Posted on 05/17/2006 5:54:17 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
May 17, 2006
If the Da Vinci Code was already feeding the flames of controversy with its challenge to the basic tenets of Christianity, actor Ian McKellen managed to throw a refinery tank's worth of gasoline on the fire on this morning's Today show, asserting that the Bible should carry a disclaimer saying that it is "fiction."
Matt Lauer, on his second day "On The Road With The Code," was in Cannes for the film festival, where the Code will have its debut. It has already been screened to some critics, who have given it decidedly mixed reviews.
As I reported here yesterday, NBC reporter Melissa Stark timidly dipped a toe in the sea of controversy when yesterday she interviewed Code director Ron Howard, asking how he reacted to the controversy the movie has created . . . for the Church! Sounding more like the Delphic oracle than a Hollywood director, Howard offered up some ambiguous prose about it being healthy thing for people to engage their beliefs.
Lauer took the bull of controversy more directly by the horns when he interviewed the cast and director Howard today. Said Lauer:
"There have been calls from some religious groups, they wanted a disclaimer at the beginning of this movie saying it is fiction because one of the themes in the book really knocks Christianity right on its ear, if Christ survived the crucifixion, he did not die for our sins and therefore was not resurrected. What I'm saying is, people wanted this to say 'fiction, fiction, fiction'. How would you all have felt if there was a disclaimer at the beginning of the movie? Would it have been okay with you?"
There was a pause, and then famed British actor Ian McKellen [Gandalf of Lord of the Rings], piped up:
"Well, I've often thought the Bible should have a disclaimer in the front saying this is fiction. I mean, walking on water, it takes an act of faith. And I have faith in this movie. Not that it's true, not that it's factual, but that it's a jolly good story. And I think audiences are clever enough and bright enough to separate out fact and fiction, and discuss the thing after they've seen it."
With the camera focused on McKellen, one could hear a distinctly nervous laugh in the background, seeming to come from either actor Tom Hanks or director Howard. McKellen's stunning bit of blasphemy is likely to test the adage that all publicity is good publicity.
Finkelstein, recently a guest on the Lars Larson Show, lives in the liberal haven of Ithaca, NY, where he hosts the award-winning public-access TV show 'Right Angle'. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
Exactly.
Not a good remark by Ian.
"Hollywood: We lie about who we are for a living!"
Ron Howard managed to screw up the story of the Alamo, another heresy he committed. He reached his zenith as Opie and Richie Cunningham and should have retired gracefully at age 16.
I wasn't going to see it, but now I'm not going to see it even more.
It's like the mustard seeds. Their foundation just had a load of gravel put on them. Hard to grow in that type of soil.
Evidently the film is a stinker. Good.
Yep, but all the negative attention will help its numbers at the box office.
There is a pretty telling comment on Dan Brown's web page.
WHAT DO YOU THINK OF CLERICAL SCHOLARS ATTEMPTING TO "DISPROVE" THE DA VINCI CODE?
Brown: "The dialogue is wonderful. These authors and I obviously disagree"
Dan Brown is clearly indicating he believes the blasphemy in his book.
Ian obviously doesn't have the wisdom of Gandalf...
Obviously. :( That's really sad too. I feel sorry for him now.
Yep. There's nothing quite like the "pop" of a well set hook in the morning.......
He's also a militant homosexual....
Didn't know that.
And it was all thoroughly discredited then and exposed as a bunch of lies to sell a book. Dan Brown is capitalizing on that and the media is giving him a free pass. The conspiracy theory of Holy Blood, Holy Grail is not open for debate, it has been debunked.
Faith and fiction are two different things. If one believes in a religious experience, such as that written in the Bible, it is not fiction and does not need to be named as such. It is for believers that the Bible's content is relevant.
Absolutely true, as regards mature and reasonable adults watching the film. I fear for kids being unduly influenced.
Just do something else with family and friends besides watching any recent or new movies. Avoid all of it. Enough is enough.
The key to your post: "Brown believes..." We all base our faiths on what we believe. Brown may very well believe that Mary and Jesus were married-- that is his right. That I believe he is wrong is MY right, and neither of our beliefs should be affected by the other (much as I might like everyone to believe as I do).
This is the essence of faith-- recognizing that it IS faith, not provable fact. Politically, we must acknowledge the rights of others to believe, and express those beliefs, in a way inconsistent with or even contrary to our own beliefs.
Liberals cannot do this apparently. They require not only that we allow them to believe as they wish, but that we accept and even agree with their beliefs. This, of course, is intolerance, which they would deny.
I am way more concerned about what trash kids learn in public schools than from this book/movie.
Hi jonny. I wasn't planning on going to the theaters to watch this, but you're right. I will not be renting this now either. Wish they would make more movies that I want to see. I have probably only rented 10 the past year. Most of those were for my children.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.