I believe The Da Vinci Code

Status
Not open for further replies.
briceman said:
But the thing is... so many different people, enemies and allies were documenting the things during the time of Christ, and the ones that were really written during that time all can be matched up... I've done a lot of homework on this :)
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is that there is room for error and/or bias. Nothing is ever as it seems. I've read all three major relgious books (Bible, Torah, and Koran) and have visited every form of church possible to me, and I've been to the Middle East on several occasions. Historically, they each have a different slant, and a different opinion on the same subject. From a logical point of view, if you have 10 different people/cultures/religons giving 10 different accounts of one event, 9 of those accounts aren't right. This type of confusion leads me to believe there is room for doubt.

Please, let's not start an out of control debate. I'm merely stating that there is room for error, I'm not saying one religon is worse than another, etc.
:)
 
The study of history isn't as biased as you say. I know "everyone knows" history is "written by the victors," but things that "everyone knows" have a tendency toward being wrong.

Let's not have a religious debate here. I only started this thread to talk about hype, especially of the "serious over-" variety.
 
briceman said:
The one that stands out to me is Josephus. While he did not believe or follow the Christ, he well documented the events that are matched up in the bible as well.

http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/home.htm
Click to expand...


I figured you'd bring up Josephus.

Unfortunately, there is a great deal of doubt about the authenticity of what he wrote. Even the site you link to attests to that.

I am actually reading a great book right now called "Misquoting Jesus." It's about the histotry of the New Testament translations and copies. If you have an interest in the early church (as I do), I strongly recommend this book. It's a fascinating read and contains a lot of amazing stories of how the NT came to be what it is today.

Peace.
 
David Jimerson said:
The study of history isn't as biased as you say. I know "everyone knows" history is "written by the victors," but things that "everyone knows" have a tendency toward being wrong.

Let's not have a religious debate here. I only started this thread to talk about hype, especially of the "serious over-" variety.
Click to expand...

I'll stop. But I for one think religeous debates are fun and educational.

As for the thread topic: Yeah, I kind of figured there was no way this movie could be good. Ron Howard + Tom Hanks + Big Budget = nothing interesting to say.
 
I might check this out on DVD, but there's no way that I'm sitting through this in a theater for 2 1/2 hours.
 
David Jimerson said:
The study of history isn't as biased as you say. I know "everyone knows" history is "written by the victors," but things that "everyone knows" have a tendency toward being wrong.

Let's not have a religious debate here. I only started this thread to talk about hype, especially of the "serious over-" variety.
Click to expand...

My apologies...let me then pose this question:

How many people here feel like this type of "overhyping" affects the way you see a movie?

I know with King Kong the hype kind of made it a little less enjoyable and kept me seperated from it. I'm afraid the same will happen with this one.
 
briceman said:
overhype only worked for LOTR IMO.
Click to expand...

But I would say in their case, the first one wasn't as hyped as the 2nd and 3rd. Most of the hype came from the anticipation of the sequels, which in there case worked out well. Now, the Matrix sequels, that's a different story.
 
C'mon...every major release goes through some sort of hype. The idea is to put butts in seats and that usually requires some sort of advertising to do if you're trying to make back a lot of investment. I don't hold advertising against a movie. I do hold poor content against a movie. I can't address The DaVinci Code on tihs level, having not seen it. 90% of the reviews I have read, however, have been less than positive. And the same thing seems to be stated over and over...boring. I'm sure I'll see it (on DVD) and make my own decision.

One of the things you've got to watch out for, though, is when there are no advance screenings for film critics. That's usually a sign that the studio is afraid they've got a turkey on their hands and they want as many people to see it on the initial weekend release as possible, before word of mouth kills the movie.
 
briceman said:
But the thing is... so many different people, enemies and allies were documenting the things during the time of Christ, and the ones that were really written during that time all can be matched up... I've done a lot of homework on this :)
Click to expand...

I'm curious as well, especially since I have a degree in Religious Studies and Philosophy.

The last thing I will do is go ahead and try to start something off topic, but Brandon, you're not being accurate.

The simple fact is that history is written by the winners, never the losers. If you'd like specific examples I would be more than happy to provide you with them or I can take you through nearly the entire new and old testament (as well as the Midrash and Talmud) and explain the historical inaccuracies.

-Jeremy
 
Isaac_Brody said:
I think this film was greenlit because of the built in controversy. I think Hollywood is going for "Passion" dollars on this one.
Click to expand...

Regarding the controversy? Maybe.

But I think "Passion dollars" refers to the ticket buying Christian conservative market.

I don't think anyone ever really thought a movie that denies the divinity of Christ and hooks him up with Mary Magdalene would attract the same moviegoers that made Passion a success.
 
But I think "Passion dollars" refers to the ticket buying Christian conservative market.

I don't think anyone ever really thought a movie that denies the divinity of Christ and hooks him up with Mary Magdalene would attract the same moviegoers that made Passion a success.
Click to expand...


True. I don't see Churches renting out whole theater showings for their 'flock' on this one.
 
I'd love to hear what Jeremy has to say and love history and religious debate. As long as we keep it cool and clean we should be okay. But David and/or Isaac will lock it down the second it get's stupid.

-

The problem is that persons of strong faith are incapable of having a logical discussion soley for having faith in the first place.

Like Briceman for example (and another I'm seeing)

You are letting your faith dictate where logic should be. I think the bible is a wonderful blueprint with a wonderful message and guidelines but it is not 100% accurate. Human beings wrote this book over thousands of years and as mentioned more than once, written by those who conquered

-

With Buddha, Christ, The Jews, Allah ......................... Who are we (or they) to tell them (Or us) which is the real deal and who is ful of **** ? Well ?

-

I like the previously posted take about not being able to comprehend religion and god. How can we understand him if we cannot comprehend it in the first place.

Faith is a tough gig.
 
briceman said:
grrr... I hope not... protests are the worst thing they can do...
Click to expand...

Seriously, fundamental Christians are gonna end up looking pretty silly if they keep this up...protesting against a fictional novel?
 
mjmcneese2 said:
Seriously, fundamental Christians are gonna end up looking pretty silly if they keep this up...protesting against a fictional novel?
Click to expand...

It's kinda funny. My girlfriend manages a bookstore and she always has nutjobs yelling at her about the damn book. She loves pointing out that it's in the FICTION section.
 
John, I respect what you're saying... but even though I DO have a very strong faith, and belief... that doesn't mean we cannot have a good debate that is not attacking or biting... I hope that I would not be that way... that is what bothers me about a lot of "christians" they are so harsh about what they believe, and the bible even teaches to be the OPPOSITE of the way many "christians" are presenting their faith... I hope I don't ever present it in a harsh, or "holier-than-thou" manner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top