book and u like it, you won't be dissapointed

 

 

Audrey Tatou excellent actress, as always

[VanMerlin]

Not in the least bit interested, not am I interested in the book. I suppose the religious aspect of it all leaves me cold. It'll be one of those movies I watch on TV when there's nothing else on...in a couple years.

[AllCeline]

Not in the least bit interested, not am I interested in the book. I suppose the religious aspect of it all leaves me cold. It'll be one of those movies I watch on TV when there's nothing else on...in a couple years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think I'll be the first to back you up on that. I'm not gonna see for all the same reasons. Though, I don't think I'll even watch it on TV.

[quaizee]

In my point of view you must be "open minded" about religion and those things...

that movie and any other won't change your mind if you have clear about what you really believe

 

 

 

I see it as "another possible chapter" of the real history, not even as offence for religion

 

Edited May 21, 2006 at 10:14 PM by icch

[VanMerlin]

In my point of view you must be "open minded" about religion and those things...

that movie and any other won't change your mind if you have clear about what you really believe

 

 

I see it as "another possible chapter" of the real history

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree. I'm sure it may be an interesting movie to those who care about Jesus and that history. I simply couldn't care less one way or the other.

 

It's crazy that some religious people are waiting outside of movie theatres to talk to people about the movie and 'set the record straight' as they see it. It's just a movie, people!! It's not going to change many minds.

 

And I saw a book being sold on TV, called "DaVinci Code Deception", talking about all the ways in which the book and movie are fallacies...the religious quarter is getting uptight!!

[AllCeline]

In my point of view you must be "open minded" about religion and those things...

that movie and any other won't change your mind if you have clear about what you really believe

 

 

 

I see it as "another possible chapter" of the real history, not even as a offence for religion

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's just the thing: many people consider this to be, "real history." Everyone should feel free to believe what they want to believe, but I just think this is unfortunately changing who Jesus Christ really is to many people, and I personally see that to be one of the (maybe even THE) worst thing ever.

 

But like I said, everyone has the right to believe whatever they want to believe.

Edited May 21, 2006 at 10:18 PM by AllCeline

[Célinefull]

In my point of view you must be "open minded" about religion and those things...

that movie and any other won't change your mind if you have clear about what you really believe

 

 

I see it as "another possible chapter" of the real history

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree. I'm sure it may be an interesting movie to those who care about Jesus and that history. I simply couldn't care less one way or the other.

 

It's crazy that some religious people are waiting outside of movie theatres to talk to people about the movie and 'set the record straight' as they see it. It's just a movie, people!! It's not going to change many minds.

 

And I saw a book being sold on TV, called "DaVinci Code Deception", talking about all the ways in which the book and movie are fallacies...the religious quarter is getting uptight!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

careful, being so plainly dismissive implies you care more than you'd like us to know.

 

Me, I am going to see it for Audrey! I don't decide that I am only going to watch a movie in a few years on tv without really knowing anything about it. I don't care about Jesus, that doesn't mean I need to rule out seeing this film.

 

Yes, I do agree about the christians..such long lengths to decredit a work of fiction that, as they say, has no basis in truth, seems a bit to excessive and makes them appear like they are trying to hide something, which basically means more box office for the movie!

[Krys]

im gonna watch it for the sake of watching it. i dont wanna read the book again

[Clari]

I'm not going to watch it, because I'm too poor to go to the cinema. In one year, when it's on TV I just might watch it.

[tativale]

I watched it yesterday. I think it's agood movie, I like it!!! heheh I havent read the book though. I just read one book of him, Deception Point. hehehehe - I just read a few pages of Davinci Code.

[Bellamy]

Da Vinci Code success may boost PS3's launch

 

The success of The Da Vinci Code, the Columbia Pictures movie based on Dan Brown's best-selling novel, could be a key weapon for Sony when it comes to launching the PlayStation 3 this November.

 

That's according to analysts at Bloomberg, who reported this week that the firm - which owns Columbia Pictures - may be planning to launch the movie on Blu-Ray almost simultaneously with the arrival of the PS3.

Source: http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/05/22/da_vinci_code_ps3/

[Krys]

what has the Da Vinci Code got to do with PS3?

[Bellamy]

"Columbia Pictures - may be planning to launch the movie on Blu-Ray almost simultaneously with the arrival of the PS3."

PS3 would be the cheapest way to have Blu-Ray player at that time.

[Annabelle]

In Malta there's a whole controversy going on at the moment because of our catholic religion involed in it. I read the book and the film will be in the cinemas tomorrow - I think i'll watch it

[VanMerlin]

careful, being so plainly dismissive implies you care more than you'd like us to know.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

If I don't care about Jesus, than why would I waste time and money to go and see a movie with an actor I don't like. You must learn to stop with the assumptions, my friend.

[Krys]

"Columbia Pictures - may be planning to launch the movie on Blu-Ray almost simultaneously with the arrival of the PS3."

PS3 would be the cheapest way to have Blu-Ray player at that time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

ah okie. understood

[Célinefull]

careful, being so plainly dismissive implies you care more than you'd like us to know.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

If I don't care about Jesus, than why would I waste time and money to go and see a movie with an actor I don't like. You must learn to stop with the assumptions, my friend.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah..what the heck was with Tom Hanks??!!? Random comedy actor in a serious film!!

[babymonkey]

Donald Clarke of the Irish Times explains it better than I ever could

 

REVIEWED - THE DA VINCI CODE: In recent years, only Crazy Frog has divided critics and the public more than Dan Brown. Pundits in big, clever newspapers such as this have laid waste to whole forests in their efforts to reveal Brown's slapdash attitude to both logic and language. Yet every time we get on a plane we find the heads either side of us inclined towards The Da Vinci Code or one of Brown's other equally dreadful not-quite novels. The message is clear: take that, you elitist scum. We're going to eat this garbage and call it ice cream.

 

Of course, there is a tradition of bad novels making good films. Hitchcock, feeling that proper literature demanded annoying levels of fidelity from the adaptor, actively preferred working with pulp. Surely, when the slew of unnecessary adverbs and uncertain participles is washed away, The Da Vinci Code should provide the material for a darn good romp?

 

Not a bit of it. Ron Howard's interminably boring movie, more faithful to the turgid text than seems sane, serves to remind us that the novel does not have the discipline or sense of purpose that pulp generally requires. There is nothing here you would call a plot, just a rudimentary structure upon whose walls the author has scrawled his endlessly preposterous conspiracy theories. Reading this stuff is tedious enough. Listening to it being droned out by distracted-looking actors is sheer torture.

 

The film begins with a lecture and that is how it continues. Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks), Professor of Silly Nonsense at Harvard, is addressing a French audience on the subject of signs and their meanings. At a book signing following the talk, he is approached by a detective, who informs him that his name has arisen in connection with a murder at the Louvre. There he meets a police cryptologist played - in a performance whose stultifying woodenness we shall charitably attribute to language difficulties - by a constantly furrowed Audrey Tautou.

 

Some stuff happens and they find themselves hiding in the lavatory. They tell each other about riddles and ancient legends. Some more stuff happens and they end up in the back of a truck. They tell each other about the Holy Grail and the Knights Templar. Yet more stuff happens before tea is taken with an outrageously hammy Ian McKellen.

 

They tell each other about the myth which suggests that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene. For the love of Mike, will you all shut up for two minutes and bloody do something.

 

The production notes claim that Akiva Goldsman, who worked with Howard on the overrated A Beautiful Mind and the underrated Cinderella Man, wrote some sort of script for the film. What Mr Goldsman, almost certainly terrified of radically altering such a successful book, did beyond cutting out swathes of Brown's rambling, cliche-rich dialogue and pasting it onto idiot boards is not made clear. Not since The Phantom Menace has an event movie urged its actors to say quite so many stupid things at quite such length.

 

So, does the film have anything to recommend it? Paul Bettany is, whether on purpose or not, invigoratingly over the top as a mad albino monk. Tom Hanks, one of the few stars doughy and plain enough to convince as an academic, just about retains his dignity. And the digs at Opus Dei have managed to enrage certain reactionary forces that deserve to be so disturbed. None of which is enough to make the two and a half hours pass at anything faster than a drugged crawl.

 

There ends this elitist's dispatch from the ivory tower.

 

Irish Times

[Cedi]

I've seen the movie.

I think it's a good movie it's only

so long. But it's a great story.

The ending could be sooner all I think of it

[gizapup]

i haven't seen it yet, but the critics say it sucked... bad... i have yet to formulate my own opinion...

[angel_christ]

My friends said it was really good. I'm looking forward to watch it. But I think reading the book would be better. It's fantastic!

[celinefanonline]

i want to see it......

i think i'll see it soon...

i don't really care about the religon thing... it's just a story.....

[LaFeeRailleuse]

I went to the cinema yesterday and watched it...

 

It was better than I expected, but I found some scene too violent!

I prefer going to see funny movies!

[angel_christ]

Ah.... I bet that violent scene would be Silas tormented himself, wasn't it?

[Krys]

watched it the other day. i kinda agree that the movie is for those that have not read the book. Bezu Fache shoulda have been bigger the only thing i dont like is the ending

[Bellamy]

I heard the ending of the movie is different to the book. Anyone can tell me what's the difference?