Who thinks the Da Vinci Code sucked?
613758
stick with the book, i'm not going to ruin it by watching the movie.
599550
Apparently, we share the same problem. The problem of how to treat this book - as a fiction or as a fact. However, it is a fact that some people, after reading this book, started attending church or became even more religious. It would seem that the Pope has not heard about those people. \nThe Catholic Church has always been against anything that would make it look bad in the eyes of its weaker followers. The Church was a supporter of ancient knowledge, which was gradually deconstructed by scientists. Why was the reason for the Inquisition to treat as threatening some great scientists from the Renaissance period like Da Vinci or Galilei? \nAs I say it, treat it like a fictional book/movie. If you want to learn more, try and comfront the book with the Bible and/or any other writings. There is another book, I don't know how it is called in English, but it would sound something like "Breaking the Da Vinci Code".\nEnjoy the movie... It comes out on the 19th of May.\n\nPS: how would you feel if you break a request from a religious leader (the Pope) who doesn't even know you? let's make a bet: he will have a private copy of the movie, by the time it gets on the big screen.
543966
Whatever you do, don't got to "See No Evil!"  It was really stupid!  Oh, and "The Da Vinci Code" wasn't that great either!
503407
Have ANY of you actually READ the book? \nI never cease to be appalled at the absolute blindness of the Jesus freaks. Not to mention that not one of you has yet answered the main question posed here.\nYes, the main theory behind the premise of the book is that Jesus has actual blood descendants still alive today. And that there is a secret society whose duty it is to trace the blood line through history and present the knowledge at the right time. \nNow, everyone here loves to just immediately scream "It is fiction!" and "Dan Brown made it up!" Well, if they had ANY idea what they were talking about, then they would know that Dan Brown DID NOT make up the theories presented in the book. The plot of course is his own idea, and is fiction, but the historical background he uses, which is what everyone is upset about, is NOT his idea.\nPlease, folks. Educate yourselves, find out WHAT he wrote. How can you say that what he wrote isn't true, if you don't even know what he wrote?\nBecause most of you have put your brain in the hands of various spiritual leaders, and you have made the conscious decision not to think for yourselves.\nSince my personal belief is that Jesus may have existed, but not as the son of God, then I believe that his blood line could still exist. Does a secret society exist for just this reason? Difficult to believe, but a cool idea.\nAnd because this stuff just really gets me going, I have to say something else. If all of the "Christians" truly believed they are following the One True Religion, and they also believe that every word of the Bible is true (my other favorite subject due to all of the discrepancies in it) why  aren't you showing mercy and compassion for all of the misguided?\nInstead you choose to scream for a banning of the book and a worldwide boycott of the movie. These are the actions of scared people. These are the actions of third world leaders who see their power crumbling. Those who have absolute faith in the truth of their beliefs would only grin, slightly amused, at all the turmoil.
510266
I'm a Christian, and I honestly didn't really see the big thrill with the book.  I feel the same way about Harry Potter.  I think that these two literary pieces of tripe are overrated hacks.
581317
Just think about this...\nDid all those people quoted or mentioned on the movie or the book lived in the year 0 I mean did they know Jesus or Da Vinci in person??? NO\n\nFor me is just an empty novel made movie, just Hollywood paraphernalia.
804911
ME ME ME!!!!!!!!!!! I thought that movie sucked!!!!!!!! The next someone wants me to go to the movies i'm gonna scream!!!! The next time i want to rent a movie i'm gonna watch it at the video store so that way if it sucks there is no chance of me spending money..lol. If i do it that way i will know at least it's worth watching again if it's good.
568228
All the hype around the Da Vinci Code makes me laugh.  The book is listed as SPECULATIVE FICTION.  That means that there is some historical facts but the basis is fiction.  I haven't read it, nor will I see the movie.  I have my own theories on Jesus and him being married.  I have more of a chance of being accurate than the book.  You see Jesus was jewish and became a rabbi.  Rabbinical law back then stated that a rabbi HAD TO BE MARRIED.  So the wedding at Caanan was his to Mary Magdelen.  He probably did have kids and that was the Medici line of rulers that claimed "divine right of rule".
653096
Not all "Church people" dislike the movie.  Only the ignorant ones who do not think that people should have an imagination or think that people should not question or wonder about life in general. I, myself have no problem with the book or the movie.
616439
I don't believe it for at all either. I think that movie makes a joke out of Jesus and I feel sorry for all the fools who find a stupid book and movie to be giving out real information. If anyone wants to read a book that tells you the way it really is..then read the bible. Stop being stupid!!!!!!!!!!
1028691
the "scandals" written in the Da Vinci Code have been around for centuries. heck, authors have written books about it since the middle ages. even the author of the Da Vinci Code admits to fudging "facts". it's a book/movie, and a bad one at that. if you believe one book/movie without doing your own research, then you're full of bologna too
378024
I agree with Donna. The Da Vinci Code says alot of things about Jesus like he was married and had kids that are historically and biblicaly inaccurate. They are blaphemous and it is unfortunate that such a thing has become so popular. Also remember even though there are people who believe the false facts in the Da Vinci Code to be true they are not true and the book is listed as fiction not historic.
1110636
I think it sucked.  It wasn't original at all.  Just a remake of a movie that was already stupid.  And who cares that it came out on 06/06/06?   666 is just a damn number, people are way too superstitious.
1014192
daVinci had nothing to do with this book.  He is a famous Renaissance artist and inventor/engineer.  So he got dragged into this because the author of this book used his name and fame in this work of fiction.  As to the underlying premise, well, the author of "The Da Vinci Code" stole it from other guys, who wrote a couple of books on the subject, one of which is "Holy Blood, Holy Grail."\n\nTheir books are much more credibly written and make the deal sound much more plausible.  How "real" their claims are is anybody's preference.  Baigent et al, the authors, claim that this Jesus was married, probably to Mary Magdelene, was slipped off the cross while still alive, recovered, and he and his family escaped to what would become France.\n\nWell, Baigent and his coauthors do in fact raise some very good questions about the whole traditional story of the lives of Jesus and his crowd.  Things there are not the neat and tidy package that traditional Christians like to think, so to speak.
489053
Their stance is that the author has passed off some gross historical inaccuracies as fact, and that Mr. Brown has essentially incited hatred against one of the church's prelatures (Opus Dei.)\n\nThe Catholic Church would be irresponsible if it allowed some of these libels to be spoken unchallenged. History has shown - with certain religious libels like the "Protocols of Zion" - that lives are literally at stake when religious hatred is sown.\n\nAnd if the Catholic Church will not stand up to an anti-Catholic writing.... who will?\n\nAll the people jumping up and down, shouting "How dare the Catholics defend themselves!" should ask themselves this. If the "Da Vinci Code" was about a bloodthirsty albino Rabbi hiding the reality of the Protocols (Priory) of Zion from the world, would you think that anti-Semitic?\n\nWhy should it be so different for Catholics?
632264
the media is having a field day with this!  Its insane. its a book.  a fictional book at that. You will after all find it in the fiction section of a bookstore! Not the historical section. I was watching CNN this morning with my morning coffee and what did I hear?  for the fourth day in a row mind you!  The Da Vinci Code.  There is real stuff out there and I have to hear about the movie again.  I do not get it.  Its just a book for crying out loud!
373455
it only claims that it is based on facts that doesn't even exist.  like for one, in the book's fact page, the priory of sion was being mentioned as an organization in the early 1099. in 1975, the Les Dossiers Secrets was discovered in Paris's Bibliotheque Nationale identifying Leonardo Da Vinci as member of the org. this is the major basis of the novel.  but the truth of this is that the Priory of Sion did not exist until 1957.  How can Leonardo Da Vinci be a member or a grandmaster for that matter he has already rotten?  Everything that Dan Brown has written about the Priory of Sion was based not on historical facts but rather on claims found in the Priory of Sion documents – all bogus works of historical fiction stemming from Plantard's fertile imagination (and what gave them a deeper ‘esoteric’ flavour was Philippe de Chérisey's input, who tried to decorate the fantasies in a surrealist fashion).\n\nit has misrepresented the church as a murderous institution and that Christian faith is utterly false.  \n\nIt isn't a defense to say that The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction. Fiction can't change the basic facts about major historical figures without being subject to criticism. People would be outraged if Doubleday printed a novel portraying Adolph Hitler in a positive light. Christians have a right to be outraged when the basic historical facts about Christ are falsified. The criticism will be even more intense when a publisher releases a book parodying the most sacred beliefs of others in this fashion.\n\nFurther, as we have seen in this special report, the book takes great pains to create the appearance of factuality, including placing the infamous "fact" page at the beginning of the novel. Brown has stressed the ostensible accuracy of the book on his web site and in interviews. This is not a case where an author and a publisher have produced an ordinary novel. They have gone to great lengths to mislead people into thinking that the novel has a historical basis. They deserve especially sharp criticism for this, and when criticism is made they cannot hypocritically hide behind the "It's just fiction" allegation after having made such extensive efforts to convince the reader that it is not "just fiction."