Posted on 05/21/2006 5:18:45 AM PDT by Aquinasfan
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- "The Da Vinci Code" banked an estimated $29 million at the box office on its first day in theaters, an industry official said Saturday, positioning the film to turn in the strongest opening weekend for any movie this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
Dont let your bowels get in an uproar partner.
The Post wasnt writen malisciously it was partly in jest to begin with. its been fun though, Just calm your nerves , have a drink. lighten up. Lightning isnt going to hit any theaters. geez.
golly gee whiz.
I sure don't remember heaping such accolades on the movie
I said it was good and was doing much better than the 'critics' predicted.
Wow, my editor would wear out his red pen if you were to cover a story...
LOL, and when did you become interested in reason and historical truth? The Catholic Church may have been wrong in confusing the Mary the sinner with Mary Magdalene, but that does not prove the countless historically known lies told in the Da Vinci Code.
Well, then there now - you got one sentence right - 1 out 7 or so ain't bad.
For a whopper of a 'conspiracy story', read floridaobservor's post # 260.
On second thought, never mind. No one is gonna confuse you with the truth ;o)
irishjuggler is correct.
The winner!
best post yet.....
(betcha get flamed)
Oh just minor heresy.
The book suggests he not only was married and fathered children, but that he did not die on the cross, was not resurrected, was not the son of God.
I have no problem with anyone believing that. In fact, if you want to believe he was bisexual, and did all his apostles as well, it's OK with me if you believe that. I am only trying to make the point that those beliefs are not compatible with what one normally means as "faith in Christ". Why have faith in a guy who was not God?
Why would he want to silence criticism of his book when that criticism stirs up interest and free publicity?
I have never seen or heard anything said by Brown that indicates he thinks Christ and Mary Magdalene really had a child. Where are you getting this?
Actually, the movie isn't doing better than the critics predicted. Most critics think the film sucks but figured it would do well given its cult following.
You don't need an editor as much as you need a historian.
I guess the pull of popular culture is irresistible, we have to connect, we have to belong, we have to be part of it. Boycott? Are you crazy? Can't boycott Disneyland because of the Fag Days there, and can't boycott Sex in the City, neither. No, the book is not "well written", no, it's not just "FICTION", and no, you really don't have to read it, don't have to see the movie! What a concept! You mean I don't have to read what every semi-literate peasant out here does?
####No one is gonna confuse you with the truth####
Because I don't find the truth confusing.
There are several believers on this thread. Have you read Dan Brown's web page? He clearly indicates he believes the theories in his book. Lots of people, especially the anti-Catholic/Christian types, eat up this stuff and buy into it.
Apparently, some here think it is them. Totally pious and without sin they are; the rest of us deserve to rot in hell.
You're correct. I know a couple of Brown cultists. They think Brown's a genius and that he really did conduct years of historical research through libraries and archives. And that he made the shocking discovery that Christianity has been fake all along. That the Son of Man was really the Con of Man. What's more, they think Brown himself believes all this garbage.
That's where the comparison to Michael Moore is really appropriate. Moore's really slavish followers not only believe him, but believe Moore himself really believes the nonsense he puts in his books and films. Neither Moore nor Brown believe their assertions, but they've hit a cash cow by peddling those assertions to the gullible.
Yep and it is getting to the point after nearly 300 posts, that there are a couple posters who it is not worth discussing it anymore with.
Brown may say he believes his theories, but he has to say that to appear credible to his followers. He no doubt laughs at them in private.
These are among the tools used by the Paulines against the gnostics. Also among the tools were torture, murder and genocide. Back in the day, when someone would say they were agnostic they were really saying, 'I'm not one of them, don't kill me'. Gnostics rule their own temple, something the Paulines don't appreciate.
The Pauline rage thing is the only reaction to accompany their insecurity.
I'm looking forward to next week when the next "blockbuster" knocks THE DA VINCI CON out of the number one spot. True Christianity will survive this scam, as it always has! Meanwhile, Brown will move on to his next project, which will deal apparently with Mormonism. Don't hold your breath waiting for him to tackle Islam! Hucksters often have chutzpah but never have balls. :-)
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.