Da Vinci Code Numbers

[OttawaUk]

How so? I just recently read that historical religious research into the origins of the 4 gospels in the NT point to them having been written and/or influenced by one man alone - Paul! So, it's his view which is reflected in large parts of the NT!

It also seems to be a historical fact that the council of Nicea selected only a few screipts for inclusion into the NT!

How could anyone possibly claim that what we see in the NT today is any more accurate than what was written in other scrolls and documents which have been rejected, for a variety of political and power play reasons?

Your assumption stands on very weak legs!

This has been debunked to death over and over again. Why are people even debating the "facts" in the story, because they're not facts at all. Anyways here's something to read that will help you with your questions.

http://www.debunkingdavinci.com/

I stand on Christ, not my own legs.

Have a good day and God Bless!

OU

 

[Harpuia]

The Omen?

Release date 6/6/06. Ohh, how clever. The orginals are still good, why do they have to redo every movie ever made?

Because Michael Eisner told Satan remakes and sequels are cool.

Then Satan said, "Well, might as well. I'm running out of ideas anyway."

 

[Ginny]

I saw the movie because of all the people trashing it on CF, I wouldn't have seen it because I never paid attention to the book. But I figure, when this many people are lashing out at a movie, it's worth it to see what all the controversy is over. I thought it was a pretty good movie. Thank you CFers, if there ever is a movie you want to lash out at, I'll be sure to see it, just to see why it's a bad movie.

Pretty bold to admit you are a pushover when strangers on an internet site can make you go and waste your own money out of mere curiosity. Kudos.

 

[HisEagle]

At least until people hear about how badly it sucks.

So far, I haven't read one comment (from anyone that has seen the movie) that says the movie sucks - only from those people who refuse to go see it.

Pretty bold to admit you are a pushover when strangers on an internet site can make you go and waste your own money out of mere curiosity. Kudos.

I actually rented "The Last Temptation of Christ" precisely because everyone was so up in arms about it. After watching the movie, I was surprised that people didn't actually catch on to what the movie was all about. People were too busy blasting it, without even watching it.

 

[Jipsah]

So far, I haven't read one comment (from anyone that has seen the movie) that says the movie sucks - only from those people who refuse to go see it.

Haven't read many reviews, have you? Try these:

"... it's not very good -- long (2hr.32min.) and mostly inert."
-- Richard Corliss, TIME MAGAZINE

"You know a movie's a dud when even its self-flagellating albino killer monk isn't any fun. "
-- John Beifuss, COMMERCIAL APPEAL (MEMPHIS, TN)

"How dark the con of Ron - The Da Vinci Code plays sort of like National Treasure with any sense of fun sucked out of it."
-- Laura Clifford, REELING REVIEWS

"[A] wishy-washiness and its general tonal flatness betray a clock-punching mentality the cast and crew seem to have adopted for its production."
-- Jeffrey Chen, WINDOW TO THE MOVIES

"On film, The Da Vinci Code is not so much a fascinating puzzle as a prolonged slog through material that resists the screen."
-- Robert Denerstein, DENVER ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS

"I cannot vouch for the novel, but the movie is a remarkably underwhelming experience."
-- David Cornelius, EFILMCRITIC.COM

"The movie is so nervous about offending anyone that it's hardly any fun."
-- Jami Bernard, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Every time Langdon starts to educate Sophie, the urge to tune out is overwhelming."
-- Josh Bell, LAS VEGAS WEEKLY

"The greatest threat that Dan Brown's novel, and now Ron Howard's film of the same, poses to spirituality is the same threat that any bad art presents the human soul."
-- Walter Chaw, FILM FREAK CENTRAL

"Ron Howard plays it too safe keeping fans of the book in line, objectors at bay and alienates anyone coming into the hype with thoughts of 'that's what everyone is up in arms about?'"
-- Erik Childress, EFILMCRITIC.COM

"I'll say it: It is anti-Jesus and anti-Catholic. Unintentionally though, it is a recruiting film for Opus Dei. Where do I sign up?"
-- Victoria Alexander, FILMSINREVIEW.COM

"The script explains everything twice, spelling out the big words three times, so that even if you've never heard of Jesus or Mary Magdalene you can still figure out this story."
-- Jeffrey M. Anderson, COMBUSTIBLE CELLULOID

"A film that never rises beyond the workmanlike to the inspired."
-- Robert W. Butler, KANSAS CITY STAR

"... a jigsaw puzzle [that] turns out to be a lot less fun than you hoped it would be when you started piecing it together."
-- Carol Cling, LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

"Looking for that Holy Grail of blockbuster movies? Keep looking. You won't find it in "The Da Vinci Code," an overblown, bland ghost of the best-seller by Dan Brown."
-- Linda Cook, QUAD CITY TIMES (DAVENPORT, IA)

"For people who insist that the movie is never as good as the book, your case just got stronger."
-- Matt Pais, METROMIX.COM

"Ron Howard and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman struggle mightily to cram as much as possible of Dan Brown's labyrinthine thriller into a 2-hour-28-minute running time, resulting in a movie both overstuffed and underwhelming."
-- David Ansen, NEWSWEEK

"One could classify The Da Vinci Code as diverting, but it has sidestepped greatness by a wide margin."
-- James Berardinelli, REELVIEWS

"Absent is the pure guilty joy of sequential puzzle-solving; instead of participating in the hunt, we're shoved off to the side as a couple of crashing boors do it for us."
-- Amy Biancolli, HOUSTON CHRONICLE

"As a film derived from a book, The Da Vinci Code isn't a fiasco on the order of The Bonfire of the Vanities nor is it a triumph a la The Lord of the Rings. Instead, it's an acceptable but uninspired simulacrum."
-- Ty Burr, BOSTON GLOBE

"Ron Howard's adaptation of Dan Brown's bestseller is punishingly long, dramatically overwrought and fatally short on the thrills we demand from summertime blockbusters."
-- Colin Covert, MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE

 

[Ginny]

:d.

 

[HisEagle]

Haven't read many reviews, have you?

No, I haven't. But perhaps you should re-read what I said in post #22 above. I don't pay attention to film critics. People need to watch the movie and form an opinion about it on their own, not based on what critics say. At the very least, those who haven't seen the film have no right to say whether it sucks or not.

You sure did go through a lot of trouble to try and prove yourself right. I hope it makes you feel better now. BTW, have you seen the movie?

 

[Jipsah]

those who haven't seen the film have no right to say whether it sucks or not.

Sure we do. The book sucked, the critics say the movie sucks, that's good enough for me. I don't need to blow 8 bucks on a stink-bomb in order to say "Yeah, they were right, it's a stink-bomb."

You sure did go through a lot of trouble to try and prove yourself right.

Not really. I cut and pasted the reviews off rottentomatoes.com. Piece of cake.

I hope it makes you feel better now. BTW, have you seen the movie?

Nope, see above. I endured the wretched book and that was penance enough.

 

[marblehead]

I watch many movies and I have my own policy to not rate a movie if I haven't seen the whole movie. I also don't listen to critics and just see movies that I think look interesting. If I think one will be really bad then I don't watch it and leave it at that.

 

[Mr.Pious]

I watched the movie, it is mediocre at best.

 

[Ginny]

groundhog- out of all due respect, you said:

So far, I haven't read one comment (from anyone that has seen the movie) that says the movie sucks - only from those people who refuse to go see it.

You never mentioned you did not want to hear anything from a film critic....and why is the average joe's opinion thought of more highly than someone who knows more about good movies than anyone else?

You came down pretty hard on him and he just provided the info.

 

[TeddyKGB]

You never mentioned you did not want to hear anything from a film critic....and why is the average joe's opinion thought of more highly than someone who knows more about good movies than anyone else?

Personally, I find that many professional critics have gotten to the point where they are no longer able to acknowledge entertainment for entertainment's sake. They seemingly have a dispassionate checklist of things that every comedy/drama/thriller/etc. should have and a movie is good or bad based largely on how it fares on their 'tests.'

I suspect each one of us can fairly easily come up with, say, a half-dozen movies that we as individuals enjoy but were critical failures.

 

[Ginny]

certainly not Dumb and Dumber

(me all time favorite)

 

[comana]

I'll take average Joe's opinion over movie critic's any day.

 

[bammertheblue]

I saw it. I liked it. It wasn't GREAT, but I enjoyed it.
I think it works better as a movie than as a book- the book was just so clunky and hard to read (because the writing was awkward, not because it was difficult).

I don't think I've ever liked the movie version of a book more than the book before!

 

[TeddyKGB]

I saw it. I liked it. It wasn't GREAT, but I enjoyed it.
I think it works better as a movie than as a book- the book was just so clunky and hard to read (because the writing was awkward, not because it was difficult).

The book reads like a screenplay, which I think forced Brown's hand somewhat. He does all his exposition in dialogue (as opposed to, say, Douglas Adams, whose narrative elements were always the funniest stuff) which is an obvious clue that he had a film in mind from the outset.

I don't think I've ever liked the movie version of a book more than the book before!

Movies I consider superior to the book counterparts include The Bourne Identity and The LotR trilogy. There are more that I can't think of at the moment.

 

[NothingButTheBlood]

The book reads like a screenplay, which I think forced Brown's hand somewhat. He does all his exposition in dialogue (as opposed to, say, Douglas Adams, whose narrative elements were always the funniest stuff) which is an obvious clue that he had a film in mind from the outset.

Movies I consider superior to the book counterparts include The Bourne Identity and The LotR trilogy. There are more that I can't think of at the moment.

Shawshank Redemption is word for word with the short story. It's a great film.

 

[bammertheblue]

The book reads like a screenplay, which I think forced Brown's hand somewhat. He does all his exposition in dialogue (as opposed to, say, Douglas Adams, whose narrative elements were always the funniest stuff) which is an obvious clue that he had a film in mind from the outset.

quote]

Actually that makes a lot of sense now that I think about it. It also bothered me that his character development was basically nil, but maybe that was just me.

 

[Kelly]

Movies I consider superior to the book counterparts include The Bourne Identity and The LotR trilogy.

There are nerds out there that would beat you down for saying that, but with the exception of the loss of the poetry, I would agree.

 

[Ginny]

I don't think I've ever liked the movie version of a book more than the book before!

Behold the imagination!