DaVinci
 

My girlfriend and I both read the book last summer. She hated the movie and I really liked it. I am really curious what those of you who have seen it think. Did you read the book as well?

i have only stared at the cover of the book, i did however see the movie and i did enjoy it, i did find the movie a little flat in places and would give it a 7.5 out of 10

Da Vinci
 

I have read the book and saw the film last night. Althought not as gripping as the book the film is nowhere as bad as the critics have claimed. i dont think that Tom Hanks was quite right to play the part. Vincent D'Onofrio - Law and Order - Criminal Intent - would have played the part much better !!!!

I never read the book, but I did see the movie. I thought that the movie was a lot better than the critics said it would be.

thumbs down....
 

My wife read the book; neither of us have seen the movie. After she told me what it was about, I refuse to read the book or see the movie. I know it is "fiction" but it is blasphemous just the same.

I think "Cars" is coming out soon... :D

I wondered whether this would happen.

There are many aspects of the life of Jesus bar-David which the New Testament does not mention. Some are minor to the point of insignificance, such as whether as a carpenter he preferred Anatolian pine to Lebanese cedar. Others are absolutely major, but ultimately irrelevant, such as whether He was legally married and had issue (possible but not probable), whether he visited Britain as a child with Joseph of Aramathea (possible as Joseph was a friend of his father and travelled to Britain later, supposedly with the Grail but more likely chasing a lucrative tin contract) or whether he was gay (possible but unlikely).

In Christian teaching, the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. To make the sacrifice truly meaningful, he would have lived a rich and normal mainstream Jewish life until the last few months.

There is nothing blasphemous here, just a slightly different take on things to (a) make a rollicking good yarn and (b) urge us to re-assess how we see JC, taking off the Sunday School saccharine spin and seeing him in a more real context.

OOhhhhhhh, won't this set a cat among the pigeons.

My friend said she did not think the movie did well to make you understand the character of Silas. That was one point I did agree with her abaout.

I LOVED the book, and was mildly disappointed in the movie version. Was very glad I did read the novel before seeing the film. I agree that both Silas and Bishop Aringarosa were not developed enough as characters, therefore the film lacked some depth.

I guess a movie can never be as exciting as the story I see in my mind as I read it! :)

haven't read the book. Did see the movie the first weekend it came out, and it was alright. I'm not pissed that I dropped $8 to see it, but I'll proably wait for rentals on my next viewing.

As far as the whole "crisis of faith" issue, for me it's like this. You watch the movie (read the book) and then you have to make a decision. Is the movie (book) a work of fiction, or is the Bible a work of fiction? There are certain parts of the book that are probably true (There is a sect of self mutilation Catholics, did you know that?) but I think that is is fiction based on some very thin facts.

I felt like they should have given it another 30 minutes and set up the characters better.

i agree Lilth

ya , the characters did need a bit more depth. i also didnt like how jumppy the movie was , it seemed to go from scene to scene quite quickly. all in all it was an ok movie not one of my favs but ive seen much worse! i really enjoyed the book , it makes u think ! there is a another dan brown book with the same lead guy in it set before this one thats a good read , its called angels and demons. i really liked that one as well , dan bron is a good athur, ive read 4 of his book since march LOL!

~nikki

i read it but didn't see the movie yet. not sure if i will...maybe when it comes out on video.

my two cents on the novel:
the exerpt from the book, or the disclaimer...whatever you call it...totally suckered me:

"The Priory of Sion—a European secret society founded in 1099—is a real organization. In 1975, Paris's Bibliothèque Nationale discovered parchments known as Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Leonardo da Vinci."

^^^first of all, i didn't bother researching before reading to find out for myself, but i later found out it was not founded in 1099, it was founded (if it was founded at all...that';s still up for debate) sometime in the 1950's.


"All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

^^^secondly...upon reflection aftre reading the book (and spouting my mouth off about it :p) i wondered how can a secret ritual be described acurately if it's a secret? :rolleyes2

there are some other little things here and there that brown claimed were real history but are, conversely, hotly debated by historians and even some facts/documents that were found to have been forged before brown penned the novel.

so...although brown didn't explicitly say that book was anything but fiction, it was certainly implied that the plot could be a set of events that may happen because of real history (as opposed to psuedohistory)...not his fault, but mine for not bothering to find out for myself.

still a great read though. :D

I was thinking about the rituals I was thinking of how easy it has now become to get information on rituals by peeps like the Masons. I know when I was a kid it was just not a widely known thing but now you simply have to type it in google to have the secrets exposed.

ah ha...but then they aren't so secret anymore. :p:D