(no subject)

[novapsyche]

After seeing the Da Vinci Code this weekend, I was amazed at the amount of bad press it had already gotten. The Catholic Church urged its members to refrain from seeing it. The reviews slammed it for not living up to the book.

Which made me think: How many other movies had been denigrated because the book was better? I mean, how many Stephen King movies would have been panned because of that reason?

As it turns out, the film grossed $77 mil domestically, and $224 mil worldwide in its opening weekend. Which just proves, again, that there is no such thing as bad press.

(Oh, and I enjoyed the movie. I thought it was quite entertaining. Also, the place was packed [I went Friday night], and afterwards people were humming with conversation. If nothing else, it's something that made people think.)

Comments

I recommend the book.

[magicmaiden.livejournal.com]

I recommend the book. I read it quite awhile back and only went to the movie as I was invited to go with family.

I think certain aspects were very close to the book....others not.

I usually watch the movie version of something before I read the book, if possible, as just by virtue of the medium, the book has much more detail.

I like the book better-which is normal for me. I am glad I had read the book before I had seen the movie. (in this case long before there was a movie) I wonder if I would have really known what was going on if I had not done so.

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned...or any earthly authority for that matter....I think it is good for folks to do some research rather than blind faith when it comes to anything mankind has laid a hand to.

Free will and all as well as just simple lack of understanding can change so many "facts".

[atdt1991.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen the book or the movie, but you reminded me of my bumper sticker: "Don't judge a book by its movie"

[blue-lightning.livejournal.com]

A friend of mine saw it and said the female character was downplayed, the whole equality of genders and religions was downplayed, and the whole sexual balance thing was downplayed. How would you rate this film as promoting gender-based and pantheistic acceptance?

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

Well, I haven't read the book, so I don't know what was downplayed and what wasn't. The movie encourages the viewer to explore noncanonical lines of thought about Jesus. It explicitly talks about how Mary Magdelene was allegedly Jesus' wife. It talks about the differences of the religions that existed in Rome at that time and the political climate due to those differences.

I really don't want to go too much into the movie, not even to address your question (I don't know if I can answer your question). The movie wasn't a masterpiece of cinema, and a lot of people are annoyed about how it plays with historical fact. But the movie does what it sets out to do: it tells a dramatic story in a fast-paced thrilling way. A lot of information is coming at the viewer, and the average (Protestant) American is going to have to suspend hir disbelief while at the same time incorporating this new information. That it succeeds says something.

[dionysus1999.livejournal.com]

I think its much to do about nothing. If it gets people thinking about religion, as opposed to autmatically responding without thought, I'm all for it.