Da Vinci Code movie Question?
912409
Ok the most easy way to get around such a question would be :The book is better than the movie".It actually counts for 98% of the adaptations.But The DaVinci code fits in the 2% of the cases where the movie is actually better than the book.\n \n       First of all Ron Howard (a beautiful mind) is a great director.The book itself did not appear so great to me having a rather bad character development (leading to the dissapointing revelation of the finale) and having the scientist explain it everything so that anybody can grasp the action is too much artifialism for me.For example Langdon dont need to explain the history of Paris to a french woman who herself is an Academic.This appears to a point in the movie but since the action is preety more spectacular it covers it uo.\n\nAlso the book has no fluidity.The chaptres last 2 1&#92;2 half pages maximum and the action is cut much to often.This leads to a confusion because you get to a point where the change of background-people leaves you with a strange sence.The movie is far better.The director not willing to follow all the cuts and changes of the author produces a more solid scenaro leaving the audience understand the changes.For example Langdon and the girl in the book seem (not ARE )the same in the beginning and the end which does not happen to the movie.\n    The standard motto is "go with the book".But this time I will choose the film instead
90231
Hi there,\n\nThe Da Vinci Code is a book by Dan Brown.\nIt is quite fascinating to know that Da Vinci hid clues in his pictures. The book also discusses the story of Jesus and Mary Magdaline. And some fascinating inventions by Da Vinci. It also tells us about a brotherhood who protect these children of Jesus and Mary Magdaline, and also safe-guard the holy-grail. The book is quite interesting and I suggest you read it.\n\nrule wid style n luv@vinny
1174882
The Da Vinci Code\n\n'tis great
563850
Well I´ve read the book and enjoyed it throughly! But sad to say there is a lot of thingd in the book that is false, \nbut it does makes you wonder. \n\nWhat I can´t understand is that a few years ago there were some old scripures found, but wouldn´d be accepted by the church. These scriptures underwent all the neccassary test to prove its validity(and it was found to be written the time Jesus was alive and 100 after he died).But it was a little bit contridicting to what is in the bible.\n\nAnyway what the da vinci code does is start to put doubt in the minds of people, and why did  the church reacted so strange to this book which is a novel! \n\nAnd okay the thought that Jesus actually has a living heir is strange, but Dan Brown was not the first to write about this there are many other listed books. And ´if´ that were true then the church would clear not want that knowledge to be known because it would loss a lot of credibility.\nSome modern writers,including Dan Brown, have come forward with claims that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. These writers cite Gnostic writings to support their argument. Sources like the ´Gospel of Philip´ do depict Mary Magdalene as being closer to Jesus than any other disciple. \nHowever, there is no known ancient document that claims she was his wife and Gnosticism was generally non-supportive of sexuality. The closeness described in these writings depicts Mary Magdalene, representing the Gnostics, as understanding Jesus and his teaching while the other disciples, representing the Church, did not.\nMary Magdalene appears with more frequency than other women in the canonical Gospels and is shown as being a close follower of Jesus. Mary's presence at the Crucifixion and Jesus's tomb, while hardly conclusive, is at least consonant with the role of grieving wife and widow, although if that were the case Jesus might have been expected to make provision for her care as well as for his mother Mary. Given the lack of contemporary documentation, this scenario cannot be proven, and although some consider the idea desirable to believe, most scholars do not take it seriously.\n\nAn argument for support of the married status of Jesus is that bachelorhood was very rare for Jewish males of Jesus' time, being generally regarded as a transgression of the first mitzvah (divine commandment) — "Be fruitful and multiply". According to this reasoning, it would have been unthinkable for an adult, unmarried Jew to travel about teaching as a rabbi.\nA counter-argument to this is that the Judaism of Jesus' time was very diverse and the role of the rabbi was not yet well defined. It was really not until after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 that Rabbinic Judaism became dominant and the role of the rabbi made uniform in Jewish communities.\nPaul of Tarsus was an example of an unmarried itinerant teacher among Christians. Jesus himself approved of voluntary celibacy for religious reasons and explicitly rejected a duty to marry: "There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." (Matthew 19,12)\n\nThe idea that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus was popularized by books like the pseudo-historical Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982) and The Da Vinci Code (2003), a novel heavily influenced by the former book. These assertions have found no acceptance from scholarly circles.\n\nAnd secret societcy are meant to be kept secret so I don´t expect the historians to find a lot of concrete information about the Priory of Sion. \n\nAnd maybe Leonardo did discover something and instead of just saying or exposing it out right he decided to be clever and hide it within his works of art. After all he was known as a genuis.\n\nSo I(am born and raised catholic, but was taught to have an open mind about things.) personally an very intrigued by this idea of Dan Browns, but I am neither for it nor against it. I
1081746
I haven't seen the movie yet, but the book is good enough. Not outstanding, just slightly above average. I love mystery books, and I usually read book this size in one day. The Da Vinci code took me a week. I admit that at some points I wanted to know what will happen next, but at others it was just boring. Boring in my opinion because for me the book was too predictable. I like thrillers with more suspense than that. I don't really like Dan Brown's writing style. He uses too many words to say a few things; he builds up suspense that will lead to nothing. \nAnyway I enjoyed it, it was a great read, although not as great as a James Patterson novel. I am a christian, and I didn't feel threaten by the book, instead I liked it. And even though it is a work of fiction it does make some sense if you think about it. \nGreat plot.
658625
Another Dan Brown and Da Vinci Code question. While it is true of the existence of the Gnostic writings, most of these were incomplete as Dan Brown indicates, and the liberties that he took in writing his book. Also of the existence of an organization know as "The Priory of Sion", an actual organization that was founded in 1956, therefore impossible for Davinci himself to belong to the organization as Brown tells in his fable. True there was a man known as Jesus, and that he was crucified. Jewish scholars have written this down as evidenced in the writings of Josephus.\n\nThis is directly from Dan Browns website\n\n"HOW MUCH OF THIS NOVEL IS TRUE?\nThe Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction. While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). These real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters. While it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit, each individual reader must explore these characters' viewpoints and come to his or her own interpretations. My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion, and history." \n\nand the writings of Josephus Antiquities 18:3:3...\n\n"3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."\n\nRead and believe the following, if you are interested in the truth.
1074931
Do you people not realize that "Jesus" was just a man like any other man. Historical facts. Let me guess, the bible? The word of "God"? What did they hold a press conference so that they could get all the facts from "Jesus" and print them in one "historically accurate book"? I don't think so. I'm sorry but the bible is nothing more than a person or group of peoples perspective on a point in time. \nJesus was a human being! He had needs and desires just like every one else. Religion doesn't want to admit that because what, it will make him seem less "God like"? \nI think you people need to re-read the book. Yes "The Da Vinci Code" is a work of fiction. But I believe that a lot of the historical premises is based in truth. To what extent I don't know. The same with the bible. There may be a lot of truth there, but just like so much other written history, facts get lost or changed to suit the intentions of the author. \nCall it what you will, but I like to believe that maybe, just maybe the bloodline of Christ still exist out there today. What would be so wrong with that?
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.
658829
I understand your confusion, and to a ceratin extent, I agree with you.\n\nI read the book, and I plan to see the movie (as soon as the hype dies down).  I think that the reason this book is taken so seriously is for two reasons:\n\n1.  Dan Brown begins the book by stating that all of the groups, artwork, etc. are completely true.  People assume that if these things are true and accurate, then the whole book must be as well.\n\n2.  The whole premise, that Jesus was married and that the "holy grail" isn't a cup but is in fact the holy bloodline of Jesus, isn't a new theory and is one that some people have argued for many years.  Plus, it is plausible!  I'm not saying that it is likely, but it is possible.\n\nWhat I don't understand is why this film has to change poeple's faith.  Even if it was discovered with 100% certainty that Jesus was married, that doesn't change my faith in Christianity at all!  (It makes me wonder about the people who made the decision to cover it all up, but it doesn't change my faith in God.)  In fact, learning that Jesus was married might actually make me identify with Him more than I currently do.\n\nI wish that people would think about that more seriously... what has REALLY changed?
345507
First and foremost of all, the "DaVinci Code" is a work of fiction; however, within its pages it contains informations based on historical facts and/or theories.  Now, as to the question asked:\n\nThis is a very grave matter to be discussed because, the very core of this topic can very well destroy, not only the Roman Catholic Church but also, the whole Christianity.  Still, one cannot deny the fact that, the "what-if" can be very possible.\n\nThere are things which were not clear about Jesus as presented in the Christian Bible, and that part is what made people starting to ask these "what-if" questions.  The Bible did state that, Jesus "loved" Mary Magdalene more than his followers; thus, what is meant by this "love"?  Indeed, a very likely hint, isn't it?\n\nSo, what we are left are two choices:\n\n- Stand firm in the Christian Faith and, consider this "DaVinci Code" as just another nonsense.\n\n- Venture beyond the "point of no-return"...
675033
I really want to see the movie but with caution, the movie is never as good as the book, this has been proven over and over and over.\nDid you know that The Da Vinci Code is part of a trilogy, \nAngels and Demons and yet to be released third part?\n\nI saw the movie last night and I feel that they simplified the movie at little too much to fit the running time, they left out many interesting parts and ignored key parts of the book, but then again the movie is never as good as the book.
593143
wait,  you think them getting info from a picture and some "papers" are ridiculous?\n\nDoesn't someone walking on water sound ridiculous?  water to wine?  dying and rising on  3rd day?  raining toads?  an ark big enough to hold two of every animal on earth?  a "devil" in the form of a serpent?  Does none of this sound ridiculous to you?\n\nNow I'm not saying the bible is wrong or that the da vinci code is right, but you have to keep your mind open.  Because if people didn't keep an open mind, the bible wouldn't be as widely believed in as it is now.
457979
It is all open to conjecture. Some of the characters or events are actual historical persons/events e.g. Mary Magdalene did exist..whether she was indeed the "wife" of Jesus is open to debate...the Knight's Templar did exist..whether they were privy to "the great secret of Jesus's marriage and blood descendants" is another story...same goes for Leonardo da Vinci. Dan Brown does not make claim that any of these events are in fact true; they are loosely based on historical facts. Archaeology and in deed biblical history/archaeology has a hard time reconciling events in the bible to factual historical accounts. This is because the bible was borne out of oral traditions. There is little that is "eye witness testimony". It is however safe to say that christian beliefs, rituals and practices are an amalgamation of other religious traditions since nothing is born in a vacuum.
1186658
Da Vinci Code Broken?\n\nDa Vinci Code controversy - It is everywhere! Dan Brown's book claims Jesus in not divine or God, and the gospels as we know them, have been changed, and after Jesus stay here on earth, men raised his status to the level of God. Could any of this be true?\n\nAncient secrets of the Church, hidden for centuries have actually been revealed and published in books prior to the fictional writings of Brown in the Da Vinci Code. Baigent and Leigh have produced other books from researchers point of view over the last two decades, including "Dead Sea Scrolls Deception", "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", and "Messianic Legacy." These books were the talk of the religious communities when they came out in the early 90's and certianly they have fueled an ongoing interest into just exactly who was this man Jesus, what was his message and what happened to him?\n\nIslam claims to "break the code" so to speak, over 1,400 years ago. The answer, according to Muslm scholars has been in the Quran for over fourteen hundred years \n\nSome may be surprised to learn, Muslims believe in the miracle birth and other miracles associated with Jesus. They actually consider him as the "Messiah" and they even say, "peace be upon him" when mentioning his name. However, they are quick to negate any connection between God and Jesus as a partnership or God-head, and they rule out the notion of God having any son (or daughter for that matter).\n\nHere is how Muslim scholars present their understanding and "break the code": \n\nHow Muslim scholars "broke the code": \n\nCreation itself tells us there is a creator and from the beginning of time – Allah, (the One God in Arabic) alone is to be worshiped. This is clear teaching throughout the Old testament (Torah), the scriptures that Jesus himself read and taught from. God is one not one of three; for example: ‘He is God; there is no other besides Him’. (Deuteronomy 4:35). The same is mentioned in the book of Mark in the New Testament, chapter 12, verse 29, when Jesus, peace be upon him, had been asked about the Greatest Commandment he replied, "To know, O Israel, the Lord your God is One Lord; and you have to love Him with all your heart and all your mind and all your strength."\n\nAccording to the oldest and most authentic copies of manuscipts and scrolls available throughout the centuries, Jesus, peace be upon him, never claimed to be God, or the creator, or the One to pray to, nor did he tell his followers to revere him as God. These notions appear on the lips of others who came along decades and even centuries later. \n\nWhile Jesus was on earth he did not claim to be the creator or ask us to revere him as God. His miraculous birth is a sign of his prophethood: “Verily, the likeness of Jesus before Allah, is the likeness of Adam. He (Allah) created him from dust and said “Be!” and he was” (Quran 3:59). Like all the great and noble prophets of Allah such as Adam, Abraham, Moses, Isaac and David, Jesus came with one message: Worship, love, obey and submit to the one true God, Allah, the creator of everything and do not worship anything besides Allah.\n\nThroughout history, people have taken to worship things or people alongside Allah, or just worshiping something else like power, status or money. Even the names of religions seem have more to do with the creation and less or nothing to do with the Creator. For example: Buddhism – Buddha (the name of a man), Confucianism – Confucius (the name of a man), Hinduism – Hind (the name of an area), Judaism – Judah (the name of a tribe) and Christianity – Christ (the name of a great prophet).\n\nIslam is different. Islam is a word coming from the verb "aslama" and it carries the meaning of "surrender", "submission", "obedience", "sincerity" and "peace" between you and Almighty Alla
1134367
the Da Vinci Code is pretty good, better if you've read the book. Definatley not a out-with-your-friends movie though. The Break Up was unexpectedly good, funny. Pretty predictable though.
1091771
Curator at the Louvre is murdered.\nHarvard Professor is called in to explain the murder, which involves strange symbols.\nCurator's granddaughter shows up, rescues professor.\nTogether they uncover clues to a huge conspiracy in which the Catholic Church has buried that Jesus and Mary Magdelene had a child and there are living descendents of Jesus.\nTurns out the curator's granddaughter is a descendent of Jesus. At the end, the professor finds the resting place of Mary Magdalene.\n\nThat's the basic plot. Go see the movie. It's good.
638113
The Da Vinci Code isn't completely true. What bothers me is that the Vatican is complaining. They thought Catholics would see right through a book based solely on speculation and stories that are probably false, oh wait.....