Oceania The Da Vinci Code movie

Discussion in 'Oceania Discussion Boards' started by Ivo, May 21, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ivo Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Oct 10, 2002
    star 1
    I watched the Da Vinci code last night at the cinema, I thought it was really good. Part of the reason was that it faithfully follows the book (I know it's a radical concept) which reading some of the reviews of the movie is a bad thing apparently?????

    I don't know which important part of the movie was unintentially funny because no-one in the cinema including me noticed. I thought Tom Hanks was good, but Audrey Tatou stole the show. All in all great movie lives up to the hype
  2. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    The reason that Da Vinci code closely resembles the book is that the book was written like a movie.

    I'll be seeing it tomorrow and hope against everything that Ron Howard had something up his sleeve when he made it.
  3. BobaFett22 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2005
    star 3
    I saw this movie on Friday night with 5 friends. Two of us read the book, two were not Christian and the last friend was Christian, but knew nothing about the story. All of us thought it was very good. Acting was spot on. Hanks was great as usual Audrey was beautiful and amazing. The movie is as close to the book it was based on as any I have seen before. Go see it!
  4. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    The movie is BETTER than the book. That can't be said about many movies that are based on books but it is better.

    What I liked was the footage of the crusades and ancient Rome and those sort of things.
  5. Kartanym Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2002
    star 6
    If I can make the time, I'll go see this one. But with X3 out this week too, it's gonna be tough :p
  6. solo77 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 28, 2002
    star 5
    I could not stand this movie.

    It was boring, confusing and the acting was very bland

    2/5 [face_plain]
  7. Kartanym Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2002
    star 6
    pfft. Sir Ian made the movie. I thought it was ok. Bit slow in parts, but I think what drew me in was the theory itself, not specifically the acting. I can forgive that, considering it wasn't really important in the context of telling the story (especially character development, which took a back seat).
  8. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    What I liked was the speech at the start showing how subjective symbols can be.

    Though I half expected Silas to pull out a blue lightsaber! [face_mischief]
  9. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    Yes, it's funny a subjective story would include a lecture on subjectivity; in case people took it seriously and as fact (without doing their own research.)

    Oh, wait... :oops:

    E_S
  10. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    What are your thoughts on the protesters, Ender?

    Even here in Launceston we had a troop of Bible-bashers on opening day handing out leaflets against the film.

    Why can't they let people make up their own minds? This is 2006, not the Middle Ages.
  11. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    The protestors are funny. Firstly, they're publicising the film, and secondly, they're as bad as the gullible cretins who believe the "history" contained within the Da Vinci Code novel; except in this case, they're believing the opposite.

    There's a reason the fringe of grail historians subscribe to similar theories, people!
  12. Detonating-Rabbit Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2003
    star 5
    I agree. By publicly criticising it, they promote it and make it controversial. The irony... :p
  13. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    But I don't know who is worse; the reactionary protestors, or the faux-coffee house intellectuals who read it and assume it's telling an accurate tale of history.

    The best quote I heard for this book was someone saying it was what people who didn't read literature thought literature was like.

    Still, it would be nice if the film was better than the book. Even though I enjoyed, for example, the Tailor of Panama more as a film, it didn't adhere too strictly to it's source material. But for every rare example like the one mentioned, there's an example of abject butchery. Hollywood still owes Louis De Berniere an apology.

    E_S
  14. TheEmperorsProtege Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 22, 2004
    star 5
    I absolutely agree with everything you said *nod*

    [face_laugh]how can any tale of history be completely accurate???? they're all accounts of things written or told by a person that hopefully really experienced it and knows what he or she is talking about. but like every tale it is subjective and therefore only a POV and incomplete....

    -Mel
  15. TheBoogieMan Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 14, 2001
    star 6
    I would just like to second the claim that there is no such thing as historical truth.
  16. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    To a certain extent you are right, Ender and I'm doing a History major at uni. A lot of what we accept as historical 'fact' is actually the agreement of several historians on an interpretation of relevent sources. This is how a history is formed as even with documented evidence we still need to interpret.

    The way you can definitely say that a historical event actually happened is that if several different sources agree on this. As for the how, that's something that's always being debated. I'll see if I can ask Viceroy to contibute on this as he's in most of my classes.

    If the Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven, history did not likewise arrive in written form courtesy of Doc Brown.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.