Giant Da Vinci Code Ad Angers Church Officials
Filed under: Drama, Cannes, Mystery & Suspense, Sony, Movie Marketing
It’s got a star-studded cast, is opening at I’m one of those people who didn't think much of the book, but I continue to be impressed at the various ways in which this mystery-thriller manages both to offend and gather up massive amounts of publicity.
Now the whole Da Vinci madness is getting a little baroque: according to Reuters, three weeks after the British ruling in the copyright case involving Dan Brown’s book, a lawyer discovered what looks to be a secret code in the judge’s ruling’s text. Some of the letters in the ruling are italicized and spell out “Smith code.” Justice Peter Smith is said by his clerk to be “generally speaking, a humorous type of person.









Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-30-2006 @ 11:32AM
T. said...
Not only do I not want to see this movie in any shape or form, but I'm also dreading the million knockoffs we'll be flooded with after it's inevitable success. We'll be inundated with freemason conspiracies, gnostic underground cults, centuries-spanning illuminati plots and sea scroll revelations for the next year or so.
Reply
5-21-2006 @ 4:35PM
Mikel said...
good. And guess what all you little brainwashed Christians? The movie made a ton of money! $224 million around the World to be exact. If you ppl were complaining about Harry Potter's $207 Million opening weekend, then you should definitely be afriad of this film's prowess. Even in Italy, the film has set a record that's double the amount that the previous box-office record (there) was. Trust me. all your nagging is useless. I loved the film and me and about a few dozen of my friends have vowed to see it ten more times to fund more money for future films like this. I think its time the TRUTH was uncovered.
The church is a real lying piece of work. In 1969, after almost 2000 years of portraying Mary Magdalene as a prostitute and a whore, the vatican finally admitted (under newly found evidence) that Mary Magdalene was NOT a prostitute and they had wrongly accused her so.
There.
That's just a little bit.
And all those covering up instances and such. It really makes you think, what DO they tell the truth about?
I'm not saying I don't believe in God, because I'm an agnostic and I do believe that there is a superior being.
And I'm not saying I don't believe in Jesus Christ, because I think he was probably a VERY great man. However, being a great man doesn't mean you can't be married. Being a great man doesn't mean you have to be a virgin.
I'm not saying the Church is wrong.
Nor am I saying that the evidence presented in the Da Vinci code is either.
AS human beings, we cannot allow ourselves to be brainwashed into beliefs by peer pressure or by others in general. we must seek the truth ourselves. If you believe Jesus was a virgin, fin something that is not supported by the church (but not necessarily banned) that supports the idea that he was a celibate virgin. If you believe he was married and sexually active, then find evidence for that too.
The thing is, more (much more) factual evidence points to the theory that Jesus was NOT celibate.
As people, we should accept what evidence points to. Not the mere fantasies that we hear or would like to hear.
And we should NOT judge things before we've looke dinto them. How many of you critics have even READ the book? It's a stellar book and the movie is great too. TRy one or the other and look at it as entertainment. If Dan Brown wanted to be religious, he wouldn't be a thriller-writer.
Reply