Saturday, May 20, 2006

The Da Vinci Code Movie - Big Deal

Yes, I read the book; who hasn't? When I first heard that The Da Vinci Code was "highly controversial" I knew that mean it would contain some kind of factual error regarding Christianity, and that this would be a central point. Still, I figured, "big deal" and ignored it.

Frankly, the written version wasn't all that wonderful, and I doubt it would have sold as many copies if people hadn't made such a fuss about it. Ever heard of the Streisand Effect?

Regarding "What is the big deal, anyway?", the problem isn't The Da Vinci Code but how some people react to lousy history as though their faith depended upon a novel. If you are a Christian and you are reading this, do me a favor (in fact, do Christ a favor): don't get too worked up. Yes, read the book. Yes, make sure you know where it is wrong and know how to answer it. But don't have a cow.

Sure, Dan Brown actually believes what he writes in the book is true, but he does terrible research for his books; Cathy is reading Angels and Demons and Brown has American Indian beliefs all wrong. The sheer amount of bad and confused history in TDVC actually gave me a headache. He gets dates, places, and events mixed up and conflated, and he does bad math on top of that. Is it too much to ask for people to do a little homework? To quote Tom Hank's goofiest line of the movie, "I've got to get to a library -- fast." I only wish Dan Brown had spent more time in one.

In hearing and reading the movie's reviews, it seems that the critics find the movie version a yawner. Even the positive reviews sound weak, and I found one clearly negative review so funny that I couldn't finish reading it out loud to Cathy.

For the record, I'm going to wait for the DVD version. I don't see the point in spending the money to see a movie nobody recommends and the plot of which follows the book religiously (haha). I didn't like the book enough to pay to be bored by it on screen.


  1. I agree about not getting too worked up. I don't really see what all the fuss is about it - I mean, it's FICTION! I did enjoy the novel for it's fast-pacedness (I think I may have just made that word up), the suspense, and the cryptic stuff. But I didn't take Dan Brown's "historical data" worth a grain of salt. It's crap and I know that. :)

    I was really looking forward to the movie but my excitement has waned - I don't think I've heard ONE good review. And I don't like spending $20 to see a crappy movie. (Movie tickets are ridiculously expensive, aren't they?)

    Anyway, I liked your post - thanks! (That one review WAS very funny! A lump of dough in a wig?! LOL!)

  2. I actually feel bad for Hanks... he can act, but from what I've heard he wasn't really allowed to act. I'll bet Ian McKellen (Teabing) did act, though...

    Had a friend who went to see it, and he actually heard people gasp in horror when the movie said Jesus was maried to Mary and had a daughter.


  3. I read the book by Lee Stroebel after seeing the movie, and WOW is all I can say. For someone claiming to have historical fact, he TRULY has gotten everything wrong. I think he only got a few facts right out of the whole book, and that is.... (drum roll) the fact that there actually is a sect called Opus Dei and that the actually cities like Paris actually exist.

    What's sad is that he makes this junk up and actually believes. I wouldn't be surprised at our society of they come up with a cult named the Brownism or something lame like that.

  4. I'll be leading a small group at chruch and we'll use Strobel's DVD as a launching pad.

    It was the history that bugged me the most, I think, especially surrounding Constantine's reign. I hope Strobel covers most of that (I haven't watched the DVD yet).