Posted on 05/18/2006 6:05:43 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
May 18, 2006
After a couple days in which the only people that the Today show offered the opportunity to comment on the controversy surrounding the Da Vinci Code were the movie's director and cast members, this morning an outside expert and Catholic officials finally got their shot. The result was an oddly ambivalent reaction, in which the movie was simultaneously praised as offering an opportunity to teach about the Church, and condemned as filled with lies.
A quick recap on the state of play at Today. Matt Lauer has been "On the Road with the Code" this week. On Tuesday, as reported here, NBC reporter Melissa Stark timidly raised the matter of the controversy with Code director Ron Howard. Stark didn't bother informing viewers just what all the fuss is about - which is none other than the movie's premise that Christ wasn't really divine, that he was married to Mary Magdalene and had children with her, that the true religion is the "feminine divine" and that the Roman Catholic Church has perpetrated a murderous patriarchal plot to suppress the truth. That's all!
Howard sloughed off the controversy with some feel-good talk about it being a healthy thing for people to get in touch with their beliefs.
The following day, as noted in this story that has made its rounds on the web, cast member Ian McKellen added tons of fuel to the fire by suggesting that rather than the Da Vinci Code, it 's the Bible that should come with a disclaimer at its front "saying this is fiction."
Finally, this morning, outside critics were given their shot. First up was Georgetown Professor Diane Apostolos-Cappadona, who Matt Lauer said "has been described as the real-life Robert Langdon", the symbologist who is the movie's central figure. Apostolos-Cappadona emphatically stated that, contrary to the Code's central assertion, the figure portrayed in Da Vinci's Last Supper is indeed the Apostle John and not Mary Magdalene: "She is not there at the Last Supper. Sorry."
Next was a clip of author Dan Brown himself, who Lauer - seeming to slough off the controversy himself - introduced by saying "does there need to be such a fuss over a book?"
Brown was seen oh-so-modestly asserting that "Christian theology has survived the writings of Galileo and the writings of Darwin. Surely it will survive the writings of some novelist from New Hampshire." Then again, during Galileo and Darwin's days, broadband internet access and world-wide film distribution was significantly more limited.
Next, a brief clip of an editor of Catholic Digest: "Virtually no one that we polled knew anyone who has left the Church because of the book."
Lauer: "News that should be comforting to religous leaders everywhere. Now, if they can just get past the movie."
Finally, Lauer interviewed, live in St. Peter's Square, Father Gregory Apparcel, Rector of the American Catholic Church in Rome. Here's where the Church's ambivalence was evident.
Lauer: "Is the movie version a bigger threat than the book was?"
Apparcel: "I don't know if I would call either one a threat. I would say that for me the movie it's an opportunity to teach peole the truth about what their faith is. It's been a tool for me to use to help people understand what their history is."
Lauer: "Maybe this is an enlightened approach. But if it's not a threat, then why the calls by some for boycotts, why the calls by some for lawsuits, why the calls by others for a disclaimer to be put up at the beginning of the movie? Why are people in the Church worried about this?"
Fair question. Along similar lines, I don't ever recall a rabbi praising the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as offering a great opportunity to teach about Judaism!
Answering Lauer's question, Father Greg seemed to backtrack somewhat: "They don't like all this misinformation and untruths being told about the origins of the Church. All the things that haven't been said about [Jesus'] relationship with Mary Magdalene and various other things - that there's been a suppression of the truth. It's very upsetting to hear, misinformation or lies, basically, about what your faith is."
But then the good father zagged again: "This is an opportunity for people to come and talk about who we are and what we believe and why it's important."
When Lauer suggested that "the nuclear button" in the book was the suggestion that Jesus had a physical relationship with Mary Magdalene [prefacing his question by observing that he felt "almost awkward" making it in St. Peter's Square], Father Greg responded:
"For me the bigger one is that Jesus wasn't God. Him saying that in the book is really upsetting to a lot of people." I would think so!
Yet once again, Apparcel then took a different tack: "But the people I talk to, the Catholics who come to church, see it as a novel, a movie. It's information that's used in the service of a thriller story. And it's wrong information and to present it as fact is wrong as well."
Father Greg also displayed a good sense of humor. When Lauer asked what he would ask author Dan Brown if he met him, Apparcel replied "I would ask him for a donation!" More seriously, he added "I would ask him in his next novel if he could get the facts straight. It's important because people believe what they read."
Asked if he would go see the movie, Apparcel responded "Eventually."
Lauer: "No hurry?"
Flashing a final bit of mordant humor, Father Greg responded: "No, I'm not in a hurry - especially after the reviews."
Rim shot!
Finkelstein, who has made recent appearances 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
Today Show/NewsBusters Da Vinci Code ping.
Brought to you by the Father of Lies.
Well then, Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" must've thrown the entirety of Christianity into an absolute tizzy!
It must say something bad about Christians that they would be so hard-up for entertainment that they would even THINK about attending a movie that slams the Savior.
I don't go to many movies anyway, but there's my $0.02
I don't understand why some are getting so worked up over a piece of fiction. Poorly written fiction at that.
"Tiresome" one critic said of the movie. The big hype is to get big bucks.
I think back 2 years ago when the media was championiing another film from Cannes. Fahrenheit 9/11.
Don't seem to recall any attempts to permit someone from "the other side" to come on the national broadcast networks and disect this film.
Linda Tripp was an Arkansacide away from keeping that secret. Taped phone calls and the pressure to keep the dress changed Monica's story from denial to admittance.
That's an accurate statement! Dr. Irwin Lutzer said in a series of messages entitled 'One Minute After You Die' that when we stand before Christ, we will all be in agreement of what sin is. There will be no debate over what is truth. I look forward to that day. I look forward to that day for Mr. Brown and people that have a heart like his.
Maybe somebody got smart and realized that vehement protest just gives it more publicity.
God is dead, vanished in a puff of logic (babelfish).
The Da Vinci code is about a famous painter. His name is called out in the title of this film, not Jesus.
Many people have read the book. Movies are made to attract the masses who passed on the book to "see what the fuss" was all about.
Generally the perception about any adaptation is "the book was better". They are two different audiences.
Even films from comic books are dumbed down for the screen.
Would you drop that silly argument? Ideas have consequences. Works of fiction, even, have consequences. Do we need to list the great works of fiction that have had an effect on this world?
When that's all they've got, they'll take the money any way they can get it.
They just want to keep this film from getting tagged "Ishtar 2" and sweeping the Razzies. You are only as good as your last film in Hollywood.
"Vehement protest"? I haven't seen that. I've seen people note the lies being conveyed through the book and movie. But not the kind of protest that accompanied "The Temptation of Christ."
Anybody who takes it seriously has the IQ of a gnat.
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.