The DaVinci Code Movie--in a nutshell

Zarr Chasm Chronical [sic] | Nov. 30, 2005 | Keli_Kilohana

[Keli Kilohana]

Dan Brown’s novel, The DaVinci Code, is now a movie starring Tom Hanks and directed by Ron Howard. According to Brown, Jesus married Mary Magdalene, a fallen woman, had a son who moved to Gaul and fathered Frenchmen. Voile! Mary Magdalene is the chalice which contained the blood(line) of Christ. Oi vey!

Proof? DaVinci’s painting, The Last Supper, of course! (The John portrayed by Leonardo is not a John but a Mary! Holy switcheroo!) According to Brown, an international religious cabal known as Opus Dei works desperately to keep the facts about this chalice and child secret. (One can’t blame them!)

The book and the movie--I am told--is mostly spent chasing after Mary Magdalene’s tomb where, we are told, are all manner of secret documents whose contents will wreck Christianity. But in the end – too bad! – the movie closes with Tom Hanks finding the tomb and disclosing nothing. So, we will never know whether Mary Magdalene’s crypt contained a secret new Gospel or Opie’s grocery list.

[Fielding]

Bought it on CD. I found no art in it. It was written for Hollywood.

[7thson]

I have not read it. I asked my priest - who did read most of it - if it was worth my time. He said no. He said the "historical background" is basically bogus and the author has events and years out of place.

[wolfcreek]

This sounds like one of Geraldo's capers.

[Fintan]

So, we will never know whether Mary Magdalene’s crypt contained a secret new Gospel or Opie’s grocery list.

 

I smell "sequel".

[smhl]

you all sound as closed-minded and afraid as the Church has been for thousands of years. The difference today, is that Catholics are no longer simple, uneducated peasants who will follow blindly what Rome tells them.

The popularity of Dan Brown's book is due to the desire of today's believers to find their religion a living faith, that is able to be challenged, dynamic and alive. Not something that died, closed and froze 2000 years ago. That does NOT mean that people believe the fiction of Brown, but that they enjoy the ability to consider possibilities.

[Fintan]

I'm truly honored that you joined FR today and felt compelled to jump all over me and my innocuous reply.

I'll be looking forward to more undeserved and unsubstantiated flames in the future.

[eleni121]

Many historians have dismissed Brown's version of events and his central claim that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene ad nauseum. IN fact this novel is a derivative of the Kazantzakis work "The Last Temptation of Christ" which was condemned by the Greek Orthodox Chruch...and rightfully so.

No I have not read it and knowing what it's about have no wish to waste my time doing so. I have read a number of critical reviews and like other works of fiction don't have to read it to know whether it's worth my time or not.

[Migjagger]

They have kept Mary Magdalene's toe? That's grotesque. Did anyone see "The Magdalene Sisters?" Irish movie.

[Ditter]

They said it was Mary Magdalene's toe but you know how Frenchmen lie. LOL! It could have been anything, it looked like a dried root.

[Migjagger]

Funny. I wonder if there's any DNA left in that dried root to trace it forward? Assuming it was HER dry root? During the Middle Ages there was a fascination for souvenir body parts.