My review of Da Vinci Code and notes to those offended by the movie

[noahmijo]

First before I saw anything about the quality of the movie or its relation to the book I want to get one thing out of the way:

This is to those who wish to boycott this movie and encourage others to do the same based on the fact that you feel it may offend your religion. Obviously I am talking to you Conservative Catholics who typically have heard nothing more than "it bashes the church" and base your standing on the movie with that in regard.

First off you need to understand something. The story of Jesus Christ can be catgorized as mythology There is no scientific evidence to prove that a man existed who could cure leprosy and other deadly diseases, no scientific or historical backing that a man from Galileo by the name of Jesus of Nazareth was not only put to death, but then later rose from the dead. ALL popular forms of organized religion use mythological tales and stories. Yes I even say this applies to my beliefs in accordance to Buddhism. Essentially those of you up in arms over this movie, you are all essentially arguing a mythological point of view that contradicts your own mythology that you pass off as fact.

Why we choose or obtain a particular faith is very a simple reason: we find comfort in it, it gives us peace, eases our suffering, gives us hope. Very powerful objects that allow us to overlook items that are not scientifically sound. Regardless of what your faith is I believe that if gives you peace and the will to perform acts of kindness onto others regardless of the supernatural aspects of it, then you are embracing a faith for the right reasons. I would invite those who are using their energies to take a page from nations like Iran or North Korea and having a piece of media banned, to instead examine your faith, put it to positive use such as helping someone in need, volunteer at a homeless shelter. If your God is as powerful as you believe Him to be, then he does not require your services to block ideas from your fellow human beings-I think instead he'd want you to offer care and kindness to those less fortunate than you-just as Jesus would do.

Onto to the movie:

Well the movie overall was fantastic. It captured the book very well, in that it captured the primary points. The movie did exclude a few explanations and some side tales (such as the relationship between Silas and The Bishop) however, the movie would've been far too long and would've swayed from point too often had all of these details been included in the movie. I bet they'll appear in deleted scenes on the DVD though :)

Ultimately the movie will have a much deeper meaning for those who have read the book, however it does a good enough job where even if you have not read the book, you can follow it easily with a little patience and prudence.

The casting:

When I read the book nearly a year ago I remember thinking how this would make a great movie and I had actually envisioned Ian McKellan for the part of Teabing. I'm glad Ron Howard saw it that way too, as well the part of Fache going to Jean Reno-c'mon he ALWAYS plays the calculating French cop or badass. Alfred Moina as the Bishop was an excellent choice as well-I never even thought of him but I'm glad Ron did.

I had my reservations about Tom Hanks, but he delivered very well. He's always been one of my favorite actors, but I didn't think I could believe him to be on a dangerous treasure hunt in major cities of Europe, but then again this is a guy who went from being Forest Gump to a dangerously thin caveman looking guy who was stranded on an island.

Lastly the part of Sophie Neveu, played to excellence by newcomer Audery Tatou.

**SPOILER ALERT* **SPOILER ALERT* **SPOILER ALERT*

Aside from her excellent and believable performance as Sophie I believe Ron wisely chose her for her semitic looking features. This would be important considering Jesus was most likely not White as portrayed in the many images of him, but being that he hailed from a region in which the people were of dark complexions, if Sophie was a direct descendent of him, she would most likely be of a dark complexion herself.
_______________________________________________________________



This movie can be categorized as a mystery/drama with a dash of suspense. If you are expecting a real suspense thriller in the vain of Cape Fear this is not it. This is more of a movie where you follow two characters as they work to unravel clues and mysteries regarding a very controversial subject which is what holds the interest of the viewer. It can be a good date movie or if you feel like going solo and just getting immersed into a grand adventure it works well for that too. Whether you will agree or disagree on the subject matter, the point as illustrated in the movie is to encourage one to question, to research and investigate and not take anything at simple face value.

That to me is a good lesson for anyone regardless of faith or beliefs.

~N~

[hippiechick]

1. Thankx for the recap!

One note, though ... Audrey Tatou is not a newcomer. This is her ... 5th <?> feature - more notable are Phillipe Junot's "Amelie" and "A Very Long Engagement".

I think she's absolutely adorable.


:hi:

[noahmijo]

4. I knew she did films in France I thought she was a newcomer to mainstream

American audiences.

I never saw Amelie and don't recall how popular it was but hey if she's already made her mark in mainstream American cinema and I missed it then I feel ashamed.

[Reciprocity]

11. Amelie is fantastic, funny, quirky and suspenseful.

Tatou was beyond great in this movie.

I also like her in another movie that I can’t remember the name of. She played a deranged women who was stalking a doctor in it.

[TahitiNut]

12. "I think she's absolutely adorable." Udamnwellbetcha!

A huge part of the reason I'm looking forward to seeing TDVC is Audrey. Amelie was a joy! She carried AVLE. If anything, her natural appeal might hinder a recognition of her skills as an actress - which, imho, are considerable. She's totally believable and hugely embraceable.

[NoodleyAppendage]

2. Shhh.... You'll spoil the attempts to sink the film financially.

While not a "classic" by any means, the film is not bad. I suspect many of the initial negative reviews were planted by christofascists and film snots to sink the film in an attempt to dissuade any message counter to church doctrine. Eventhough the movie is fiction, it may spark a bit of inquisitiveness in viewers to actually read about the real history of the Xtian religion and the inherent fiction of the Bible.

My question to the christofascists is, "if your religious doctrine is so secure and God's power is so great, then why even bother to worry about a silly movie?" Me thinks you doth protest too much.

J

[noahmijo]

5. Well here in Tucson which is quite full of religious zealots the movie

was sold out in every theater and most theaters threw the movie on no less than 3 screens. The theater I went to had the movie on 4 screens and every single showing was sold out from morning to hours of the morning.

[Grateful for Hope]

3. Thank you for this review

I really enjoyed the book (read it a long time ago), and, I am looking forward to the movie.

[Mr_Spock]

10. I was going to write the exact same words so I'll just second your post...

Looking forward to seeing the movie...

[catmother]

6. not having read the book or seen the movie i do know the

general concept of the story. it's been given quite a bit of attention for awhile now. i will rent it when it's on DVD. i don't go inside movie theaters.

your review was well written -- not meant to offend anyone -- and i agree with you about jesus and other religions possibly being myths. i was raised catholic but gave up the faith in my early 20s.

i don't know why the church is making such a big deal about the movie. why do they feel so threatened? so what if jesus was married. are they afraid that if people believe this they will want to let priests marry?

i've heard that the movie was banned in north dakota -- that somewhere -- don't remember where -- projection machines were stolen. somewhere else a movie theater was burned down. why are "people of faith" retorting to violence? it's just a movie.

i agree with you about faith. if it gives people comfort -- then that's great.

[noahmijo]

7. If anything those who protest it are proving this movie to be fact

Insofar as the movie and book make a big deal of the fact that the church has worked tirelessly to cover up other versions of the story of Christ. It's like these people are today's agents of what the French crusades started.

[catmother]

9. you're absolutely right. one of the things that bothers me is

that the gospels were allegedly written 40 years after christ's death. so i think much of the writing is based on memory, dreams and reflections.

[roguevalley]

8. The hoo-hah amazes me. I wasn't aware that Mr. Brown trespassed

on copyrighted material. Obviously, the story of Jesus is trademarked and a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Catholic/Evangical churches of the world. I'm surprised they don't go after historians and archaeologists who dig through biblical places and find nothing to support the Bible.

RV, a protestant from way back but sick of this stuff. So sick, I have gone pagan.