OT - Finished "The DaVinci Code"

[Black_Knyght]

I've read this book - VERY, VERY GOOD !!!

Afterwards it inspired me to do some online research of my own, just out of the sake of curiousity. I was actually surprised by the number of REAL, CREDITABLE scientific endeavors to prove these connections, and the number of solid historically accurate links they connected because of that research. And interestingly enough, the number of attempts to not dispute, but block or stop, these efforts by both the Vatican and the Opus Dei. Opus Dei was actually ordered OUT of Morocco because of their actions.

Kind makes you wonder.....

[rdouglass]

Black_Knyght said:
...I was actually surprised by the number of REAL, CREDITABLE scientific endeavors to prove these connections, and the number of solid historically accurate links they connected because of that research...

I'd be interested in your results if you still have them. I have heard that the book only contains 3 things that are accurate:

1. Paris is in France.
2. London is in England
3. Jesus Christ walked this earth.

I'm sure that's the extreme view either way but I would be interested in your findings nonetheless.

[Hunpecked]

Some of the objections to the "history" in the book and movie are covered here:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar.../22davinci.htm

Personally I doubt the movie has any more historical fact than the Indiana Jones movies, but as pure entertainment it may well be worth a Netflix slot.

[Captain Kwok]

Perhaps not unexpected, but the early ratings on rottentomatoes.com show the movie as 0 for 7 thus far.

[Black_Knyght]

I think that one of the most fundemental points here, despite all the controversy, is getting lost.

This is, and has been billed as, a work of FICTION. A work of fiction based on researched, documented, debated, and disputed facts. The church stands of one side, swearing it's all lies. Some scholars and scientists have stood on the other and defended their findings.

And, through it all, Dan Brown and Ron Howard have made no bones about this being anything other than a work of fiction.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

What, exactly, are they *claiming?

* Calling it fiction sounds like a convenient excuse so they don't have to defend their claims, to me.

[Black_Knyght]

narf poit chez BOOM said:
What, exactly, are they *claiming?

* Calling it fiction sounds like a convenient excuse so they don't have to defend their claims, to me.

That's the point here: What EXACTLY have you ACTUALLY heard publically, from either Dan Brown or Ron Howard ???

There's a ton of controversy, speculation, and commentary out there right now, but little if any word from the specific sources of it all. And the book WAS published as a work of fiction

Dan Brown based that fiction on ideas both popular and unpopular, true enough. The part that sends me rolling to the floor is how EVERYBODY is making such a big deal over a novel that NEVER stated, absolutely & definitively, that it was a work of historical, social, or scientific fact.

[Renegade 13]

I think the greatest problem with this issue was various groups condemning it. That just made more people curious about what was being condemned, when if nothing had been said about it, they never would have given it a second glance. Public condemnation of a book/movie or controversy of any sort serve to just draw more attention to the subject of condemnation and lines the pockets of the authers even more.

In a case like this, those who don't like it would have been better off leaving it entirely alone, and not making a fuss. That's the best way to kill something you don't like; ignore it.