What was the big deal about the Da Vinci Code movie?

Question

That was one of the most overhyped let-down movies I've ever seen! It followed the typical Tom Hanks movie formula (which sucks in all of his other movies too!). I don't get it, why the hype? It wasn't even worth the advertising dollars spent on it! Okay, my question:

How many of you Christians believe in the ideas behind this movie and how many do not- good explinations please I want to see the arguments for both sides (and I'm offering to play referee- I'm an atheist) .

I understand that controversy creates free advertisement. That isn't what I'm asking. I want to know how Christians as a whole are reacting to it- it poses a point that is potentially disruptive to their faith. I want to know their reactions- who accepts it, who rejects it, who would consider it... etc.. I didn't like the movie either, and wouldn't bother with the books. I'm not particularly interested in it because I'm not religious, but I am curious to see how someone who IS religious would react to it because the movie was directed at them- not people like me.

Answer 1

I thought the book was over-hyped as well. There was nothing in it that I hadn't read or seen elsewhere, and the plot and characters were thin. Dan Brown was lucky he picked a controversial subject, or no one would have ever heard of him.

Answer 2

All I know is that I loved the book,the movie could have been better but if you always dislike Tom Hanks I guess we don't need to go into that. Funny how he's one of the most sought after actors in Hollywood though. And although the book and movie are basically fiction there are enough facts sprinkled in to at least get across an idea of the Church not being anything it claims to be and vile in the things it will do to protect it's power. For example the story of the Knights Templar being executed en masse is true,guess they did amass too much power. And anyone with a brain knows that the stories of the witch trials are very true,I kind of wonder how many were killed. And if such a secret actually existed do you not think the church would kill anyone man woman or child to protect that secret? And of course one thing that must be considered is that for every gospel put into the Bible their are three or more in archives that did not make the cut,so there is very likely a vast mountain of info we don't know about Christ.

Answer 3

The movie doesnt do the book justice. As far as suspense novels go, the book was great. The movie was a real let down. But the hype is due to Dan Brown's claim in the beginning of his book that the things he writes about are fact. And when asked on a national talk show if he would have written anything different for a history book, he said no, thus claiming everything in the book was historically accurate. The problem is that the book contains so many embarrassing distortions of history. Even historians who do are not Christians have said Dan Brown's claims are ludicrous.

Answer 4

We live in a society that evolves around one thing. Money. I think about money all the time, but I have none. Rich people think about money all the time, they want more.
Now Movies are a business venture. They make a product for sale. What is the best way to sell a product, advertisement. But advertising costs money. So, how do you get free advertising, create controvery. This is what happened with this movie, and many others regarding Christ. You see the movie was a letdown, but it was successful, it made money. Lots of money. The advertising was inexpensive because the controversy fueled free advertisement. Even if you were told the movie was bad you went to see it because the contoversy created an interest and you had to see for yourself. Even the Author of the original works admitted that the book was fictional. Yes his researched was actual research based on rumor and inuendo, but the book was fiction.
I have a question for you. Do you really think a person without faith is a valid referee. If a guy does not believe in boxing can he referee. Who is going to believe in your results you do not believe. You are trying to make this a religious issue, this movie wasnt about religion. This movie was not about faith. This movie was about one thing and only one thing. Business, making money.
Additionally, regarding Tom Hanks, I do not like most of what he has done, however, when it comes to his trade, Tom Hanks is genius. Anybody with a little extra to invest, find a Tom Hanks project. This is only good business.

Answer 5

I never saw the movie, as I generally find all books made into movies to be a let down. The book was excellent and made some interesting points. I assume people are against the book because of what it says about the church. I think it raised some interesting questions, as we really can't verify the accuracy of the Bible, we have only the Church's word to go on and we all know what kind of atrocities the church has committed in the name of God.
I don't know if I believe it, but I do see how it could be possible, but of course it was just a book and a very entertaining read at that.

Answer 6

It was no big deal for me. It was a work of fiction....a movie based on a novel. And it was not a particularly GOOD movie, either.

Mr. Brown's prequel "Angels and Demons" was a much better book, and I think it would have made a better movie, too.

The ideas behind the movie are speculative at best and complete balderdash at the worst. There is no historical basis in fact for any of it.

What Brown has done (he stole the idea from the guys that wrote "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" anyway - total baloney in theory and in conclusions) is to take bits of truth (Yes, there were Knights Templar, yes, Mary Magdalene was a real person and Disciple, yes, there is a group called Opus Dei...etc.) - and the weaves a wild tale out of whole-cloth.

I told the people in my parish to "go see it". They did. We discussed it.

Verdict: Pure nonsense.

Answer 7

The movie was just a quick rip of the book. The book was a work of fiction, but the problem was, that it CLAIMED to be based in fact:
"Every organization and historical event in this book is true"

So people had to research it for themselves to prove that the claims made were indeed false. This was difficult, because a cursory look appeared to validate the story. Only a close look at the data and the people involved makes it clear that it is indeed just a cleverly deceptive work of fiction.

Answer 8

I'm CAtholic. I've thumbed through the book but didn't bother with the movie. I don't like what it says about the church. It's horrible! The whole thing is about Jesus and Mary Magdelen being married, having kids, and the church covering it up to the point of having like an assassination team that goes out and kills people over it! It's a bunch of lies.

I wouldn't have as big a problem if it weren't for the fact that (despite it being fiction) people think it's fact! That's the truth. THere are people who think that the book is all true. It's a horrible thing!

What's more, the book is against the Catholic church. I know of a few other chrisitan churches in my area who had thier congregation go to the movie because of it's negative message against the Catholic church and praised it! That's not right!

Answer 9

The main controversy is the notion that Christ was married to Mary Magdalene and had children by her that the Catholic Church has been hiding for two thousand years. Furthermore, there are two factions in the Catholic Church, one trying to supress the notion of Mary and her children and the other trying to protect those heirs. The other controversy was that Christ was just a man and not a deity. The movie didn't go into that one so much as the book did. As for the other one, it was not a shock to me to learn that others thought the same as I did.
I always felt that Christ was married and probably had children but managed to keep their identities quiet. I have always felt that the special position that Mary Magdalene held in His life could well have meant that she was married to Him.
The final notion that Mary was actually one of the apostles pictured in the final supper painting, the one Jesus loved leaning on His breast, is a bit of a stretch. The twelve apostles were the twelve named in the New Testament. I'm sure that after Christ's death and resurrection that the twelve probably helped to take care of Mary, not only His mother but also His wife.
In conclusion, I agree that the movie was not nearly as controversial as portrayed. However, if you were a Catholic, I could see how the notions put forth would shake the foundations of what you had been taught all your life.

Answer 10

Controversy sells tickets, It is a tested and true formula. In some cases movie studios have hired casts of extras to stage a protest for media consumption. A dozen protesters can look like a major event if filmed right.