Da Vinci Code movie getting lambasted by critics

[Vinthekwanfan]

Here are the links. The movie certainly had it coming; I love Tom Hanks, Opie, and Audrey Tautou (Amelie), but the fanatic level of hype, built-in massive expectations generated by the likewise bloated, pompus, pretentious, and nothing-but-all-lies novel (theologists think so, but Dan Brown the author won't fully admit that he whipped things up from various, random religious text and art works). Well, as I'm a devout (not Bible-thumping) Roman Catholic who vocalizes my own opinions whether pro- or anti-Catholic (not that it has anything to do with a piece of fluff entertainment), I will be somehow embittered if this movie will go on to earn gazillions of dollars as expected (if only for the sake of the likable actors).

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/17/film.cannes.howard.reut/index.html

[skateworlds1]

Here are the links. The movie certainly had it coming; I love Tom Hanks, Opie, and Audrey Tautou (Amelie), but the fanatic level of hype, built-in massive expectations generated by the likewise bloated, pompus, pretentious, and nothing-but-all-lies novel
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/

[/film.cannes.howard.reut/index.html[/url] Umm.... The book is a work of fiction so the "all lies" comment makes little sense. If it offends someone, they need to go to a differant movie, more to their liking.:P

[Grace]

I am going to move this to the Political thread. Though not a political topic and is a religious one, what you wrote could easily be led down the path to a highly sensitive topic and at a chance for it being discussed, I am moving it there from preventing it from exploding here.

[Krista]

yeah when its already under the title of "false" you can't say its full of lies lol. people have the problem, not the book or movie.

[skateworlds1]

Agreed Krista.. Glad we are avoiding an "explosion" at any rate.:lol

[Divinelove]

I could imagine a book like this would anger so many people that believes in the fairytale that is....the passion of the christ earned a gazillion dollars, i bet you weren't bitter about that one. Can't wait for X3 though. I love that jean grey.

[redvispa]

Well I for one am excited about this movie -- I liked the book and I'm interested in seeing the on screen version

[donnylutz]

theologists think so, but Dan Brown the author won't fully admit that he whipped things up from various, random religious text and art works)

The book was fiction, the movie is fiction. Dan Brown has never stated that it was all real. It's a story, plane and simple. (and a pretty good one in my opinion....I haven't seen the movie yet, but I really enjoyed the book.)

[skateworlds1]

I want to read the book before seeing the movie but tell the truth, did the book drag in some places or was it a page turner? Some say the book was boring?

[attyfan]

I think that Brown has spent so much time harping on the portions of the book that are true (there really was a Leonardo Da Vinci, and he really did paint "The Last Supper") and how everything else is backed up by another, non-fiction book, that people are treating it differently than a simple piece of fiction.

Oh -- and it isn't just the members of certain religioius groups that don't like the movie. Albinos are getting sick of being stereotyped as evil:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12820726/

[Shallah]

In general the book is always better than the movie so my advice is if you plan to see the movie version of anything watch it first and then read the book. Otherwise you might be like me waiting for certain things to happen that never do.

It was a very quick and fun read for me. The book is a bit like Tom Clancy sweeping international thriller only instead of various military weapons being described in detail there is the puzzling out of the clues. It is not the greatest novel ever written but it was a good book in that I did not want to put it down until I found out the way and how of the who done it.

As for it being boring it was not to me but everyone's taste is different. I haven't read many reviews so I don't know if the boring comments only come from those who dislike the topic of the novel or they simply didn't like the book period.

You can always get a copy from the library, read a few pages and see if it is to your taste or not. This reminds me of my Nana once getting a book from the library. She got though one chapter but didn't care for it and so returned it unread. Later she got a call from the librarian asking for comments on the book since another reader had complained. She said the other reader said "I read it three times and it was absolute filth!" :lol

[skateworlds1]

LoL- that sounds like something my mother would say, She is of the religious right persuasion and many things are "filth" to her. Come to think of it, she's not very happy. lol. Now I am outraged to hear about the Albinos.. That just sucks. (snicker)

[synnabun]

This is one subject I will speak about.

It's a book! It's a movie! It's a fictitious novel meant to entertain. If Dan Brown had ulterior motives, then so be it... but just because someone wrote something doesn't mean you have to believe it! Everyone has a choice... they can choose to read the book and see the movie... or not! The one thing that these critics and misc. organizations need to remember is that people can think for themselves. If they honestly think that people are dumb and gullible enough to take a work of fiction to heart (and let it test their religious beliefs… which should have been set in stone well before the book ever existed)... then these people just have major problems and it has nothing to do with different forms of entertainment, but rather their desire to be controlled.

I like a good story and The Da Vinci Code is one. It’s not the best written book I’ve ever read. I honestly had trouble getting into it because I didn’t like the way it was written, but I got used to it. I figured out a lot of the clues before they were revealed. It’s an interesting story for those that aren’t so easily offended by the whole Jesus history presented in a different sort of manner. I’m going to see the movie too… and everyone else that has a problem with it can kiss my bootie! :D

[Shallah]

it isn't the filth complaint that amused me - there are books & movies I find disgusting - it was the fact that the woman read the book 3 times before telling the librarian it was absolute filth. My Nana figured it out in one chapter :P

[Jayjen36]

Umm.... The book is a work of fiction so the "all lies" comment makes little sense. If it offends someone, they need to go to a different movie, more to their liking.


Heehee! True enough. This sort of thing reminds me of the big big fracas some people caused (and continue to try to stir up) about poor Harry Potter! I wonder just how many people who are complaining actually read the book, and of those who did, how many of those did it solely to load up on "ammo" when they began to attack it. A ridiculous waste of time.


If they honestly think that people are dumb and gullible enough to take a work of fiction to heart (and let it test their religious beliefs… which should have been set in stone well before the book ever existed)... then these people just have major problems and it has nothing to do with different forms of entertainment, but rather their desire to be controlled.


:clap :clap :clap
Boy do I agree with that. There are so many so called devout people flying about looking for the devil in cereal boxes or cartoons that they take every idea that doesn't jibe with what they've been taught as a direct assault on their personal beliefs. Frankly, I think that if your beliefs can be so easily shaken it's a good thing that they were. Perhaps they aren't as solid and as heart-felt as they want to believe.

The fact is I haven't read the book or the book it at least seems to be based on "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" but I did see the authors on a program about the holy grail. I believe that a big part of their evidence came from a guy who claimed to be either the descendant of one of the Templar knights who supposedly guarded the supposed descendants of Jesus, or one of the actual descendants. That guy was later debunked, a lot, but the authors still insist that their story has some validity. I think it is likely a lot of nonsense. I mean they claim that those descendants are the European aristocracy for heavens sake! Have you seen those people! I would think that that kind of blood line would make for results much much better than those!!! no offense to our European MFKers

[VIETgrlTerifa]

I'm sorry, but this should not be in the political forum. It's only political if you want to make it political. But it's a freakn' work of fiction.

Why don't we put Harry Potter books in this forum too, I'm sure there are some people who think JK Rowling promotes wicca or witchcraft.

[Krista]

It involves religion, which is pretty political sometimes, therefore nothing wrong with it being moved here. Harry Potter posts could be moved here as well if they got into political and religious matter. Whether they have or not in the past, was up to the mods, just like it is now.

k thx.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

It involves religion, which is pretty political sometimes, therefore nothing wrong with it being moved here. Harry Potter posts could be moved here as well if they got into political and religious matter. Whether they have or not in the past, was up to the mods, just like it is now.

k thx.

My problem is that people are making it political. Even a thread about the reviews of the movie, turn into a politically or religiously motivated tirade.
It seems ridiculous to me, especially considering it's a work of fiction.

[Jayjen36]

My problem is that people are making it political. Even a thread about the reviews of the movie, turn into a politically or religiously motivated tirade.
It seems ridiculous to me, especially considering it's a work of fiction.


The fact is that it has become something of a controversial subject. The catholic church is trying to sue the makers of the film. Many many religious groups are staging boycotts of the movie. And there are already "tracts" out disputing the fictional claims of the movie. Like or not it's an issue and as it has to do with mainstream Christianity pretty soon one politician or another will come out against the movie, than one will defend it, and so on and so on.

[skateworlds1]

My problem is that people are making it political. Even a thread about the reviews of the movie, turn into a politically or religiously motivated tirade.
It seems ridiculous to me, especially considering it's a work of fiction. I tend to agree VIETgrl. It seemed a bit of an anal reaction to move the thread as it is not about politics but there you have it.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

The fact is that it has become something of a controversial subject. The catholic church is trying to sue the makers of the film. Many many religious groups are staging boycotts of the movie. And there are already "tracts" out disputing the fictional claims of the movie. Like or not it's an issue and as it has to do with mainstream Christianity pretty soon one politician or another will come out against the movie, than one will defend it, and so on and so on.

True. Proving how certain people love to waste their times and efforts on things like this.

[Shallah]

I have noticed several books debunking this fictional novel in the new books case at the library every time I have gone recently. If anyone is interested check your local library and save a few $. Ditto for The Da Vinci Code itself. And if you are *really* patient yet want to see the movie wait for your library to get a copy :)

shallah, biblioholic on a budget

[skateworlds1]

Factual facts? There are none, it's fiction. Is anyone else sick of religious fanatics and their reactions to everything? If they're so offended by everything, then they shouldn't go out of their houses or watch tv, hear radio or read the news. Sheesh!

[Krista]

I tend to agree VIETgrl. It seemed a bit of an anal reaction to move the thread as it is not about politics but there you have it.

Its controversial. And controversial pretty much = political. People get defensive one way or another. Random chat is usually less arugmentative.

Let it go people, its just a thread in a section. You can post here as easily as anywhere else.

You can tell its the off season......

[probativev]

I haven't read that many reviews, but Roger Ebert liked it a lot.

Anywya, this is one of those movies that movie reviewers love to blast because it is so hyped, so I don't know if I can trust the reviewers or not. I think I'm going to go see it anyway.

I just wish they did more cosmetically. The Albino doesn't look like an albino, just a blonde guy. They should have made him wear red contact lenses. And I still hate Tom Hanks' hair.

[Krista]

Actually thats a misconception. The majority of Albinos don't have red eyes.

[Yzerbear19]

It's a book! It's a movie! It's a fictitious novel meant to entertain. If Dan Brown had ulterior motives, then so be it... but just because someone wrote something doesn't mean you have to believe it! Everyone has a choice... they can choose to read the book and see the movie... or not.

I agree. Its FICTION! I've never read it and have no desire to read it, but its fiction. Today when my brother came back from lunch he was laughing because there were these 3 people out front of the movie theater protesting the movie. When I went to lunch a little while after that there were probably 8-10 people there. I had to laugh because its FICTION!!! These people are wasting their time. They aren't going to stop people from seeing the movie. Those who want to see it will go and those who don't, won't go.

Which company is putting out the movie? I ask because I watched this DVD last night called "An Evening with Kevin Smith." Its a couple of years old, but there was one part that I found interesting. He was talking about his film, "Dogma" which was originally going to be distributed by Miramax and Disney. The Catholic league was all up in arms over the film, but when it was distributed by Lions Gate instead they didn't make such a big deal over it because they just wanted to be a thorn in Disney's side. I wonder how much of this whole issue is because it is a movie now. I don't seem to remember such outrage over the book itself. Just wondering if some of the outrage is aimed at the company putting out the movie.

[Jayjen36]

I wonder how much of this whole issue is because it is a movie now. I don't seem to remember such outrage over the book itself. Just wondering if some of the outrage is aimed at the company putting out the movie.


The movie was released by Columbia Pictures and Imagine Entertainment, and the only thing, as far as I can tell, any Christian groups have against them is this movie. Actually there was quite a bit of fuss made when the first book, Holy Blood Holy Grail, came out and again when the book, The Da Vinci Code, was released. A lot of the books, tracts, ect. protesting, de-bunking, and ripping up those two books came out just after they were released. I remember lots of stories on the 700 Club and such (back when I actually watched those shows) going on and on and on about them.

[redvispa]

I watched it today, and I really liked it -- more than anything, I liked the visual look of the film -- It wasn't too surprising since I've read the book, but my boyfriend who hasn't read the book said he found it all facinating.... overally, it was entertaining for what it is ... a fun adventure story...

[moxie]

Anywya, this is one of those movies that movie reviewers love to blast because it is so hyped, so I don't know if I can trust the reviewers or not. I think I'm going to go see it anyway.

Also, the early reviews came after the screening in Cannes, where the critics traditionally are hard on mainstream American films. They don't like big-budget Hollywood films taking over what started out as an arty film festival.

From the reviews that are now coming in, I would say the reaction is "mixed," as opposed to being overwhelmingly negative. The reviewer from my paper said the movie's greatest fault is that it tried too hard to be faithful to the book; he felt it would have been a better movie if it had had quicker pacing and less detail. But he does feel that people who liked the book will mostly like the movie.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

Also, the early reviews came after the screening in Cannes, where the critics traditionally are hard on mainstream American films. They don't like big-budget Hollywood films taking over what started out as an arty film festival.

From the reviews that are now coming in, I would say the reaction is "mixed," as opposed to being overwhelmingly negative. The reviewer from my paper said the movie's greatest fault is that it tried too hard to be faithful to the book; he felt it would have been a better movie if it had had quicker pacing and less detail. But he does feel that people who liked the book will mostly like the movie.

I never read the book, so my review of the film is from someone who never read the book before.

I watched it last night and although there were times the look of the movie was pretty to look at, I thought Ron Howards' directing was really awkward at times. Some times it was good, but many times it was just choppy and really sloppy. The dialogue was really awful and the plot was extremely obvious. It was also way too long and they didn't have to spell everything out. It's sad when the most interesting part was the "history" aspect of it and the actual mystery itself was sorta blah.

The characters were all so one-dimensional and boring, and I also thought Tom Hanks's acting was well....couldn't they cast someone else because he seemed really uninspired in this one. But I did love that when they were running from the museum, she was running faster than him...IN HEELS.

Side note: With all that Audrey Tatou's character went through, how the hell did she manage to have her make up, clothes, and hair be perfect?

[VIETgrlTerifa]

Its controversial. And controversial pretty much = political. People get defensive one way or another. Random chat is usually less arugmentative.

Let it go people, its just a thread in a section. You can post here as easily as anywhere else.

You can tell its the off season......

It's just that some here think the idea that a work of fiction can be as controversal as this thing has become where a thread just talking about the REVIEWS of the movie is political is beyond ridiculous.

If anything, the people protesting this movie is giving this boring mediocre movie a lot more attention and makes people want to see it just to see what all the fuss is about.

[kittyjake5]

Side note: With all that Audrey Tatou's character went through, how the hell did she manage to have her make up, clothes, and hair be perfect?

Maybe it was divine intervention.:wink

[JerryStopher]

I never read the book, so my review of the film is from someone who never read the book before.

Hey VgT -

I've never read it either, and your review of the film is all the evidence I need to know I wouldn't enjoy seeing it, as if I were considering it anyway.

I'm not one to go after everything that's in vogue.

I will venture an opinion, though: some folks have too much time on their hands, and their rantings are not really as important as they think.

[skateworlds1]

It's just that some here think the idea that a work of fiction can be as controversal as this thing has become where a thread just talking about the REVIEWS of the movie is political is beyond ridiculous.

If anything, the people protesting this movie is giving this boring mediocre movie a lot more attention and makes people want to see it just to see what all the fuss is about. I thought the same thing as you VG. It seemed ridiculous to think of it as controversal. jmo:P

[forestgreen92]

I laughed at those who protested this movie. I'm sorry, but I've read the book. It's definitely fiction. It's the same kind of eye-rolling laughter I had when the religious right got so excited about the Narnia Chronicles and how they were a depiction of Christianity. I'm Christian, but I sure didn't get that concept from a movie with a talking Lion.:silly

[vive_la_reine]

I saw the movie tonight and thoroughly enjoyed it. I didn't read the book but went with someone who read it a few years ago. His take is that it was pretty loyal to the book.

It wasn't a great movie, but I didn't feel as if I wasted my money. As far as the high heel thing, welcome to the world of how most movies have depicted women for the 56 years I've inhabited this planet. This is nothing new. As someone once quipped, "Ginger Rodgers did everything Fred Astaire did only backwards and in high heels...." :lol

Along the note of Sophie remaining in tact, I thought Tom Hanks looked pretty good too, considering all he'd been through. You just had to suspend any connection to reality with the fact that these people had been on the run for several days and looked pretty fresh. Most mortals would have looked as if they'd been dragged by a horse through a field of cactus....

That said, I would rather watch this movie another 10 times over "The English Patient" which IMHO, was not only the worst movie ever, but the worst movie ever to win Best Picture. My take away from that movie is that if love is such torture, then why bother unless you have some sort of mental disorder? I'd rather poke my eyes out with hot daggers than ever have to watch The English Patient again....:silly

The Davinci Code was OK in my book as far as popcorn entertainment...

[Divinelove]

I think everything offends the so called "christians" if their view of the world is threathened.

[moxie]

That said, I would rather watch this movie another 10 times over "The English Patient" which IMHO, was not only the worst movie ever, but the worst movie ever to win Best Picture. My take away from that movie is that if love is such torture, then why bother unless you have some sort of mental disorder? I'd rather poke my eyes out with hot daggers than ever have to watch The English Patient

OMG, you just made me spew my coffee all over the computer! "The English Patient" was the MOST BORING movie I've ever seen; I didn't think it would ever end! The only interesting/romantic scene was the one where all the candles are lit in a path, and that was just a few seconds of respite from the torture.:banghead

[skateworlds1]

No, OUT OF AFRICA was the most boring and anything with Emma Thompson in it, also.

[JerryStopher]

I think everything offends the so called "christians" if their view of the world is threathened.
Unfortunately, they're giving Jesus a bad name. There are many of us Christians who are not freaked out by fiction!

[Dave]

Hallelujah JerryStopher!

[kittyjake5]

I hated English Patient too. I tried to watch that movie three times
and could not get into it. Finally I realized just because it won an Oscar for best picture it was not my cup of tea.

[MK Simply Stunning]

I the book was a great read for me I couldn't put it down. It moved right along. The movie didn't seem fast paced at all. The movie didn't give Sophie as much credit for solving things as the book. There was fact mixed with fiction.

[Anne]

The movie is currently showing here in the Philippines and it's given an R-18 rating! I really cant understand why. It's just a movie. Although I personally think that the book is waaaaayyyy better than the movie. The Albino guy in my imagination is scarier hahahaa. Lol.

PS: A friend of mine imagined Langdon to be played by Hanks when she was reading the book. Lol. Audrey is pretty! She fits the Sophie role. ^^

[Yenezie]

Saw the movie, it was boring. Book much more exciting. In the movie Silas was supposed to be creepy, but instead he was hot. That is just so wrong.

[probativev]

I hated English Patient too. I tried to watch that movie three times
and could not get into it. Finally I realized just because it won an Oscar for best picture it was not my cup of tea.

I hated the English Patient too. One of the most boring picture I ever saw. A looong movie that was much ado about nothing, but a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.

[MK Simply Stunning]

Silas was not creepy, Paul Bettany has a great body. I was sad that Sophie was not an equal to Hanks, in the book she was equal. The screenplay was written to make Hanks the star.

[toutestgrace]

Yes, it's fiction. I wonder what the reaction to a story about the 'hoax' of the Holocaust or American slavery might be.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

Yes, it's fiction. I wonder what the reaction to a story about the 'hoax' of the Holocaust or American slavery might be.

It might get some anger, but anyone willing to write a fictional account of there being a "hoax" to the holocaust or slavery would probably be laughed at because most people are confident in those events actually happening. It seems the only people who are angered by this movie are only threatened.

With all the boycotting and anger this story has gotten, I came into this movie hoping it'd be more controversal or exciting. It was really much ado about nothing.

[kwancierto de aranjuez]

The book is definitely better. I really like Audrey but hated Hanks as Langdon... he just was not Langdon to me.

He kept saying "This is incredible!" and I kept saying to my head how lame.

About the controversy, if this book threathens anyone faith in their Christianity to begin with, then they were not good Christians to begin with.

Real Christians as I know them are open-minded, open-hearted and above all place importance in Jesus's message of love, kindness, generosity and peace than on the divinity of Jesus.

[Jayjen36]

toutestgrace wrote:

Yes, it's fiction. I wonder what the reaction to a story about the 'hoax' of the Holocaust or American slavery might be.

The problem with that argument is that there is far too much evidence for the Holocaust and American slavery for anyone to have anything beginning to be a credible argument against their having happened.

There is however, not so much hard evidence about the details of Jesus' life on earth. Lot's have people have written lots and lots of things, but there is a question as to how much of it could be called solid enough for most historians.

But, I think there is quite a bit of evidence that points to the fact that Jesus wasn't married and had no children, or rather there is so much lack of evidence of it that it would be a stretch to say that he did. And even the authors of Holy Blood Holy Grail admit that even if their book were to have solid facts there isn't enough there to make a solid argument for the idea that Jesus was married.

The point is, frankly that although the author of the Da Vinci Code, writes in the beginning that the general "facts" about the story are true. Those "facts" have been largely de-bunked a long time ago. If anyone has a problem all they need to do is watch the bi-zillion television shows reporting on it. The guy who supposedly "found" the list of the members of the Priory of Scion was found to be a fraud. He actually wrote the list and hid it in the library so that he could miraculously "find" it a couple of years later. It's a wonder that people still take it seriously. Both those that believe the book and those that are horrified by it.

[Heather]

Well, I saw it today finally (wanted to go opening day but couldn't make it), and I liked it. I read the book well over a year ago, so I don't remember all the details, but I do know some things were definitely changed. But yea, I loved the book, and liked the movie. The ending was different, and I think I actually liked the movie's version better. Or rather, the ending part that was the same, I bought it more on the screen than in the book. When I read the book, that part was pretty disappointing to me. (ok, this sounds completely confusing, lol, but I dont' want to give anything away, I guess.)


That said, I would rather watch this movie another 10 times over "The English Patient" which IMHO, was not only the worst movie ever, but the worst movie ever to win Best Picture. My take away from that movie is that if love is such torture, then why bother unless you have some sort of mental disorder? I'd rather poke my eyes out with hot daggers than ever have to watch The English Patient again....:silly

OMG, I agree 100 million percent on that. I HATED English Patient. I remember I looked at my watch (always a tell tale sign I'm not liking the movie), thinking an hour had already gone by. It was only 15 minutes. I would have walked out if I was there alone. Most boring movie EVER. Just shows critics and awards don't always know what they are talking about.

[dec5]

As a Christian, I am proud that the Christian majority shows more class every time our faith gets bashed.....

No huge riots......

No Millions protesting in the streets......yelling for the death
of Hanks.....and the cast of the movie....

Just non violent objection for the most part....to the suggestion that the
Code is fact.......





We should tell folks about the gospel though.... everyone will have to have a chance to decide.

For those folks that reject Christ's words, it is their decision...... and ultimately will find out the truth.....we all will......



As Christians, all we can do is spread the word....and live it....

And pray we do the right thing........


As for the movie....eh......yup it is fiction.....


But Christ did exist in history......and still does...:)




I laughed at those who protested this movie. I'm sorry, but I've read the book. It's definitely fiction. It's the same kind of eye-rolling laughter I had when the religious right got so excited about the Narnia Chronicles and how they were a depiction of Christianity. I'm Christian, but I sure didn't get that concept from a movie with a talking Lion.:silly


Narnia rocked!!! And the Lion was cool....Narnia is basically a simplified
version of the gospel in parable form....mixed with Euro mythology characters.....to give it a other world look.....



BTW I don't bother going to the movie theater anymore....DVD is the future.......but I am gonna pass on the Code just the same....:D

[Yenezie]

LOL! Good point dec5.

No burned down embassies over satrical cartoons of the Islamic prophet.

No murdered director over a film that criticized Islamic's treatment of women.

No death threats, attempted murder, and exile of the woman who wrote the script that the deceased filmmaker used for his short film.

No 3000 burned/destroyed cars and beatings deaths of elderly men over 2 moronic teens who electrocuted themselves.

As for the English Patient, never seen it. But I still haven't forgiven the Academy for giving "Best Picture" to Gladiator and American Beauty.

[Krista]

The discussion of the English Patient reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where Elaine goes to see it and just doesn't get what the hype is about, and everyone else is gushing lol. That cracked me up.

I actually really liked The English Patient. It was a very emotional movie, and well done, IMO. I'm a movie fanatic though.

[cestlavie000000]

As someone who is not religious at all I was not interested in seeing this movie.
But everyone I spoke to religious or not really liked it....so I am sure I will eventually see it. However, the subject matter in general doesn't interest me.
Day to day interaction with people and treating them well expecting nothing in return...now that interests me!

Loved the English Patient but my friends fell asleep at the movie theater sitting next to me...

The worst movie I ever saw was Poetic Justice with Janet Jackson...horrible and I like Janet fat or thin.

Now V for Vendetta that is a movie I can sink my teeth into. Society in a shambles due to constantly having your every moved watched by a government who tells you what you can do and that kills off those who don't fit what "their" human right standards are. Those who are opressed will always rise up....maybe even higher than the price of gas!

[MK Simply Stunning]

Loved The English Patient, it wasn't a romance. In my opinion it was a study of very different kinds of people thrown into extreme circumstances. Ralph F's character is angry at himself for giving into lust, betrayal and weekness. I don't know what she was thinking after the lust part. Doomed relationship.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

The self-congratulatory posts are just...wow.

[kwancierto de aranjuez]

As a Christian, I am proud that the Christian majority shows more class every time our faith gets bashed..... No huge riots...... No Millions protesting in the streets......yelling for the death of Hanks.....and the cast of the movie.... Just non violent objection for the most part....to the suggestion that the Code is fact....... We should tell folks about the gospel though.... everyone will have to have a chance to decide. For those folks that reject Christ's words, it is their decision...... and ultimately will find out the truth.....we all will...... As Christians, all we can do is spread the word....and live it.... And pray we do the right thing........ As for the movie....eh......yup it is fiction..... But Christ did exist in history......and still does...:) Narnia rocked!!! And the Lion was cool....Narnia is basically a simplified version of the gospel in parable form....mixed with Euro mythology characters.....to give it a other world look..... BTW I don't bother going to the movie theater anymore....DVD is the future.......but I am gonna pass on the Code just the same....:D

Well, to be fair, I don't think other religions who are on our "American" TVs protesting are the mojority representation of their religions.

Also, let's also praise the millions of Buddhists and Hindis who haven't gone out to the streets either...

:gphug

[vive_la_reine]

Real Christians as I know them are open-minded, open-hearted and above all place importance in Jesus's message of love, kindness, generosity and peace than on the divinity of Jesus.Amen to that statement.

I am not a Christian and I am proud of it. I respect Christians and their belief in their faith. It is their choice.

That said, the Christian person who most impacted my life was the woman who lived next door to my mom and dad when my mom was dying. I went back there and was the Hospice care taker for my mom. This wonderful Christian lady, who I will call, Miss N., was one of the few "Christians' I knew and put her heart where the preaching is and cooked food and helped. She agreed to be one of the people on call for the "Help I've fallen and I can't get up service" that I set up for my mom and Dad since serveral people in my family who were "born again christians" were angry with my mom and refused to do anything of value because they didn't get the part about Christ, forgiveness and turning the other cheek and all that.....They lived 5 minutes away, I was 2300 miles and drove the distance with my 2 dogs who were a greater embodiement of the true spirit of Christ than these other losers, but I digress....

So, Miss N would check on my folks and fix food. She had limited mobililty and a darling Beagle, Angel. I would take Angel for walks. Miss N. supported and helped.

One day the topic of Religion came up and I said, I don't get or believe the whole Christ thing. She said she did and she would pray for my soul and that was it. We never discussed it again.

What I appreciated about that most Christ like attitude is that there was genuine love, caring and concern. There was none of this "neener, neener, neener attitude we are better and know better than anyone else attitude" that has been expressed in some posts in this thread.

And before your all go and erect a statue in honor of yourselves about not being bad, this war in Iraq that you all support is resulting in the death of many Iraqi citizens because you all feel it's OK to wage war on any soil except our own which Ya'll think we are defending in Iraq. Bottom line is that we have a Born Again Christian as our President waging war on a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but you'all feel fine as long our lives and country aren't being killed.

Whatever...with that attitude, you'll never get me to believe or listen. Miss N on the other hand, might have a chance.

[JerryStopher]

And before your all go and erect a statue in honor of yourselves about not being bad, this war in Iraq that you all support is resulting in the death of many Iraqi citizens because you all feel it's OK to wage war on any soil except our own which Ya'll think we are defending in Iraq. Bottom line is that we have a Born Again Christian as our President waging war on a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but you'all feel fine as long our lives and country aren't being killed.


Hear, hear!!

I'll say more in a new thread.

[dec5]

And before your all go and erect a statue in honor of yourselves about not being bad, this war in Iraq that you all support is resulting in the death of many Iraqi citizens because you all feel it's OK to wage war on any soil except our own which Ya'll think we are defending in Iraq. Bottom line is that we have a Born Again Christian as our President waging war on a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but you'all feel fine as long our lives and country aren't being killed.


There hasn't been an attack on US soil since we invaded Iraq and bogged down Al-Qaeda's resources, (Who want to defeat the US in Iraq.)by helping the Iraqis build their new nation.

Although the deaths of Iraqis and US personel is tragic.....the millions of Iraqis
freed and given hope is a good thing for Christians and non Christians alike.

We pull out now, the Islamofacists are not gonna stop....they will kill again.....Americans....Christians... and anybody who opposes them....


Folks who think GW is the problem are really gonna find out what a real terrorist is, when a American city is buried in Nuclear rubble and Al-Qaeda supporters dance in the streets...... If we lose in Iraq....who in the world would want to fight for the US?

Al queda says the US is weak and has no stomach for a prolonged war....
We will abandon Iraq like we did South Vietnam, and which resulted in
two million slaughtered......

We lose in Iraq....we will be fighting Al-Qaeda in our streets.....

Bottom line....Bush did the right thing.....and I support him......history will prove him right....like Reagan.

[probativev]

Ok I finally saw the movie last night. IMO it was absolutely lame and horrible. It's one of the worst movie I've seen in a long time. Ron Howard is all wrong to direct this film, and Hanks is all wrong as Langdon. Hanks playing Langdon had no personality. Audrey Toutou and Tom Hanks had zero chemistry and might as well have been in different movies even as they were talking to each other. The movie was totally flat. The cops characters were underuntilized. The Silas was not menacing at all. It was a totally lousy movie.

And I just have to complaint about the historical flashbacks. OMG GIMME A BREAK! They look like re-enactment scenes from the History Channel or TLC. And the cheesy ways (the highlights of letters) to show how they break the clues were just lazy lazy and lacking in imagination to tell story by Ron Howard.

I have seen bad many movies before, but this is is the first time I have the urge to write to the Sony Studio and demand my money back for the tickets, plus the 3 hours of my life they wasted watching this stupid film and all the commercials and pre-views I was held hostage to watch.

[gatzbee]

this was one of the worst movies ive seen in a while. i thought to myself, well there must be SOME suspense. i mean yes i know everything thats gonna happen, but still there was really nothing special about the cinematography. it was filmed as if this was a TV movie or something. the script was HORRENDOUS. it was like they just tried to copy and paste some quotes out of the book, or if not paraphrase, or if not that add pointless dialogue. the beginning was too slow, and the end just cut out a bunch of really intriguing revelations we find by the end of the book. that end scene where Sophie touches the water with her foot is just super CHEESE. and they're supposed to be love interests by end, instead we see tom hanks just giving her a kiss on the forehead. and i never thought i'd say this but i thought Tom Hanks' acting was just all out bad. there was no sense of charm. he said he didn't read the book before he did the movie. quite frankly i wish he did cuz during the movie he just seemed to be phoning in his lines quite flatly. and there was no point in the movie to deal with the issue of Langdon's claustrophobia. it's an integral part of his character in the book, but it just made no sense in the movie. Tom Hanks needed a major haircut in the movie, and Audrey needed to have someone put a clip on her front bangs that kept swishing in front of her face everytime she moved or said something. esp. during the more serious parts, i just couldn't take her seriously when her hair just kept falling to her face and she had to kinda swish it back with a little swing or use her fingers to swish it back. i also didn't really feel any real depth in her character and her acting. both she and tom just didn't really connect, but tom hanks even more so. and the only fun part was ian mcklellan. thank GOD for him. we're also supposed to find that Sophie is the sister of that boy in the end. and since they showed her grandfather in that pagan ritual, we should have gotten an explanation on y he was doing that ritual, and the woman was actually his own wife. man i was soooooo disappointed. i didn't think the critics would be THAT right. just all around slow, flat, lifeless, and senseless movie...

[Emerald2000]

Ian McKellan saved the movie, although I thought Paul Bettany did a good job too. Tom Hanks is a good actor, but his role in this movie completely blew. His dialouge with Sophie felt almost totally contrived. I didn't imagine him as Robert Langdon at all; for some reason I thought Bill Pullman would have done a better job. The very end of the movie, with Hanks by the Louvre, was great, even though the last part with him and Sophie left something to be desired.

The book is 1000x better; despite my complaints, I did enjoy the movie. I went with a friend who hadn't read the book, and he liked it too. I guess it just depends on the individual.