The Davinci Code

[Aenlic]

What I've read on the matter suggests that the Friday 13th superstition is directly related to the arrests of the Templars in France on Friday, October 13th, 1307. But there is some support for it having to do with the Norse gods numbering 12 at a feast in Valhalla when Loki, number 13 and uninvited, came in with the end result being the death of Balder, the god of joy.

In looking further I found this about.com article which seems to cover just about everything, http://urbanlegends.about.com/cs/his...the_13th_4.htm

[Brenus]

Whatever the real roots, Friday the 13th was really a bad day for the Templar.

[Aenlic]

Have to agree there. Going from an organization more powerful and rich than any country in Europe to nothing in the blink of an eye must've left many of them looking like shell-shocked refugees in a bombed out WWII city.

[edyzmedieval]

It's a commercial masterpiece. It got to the public because of the religion fact. Simple as that.

Although, the Templar Mystery must be read though.

[AwesomeArcher]

I read the book, it was pretty good. I liked the action. I also read one of Dan Brown's other books Angels and Demons. I think that was better than the Davinci Code. Has anyone seen the movie yet. I plan to see it sometime this weekend, it has already made a load of money both in the U.S. and Worldwide.

[Aenlic]

I went to see it today. It won't rank on my list of great movies; but it was certainly entertaining. It remained mostly faithful to the book except for minor detail near the end dealing with Sophie's family. It might seem a bit confusing to those who haven't read the book, or who don't know the details of books like Holy Blood, Holy Grail; but at this point, many millions have read the book.

Ian McKellan is wonderful. There is some nice humor in there as well. Tom Hanks actually seems credible as Langston, which surprised me. I'd much rather have seen one of the original people up for the part of Sophie, Sophie Marceau, get the role; but that's just because I'm a big fan of Marceau. Jean Reno is wonderful as the French police detective, too.

The book was entertaining and so was the movie. Are either masterpieces of literature or film? No. But it was worth the price of admission.

[AwesomeArcher]

I saw the movie just a few hours ago, i would give it 4 1/2 stars. It follows the books really well and the actors fit the book pretty well. I would recommmend seeing it. I dont really see what all the fuss is about the whole movie. My friend is a catholic and he said that his pastor put a message in their bulliton saying that they should not see the movie. I think they are missing the whole meaning of the world fiction. I go to church every week (Luthran) and i had no trouble watching the movie, it is just a well written, thought out, and clever fiction book/movie.

[naut]

IMHO, it is almost as BS as the Harry Potter series. Except that the Harry Potter series was fun to some degree.

It was a great FICTION book, and that is what most people don't understand. If they need proof its FICTION, they can take their gullible *** to any library and see where it is shelved!

Sure its a therom. In the same way that by me saying, that the world is actually a giant Paw-Paw and the reality we have is just a holograph displayed from a electronic paving-stone, is also a therom.

And I think I should lend Dan Brown $10 to get some writing lessons, his literrary skills are almost as bad as Tim Winton's, and don't get me started on him!.

Yey Ranting!

EDIT: Very clever Aenlic, I love the fact I spelt "literrary" wrong!

[Aenlic]

Oh, the irony. The irony is killing me!

[edyzmedieval]

I started reading the Templar Revelation, and I have to say, it's really breathtaking. It captives me, for some unknown reason.

Reading.

[edyzmedieval]

I started reading the Templar Revelation, and I have to say, it's really breathtaking. It captives me, for some unknown reason.

Reading.

[Enoch]

Aaron’s rod is going to show where Magdalene’s tomb is

Am I correct?

You are...

I was just having a little fun.

[AwesomeArcher]

IMHO, it is almost as BS as the Harry Potter series. Except that the Harry Potter series was fun to some degree.

It was a great FICTION book, and that is what most people don't understand. If they need proof its FICTION, they can take their gullible *** to any library and see where it is shelved!

Sure its a therom. In the same way that by me saying, that the world is actually a giant Paw-Paw and the reality we have is just a holograph displayed from a electronic paving-stone, is also a therom.

And I think I should lend Dan Brown $10 to get some writing lessons, his literrary skills are almost as bad as Tim Winton's, and don't get me started on him!.

Yey Ranting!

Apparently the millions of people who have bought the book and watched the movie dont think he needs writing lessons.

[ZombieFriedNuts]

It was the controversy that made people bye the book

[AwesomeArcher]

It was the controversy that made people bye the book

Yes, i agree that the controversy played a big part, but it takes good writing skills to create that kind of controversy.

[Keba]

I think evidence tells a different tale ... you do not need good writing skills to make a popular controversy that will be literally swallowed by the common masses uh ... I'd better stop now.

[Aenlic]

Yeah, I mean look at the Bible. Terrible writing. But people believe it, in spite of reason and lack of evidence; because they're told it's true. Proof positive that people will believe just about anything if you package it right.

[naut]

Its popular culture. It doesn't mean it is automatically good if bought by the millions of systematic drones in our society who follow popular culture no matter what. It is similar to modern art, to make modern art all you need to do is **** on a canvas, and hey presto you've made a masterpiece.

And I am saying this in regard to the Da Vinci Code, not the Bible

[Aenlic]

Why? The Da Vinci Code phenomenon is no more an artifact of popular culture and gullibility than the Bible. How is it so different for one writer to take a bunch of fiction and mix in a little fact and sell it to the credulous masses than for a group of religious prelates to do it? In many ways, making an anthology of a bunch of unproven stories, leaving some out and changing others, then presenting the result to the popular culture as "the word of God" and therefore the absolute truth is very little different than what Dan Brown did. And both Dan Brown and the church got rich doing it, at the expense of the gullible, believe-anything-they're-told, unwashed and unthinking masses.

I find the modern result rather amusing. Especially when I see religious believers, especially priests and bishops and such, on TV denouncing the Da Vinci Code as badly written fiction and unproven conjecture made to sell to the masses because it directly contradicts another badly written work of fiction and unproven conjecture made to sell to the masses. And they do it with straight faces, apparently completely unaware of the irony.

[Monk]

Greetings forum goers. i'd like to take this opportunity to post a friendly reminder in this thread to stay on the topic of the op's intent. This isn't directed at anyone, just think of it as a little deterence.

[Aenlic]

What are everyone's thoughts on the Davinci Code. I know it stirred up a lot of questions in me. It was a very intriguing book.

The original post.

Everything so far looks on topic to me.

[naut]

No Aenlic, I was replying to Keba's post. And you posted just as / just before I posted. So I thought it would be appropriate that I state that I was refering to what was being said before, not to what you said.

An interesting theory/train of thought none-the-less.

It is MHO that the Da Vinci Code is ... for the lack of a good English word ... entsetzlich, and literature is all based on opinion. So people can view it in anyway they wish.

[Aenlic]

Ah, I understand Rythmic! My apologies.

I need to work on my miserable German language skills. My ancestors from Schornsheim would be appalled. What is the closest English language equivalent to entsetzlich? Ist es idiomatisch?

Ah, I figured it out. Terrible? Well, I found the book entertaining. It isn't up to the standards of literary perfection perhaps. For that I go to authors like Neil Gaiman or Kim Stanley Robinson; but it was entertaining enough to keep me reading. Of course, I read Holy Blood, Holy Grail when it came out in the early 1980's; so I was already familiar with the premise of the book. As fiction goes, it is about the average, I'd say. But then, I absolutely hated some works that are supposed to be classics, like Madame Bovary and Les Miserables; so I'm no expert on good literature.

[naut]

No need to apologise.

Nein. Es ist nicht idiomatisch. Es bedeutet "Appalling", "Horrible" und "Abysmal". Aber ist die beste Bedeutung "Bloodcurdling".

I am glad you found it entertaining, as that is what a fiction book is for. To entertain the reader. Unfortunatly I was not entertained by it. In regards to other literature, yes some of it is entirely BS and boring. But then again some is good. And it all is in relation to opinion.

Oh yes, and looking back I realised what was so ironic!

[Rosacrux redux]

Nein. Es ist nicht idiomatisch. Es bedeutet "Appalling", "Horrible" und "Abysmal". Aber ist die beste Bedeutung "Bloodcurdling".

Genau!

I would agree with those stating that a best-seller is not automatically "good" nor its author can be regarded as even decent because of its sales. D.B. is a smart guy, with a decent background in apocryphal stuff, very decent at PRing his work, with a good intuition for controversy, but frankly as a writer he is ...well... schrecklich

The book is rather silly, and I didn't even bother to watch the film, although I should thank both DB and the filmmakers, for they provided my to-be-published (coming Monday) monography about the Knights Templar with lots and lots of free publicity.

Too bad most people who'll buy the book motivated by DVC shall be dissapointed, because I only devote 7 pages to the "mysteries" surrounding the Order... the rest is just plain history

[Aenlic]

History is always good. At the very least, some might be motivated to learn more about the Templars and end up learning some actual facts! The way I see it, if only 1 out of 100 people actually come away from the book or movie with an itch to learn more and end up discovering how to separate the fact from the fantasy, then we're better off than we'd be without the interest. Some scenes from the movie certainly seem to at least arouse some interest. There's a wonderful overhead shot down to the Temple Church in London, showing the wonderful statue of two knights on a horse. Maybe it will tempt people find out why that is?

[Rosacrux redux]

Then they should read my book! I say all about it!

Actually, they'd better check out some decent books about the templar, and not the sensationalist crap and uber-hyped apocryphal bull ...they should check out Malcolm Barber's work, for instance! Aside from the primary sources I managed to get my hands on, his "the new knighthood" and "trial of the templars" were my best sources while writing my own little book.

[AwesomeArcher]

I think evidence tells a different tale ... you do not need good writing skills to make a popular controversy that will be literally swallowed by the common masses uh ... I'd better stop now.

But than couldn't anybody write a book that sells millions of copies? That is my last comment on whether Dan Brown is good writer or not, as it is purly opinion and you can think what ever you wish as rythemic said I agree with you on your other point rythemic modern art is junk (again just my opinion), sorry if off topic.

[AntiochusIII]

But than couldn't anybody write a book that sells millions of copies? That is my last comment on whether Dan Brown is good writer or not, as it is purly opinion and you can think what ever you wish as rythemic said I agree with you on your other point rythemic modern art is junk (again just my opinion), sorry if off topic.

Argumentum ad populum et ad numerum.

That's all I have to say.

[naut]

Argumentum ad populum et ad numerum.

That's all I have to say.

"Proof to populace and to total."

Um, what does it mean?