All this broo-ha-ha over the "DaVinci Code"

[Howzit]

BTW, any of you that don't believe in exactly what I believe in are completely wrong and misguided, and I hate you.

You forgot the "will burn in hell" part.

[sanantoniosooner]

They don't serve breakfast in hell.

[etouffee]

BTW, any of you that don't believe in exactly what I believe in are completely wrong and misguided, and I hate you.But um, won't you be joining us in Hell as punishment for your hatred?

[crawfish]

They don't serve breakfast in hell.

They have a buffet, but you always have to go behind the snot-nosed family that uses their hands to get the food.

[etouffee]

the ones who keep going back to the buffet with dirty plates instead of getting a new one each trip? i hate those people.

[OU4LIFE]

But um, won't you be joining us in Hell as punishment for your hatred?

not according to my faith. Which changes with the wind. Burn in hellers.

[etouffee]

Twisted Sister had a song called Burn in Hell.

[OU4LIFE]

oooooh they are going to hell for that.

[OU4LIFE]

unless the song was just fiction, then it's ok.

[etouffee]

well it has at least some factual basis. Twisted Sister did exist, after all.

[BlondeSoonerGirl]

And listening to some of their stuff really was hell...

[SleestakSooner]

"What are you gonna do with your strife?!"

[Sooner_Bob]

You obviously missed the Tilde Swinton thread. :D



If it happened within the last couple of weeks I probably did. :(

[Sooner24]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12822855/

[GDC]

I read Angels and Demons, I refuse to give Dan Brown anymore of my money.

[critical_phil]

I read Angels and Demons, I refuse to give Dan Brown anymore of my money.


i'm looking forward to seeing the DaVinci Code.


probably when it's release on DVD ~Thanksgiving......

[proud gonzo]

I can't wait to see the movie. I don't care about any of the controversy. it's a fictional novel and I thought it was a darn entertaining one too.

[Sooner24]

From that story the book is way better then the movie.

[Norm In Norman]

Again, I thought the book was OK but predictable. I was hoping the movie might be better. I'm not really going to base anything on one review though. It doesn't really seem like a Cannes Film Festival sort of movie. They prefer movies about gay cowboys.

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

We went to a church a while back that was pimping the movie "uhh. I forget, something about a spear" from the pulpit.

It was a pretty horrible movie.

[sooneron]

I don't expect a lot from the movie. Especially with the hype. I agree the book was pretty ok, but predictable.

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

End of the spear:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/end_of_the_spear/

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

Hey, if nothing else, it's kind of created a cottage industry among Christian writers. Have you seen how many books/blogs/etc. are out there addressing this book/movie? This is neither good nor bad in my opinion.

[proud gonzo]

it annoys me that people aren't able to separate fiction and reality in their minds though.

[StoopTroup]

it annoys me that people aren't able to separate fiction and reality in their minds though.
Thus the RRSO every year is so interesting when you know who shows up...:texan:


:D

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

it annoys me that people aren't able to separate fiction and reality in their minds though.

I know, I told my daughter to go clean up her play-doh and I called her by name. She said, "My name is Cinderella."

[StoopTroup]

Cinderalla had some mean sistas!

[Sooner24]

DON'T FORGET THAT STEP-MOM. :eek:

[soonerbrat]

I can't wait to see the movie. I don't care about any of the controversy. it's a fictional novel and I thought it was a darn entertaining one too.


i'm with you, sistah!

i'm seeing it friday in dallas.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Again, I thought the book was OK but predictable. I was hoping the movie might be better. I'm not really going to base anything on one review though. It doesn't really seem like a Cannes Film Festival sort of movie. They prefer movies about gay cowboys.Don't be too surprised if ridiculing Christianity is ample reason for an award at Cannes.

[SOONER44EVER]

From that story the book is way better then the movie.
The book is almost always better than the movie. I read it but I still want to see it.

[SicEmBaylor]

The book is almost always better than the movie. I read it but I still want to see it.

This is true except when they write a book based on the movie. That always SUCCS.

[SOONER44EVER]

This is true except when they write a book based on the movie. That always SUCCS.
Very true. Jurassic Park and The Silence of the Lambs were 2 of the best movies I've seen after reading the book.

[OU4LIFE]

The only movie I've ever seen that was equal to the book.....Shawshank Redemption....and the only reason I think it worked, it was a short story by King, not a full length book. IMO most full length books are too hard to convert into movies because you have to leave stuff out. Books are WAY more detail oriented. A movie would have to be 9 hours long to fit in everything the book had.

But I still want to see TDC. I'll probably try to hit a matinee after it's been out a week or so.

[etouffee]

it annoys me that people aren't able to separate fiction and reality in their minds though.Amen.

[etouffee]

Don't be too surprised if ridiculing Christianity is ample reason for an award at Cannes.Unless the movie is a radical departure from the book, it doesn't ridicule Christianity. It presents some alternative theories about the history of Christianity in a fictional context. And it got a very poor reception when it was screened at Cannes, so it's highly unlikely to win anything.

[crawfish]

it annoys me that people aren't able to separate fiction and reality in their minds though.

I prefer my reality with a heavy dose of fiction.

[OklahomaTuba]

Its a fun story, but Tom Hanks looks horrible in the pictures! Is he sick or something?
http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20060516/i/r2570364476.jpg

[Veritas]

I would rather paper cut my eyeballs than read another one of Dan Brown's literary abortions, and I'd rather gouge out my paper-cutted-up eyes with a spoon that watch a movie based on said abortions.

Gawd I hate that hack.

[GDC]

Bailing out of helicopters at several thousand feet using a blanket as a parachute pretty much ruined it for me. I don't give a flip about any of the religious bs.

[critical_phil]

Bailing out of helicopters at several thousand feet using a blanket as a parachute pretty much ruined it for me. I don't give a flip about any of the religious bs.


it was a tarp!!!111!!!


it's just a book. if you read fiction, dan brown is better than most. predictable, yes. exaggerated, yes. but isn't most fiction? i'm no DB fan. at the very least, he brings up things that might make me do a little non-fiction reading (like looking up a certain work of art mentioned in his stories...)

veritas is ill from drinking the kool-aid in lincoln. he'll believe bill callahan saying championships are in the future....but he won't read dan brown.

it's sad really................

[sooneron]

Dan Simmons pwns Dan Brown

[crawfish]

Digital Fortress was ok. As long as Brown sticks to cryptography (his specialty), he's actually quite good. It's those pesky characters, plots and research that tends to throw him off.

I'm not sure I'll read another Brown novel. Too many other books on my plate more worthy.

[Veritas]

it was a tarp!!!111!!!


it's just a book. if you read fiction, dan brown is better than most. predictable, yes. exaggerated, yes. but isn't most fiction? i'm no DB fan. at the very least, he brings up things that might make me do a little non-fiction reading (like looking up a certain work of art mentioned in his stories...)

veritas is ill from drinking the kool-aid in lincoln. he'll believe bill callahan saying championships are in the future....but he won't read dan brown.

it's sad really................
Phil, you're killing me. Dan Brown writes pure ****. And worse yet, it's the same **** over and over, with different characters.

You're right, most fiction is crap, but that meants that being better than most isn't really an accomplishment.

If one wants to read decent fiction, there is great writing out there to be found. Just gotta know that the NYT Bestseller list is like the "Top 40" of music: it's not what's good, it's what's popular.

[Veritas]

Digital Fortress was ok. As long as Brown sticks to cryptography (his specialty), he's actually quite good.
Have you read Cryptonomicon by Neal Stephenson? If you like crypto, it's pretty cool, and unlike Digital Fortress, it actually involves plausible concepts.

[critical_phil]

Phil, you're killing me. Dan Brown writes pure ****. And worse yet, it's the same **** over and over, with different characters.
...
If one wants to read decent fiction, there is great writing out there to be found. Just gotta know that the NYT Bestseller list is like the "Top 40" of music: it's not what's good, it's what's popular.

i was just breaking your balls a little bit. trust me, i see your point. here's mine:

we, as a society, will do just about anything for entertainment's sake. of the mindless, idiotic entertainment choices available, dan brown books are nowhere near the top of the list on the stupidity scale. (see: britney spears, big brother 14, ben stiller movies, big & rich, world paintball championships on ESPN, etc, etc, blah, blah).

how many movies do you watch per year? 25? 50? 100? how many are actually worth investing 2 hours in? probably a half-dozen or so. if you want to bitch about shelling out $50 to take mrs. V to see stepford wives, fine - cause it was retarded. just don't act like TDC is on the same moranic level...

dan brown books are an easy read. not nearly as good as some, not nearly as bad as others. i certainly wouldn't call him (and his wife, apparently) a hack. it's decent entertainment value.

i guess i'm saying dan brown = minor league hockey of literature......

[47straight]

Unless the movie is a radical departure from the book, it doesn't ridicule Christianity. It presents some alternative theories about the history of Christianity in a fictional context. And it got a very poor reception when it was screened at Cannes, so it's highly unlikely to win anything.


So painting conservative catholics as murdering, plotting villians determing to hide the truth is just harmless teasing?

[soonerhubs]

Is someone telling me Middle Earth is not real? :eek:

[etouffee]

So painting conservative catholics as murdering, plotting villians determing to hide the truth is just harmless teasing?
fiction.

F. I. C. T. I. O. N.

fiction.

come on, say it with me, real slow:

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick shuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnnnn.

Then, um, keep saying it over and over til you get it.

Do you get this outraged when members of other groups are the ficticious villians in fictional books and movies, or just when it's one you're sympathetic to?

[King Crimson]

i thought the movie of Fight Club was better than the book--just to offer one example in reverse.

there certainly aren't many.

[crawfish]

Have you read Cryptonomicon by Neal Stephenson? If you like crypto, it's pretty cool, and unlike Digital Fortress, it actually involves plausible concepts.

I do admit, Stephenson is a MUCH better writer and knows his stuff better than Brown. It's not nearly as accessible to your everyday reader, though.

[Norm In Norman]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/

Right now (with only 7 reviews, mind you) it has a 0%. i find it hard to believe that it's worse than like Elektra, which has a 7% there. i guess we'll see when there are more reviews if it's better than that.

[etouffee]

it probably sucks. ron howard has a flare for the hokey and melodramatic, and tom hanks was absolutely the wrong choice for the lead. clearly howard wanted the biggest "name" star he could get, and all i can figure is the rest of the A-list declined or had other obligations.

[JohnnyMack]

Don't be too surprised if ridiculing Christianity is ample reason for an award at Cannes.

Zero percent at Rotten Tomatoes, panned at Cannes. Looks like your martyr routine failed.

The movie apparently just sucks.

[etouffee]

Don't be too surprised if ridiculing Christianity is ample reason for an award at Cannes.Odd. Isn't it usually Christian conservatives who like to cast scorn on other people for being "perpetual victims"?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Zero percent at Rotten Tomatoes, panned at Cannes. Looks like your martyr routine failed.

The movie apparently just sucks.How did the Michael Moore movie do at Cannes? What is Rotten Tomatoes?

[Mjcpr]

How did the Michael Moore movie do at Cannes? What is Rotten Tomatoes?
It's technically a fruit that is long beyond the ripe stage but that's not important right now.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Odd. Isn't it usually Christian conservatives who like to cast scorn on other people for being "perpetual victims"?Yes, but mostly when they are playing the "victim card", politically. Do you think the movie-making community is either fair to, or gives favorable treatment to Christians?

[SoonerInKCMO]

Yes, but mostly when they are playing the "victim card", politically. Do you think the movie-making community is either fair to, or gives favorable treatment to Christians?

Fair, yes. Favorable, no.

;)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

It's technically a fruit that is long beyond the ripe stage but that's not important right now.I get the impression that JohnnyMack was referring to something else...but thanks.

[JohnnyMack]

How did the Michael Moore movie do at Cannes? What is Rotten Tomatoes?

What does the Michael Moore movie have to do the price of tea in China?

Subject = over here.

You = left field.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

What does the Michael Moore movie have to do the price of tea in China?

Subject = over here.

You = left field.Sorry you can't or won't make the connection. Thank you for your bitter answer, too.

[JohnnyMack]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com

It's a website that summarizes the reviews of movies.

Some people use it as a gauge as to how good a movie may or may not be. The reviews are by Leftist semi-communist media writers and Hollywood types who spend most of their free time performing drive-by shootings on various and sundry Christian churches.

Anyways, those evil-doers have relentlessly panned the Da Vinci Code as a bad movie.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com

It's a website that summarizes the reviews of movies.

Some people use it as a gauge as to how good a movie may or may not be. The reviews are by Leftist semi-communist media writers and Hollywood types who spend most of their free time performing drive-by shootings on various and sundry Christian churches.

Anyways, those evil-doers have relentlessly panned the Da Vinci Code as a bad movie.OK

[SoonerInKCMO]

I get the impression that JohnnyMack was referring to something else...but thanks.

Ummm... have you not seen the movie "Airplane"?

[etouffee]

Yes, but mostly when they are playing the "victim card", politically.What's the difference between playing the victim card politically and playing it religiously? At the end of the day it's the same thing: whining that someone else is pushing you down when they aren't, just to draw attention and sympathy to yourself.


Do you think the movie-making community is either fair to, or gives favorable treatment to Christians?I'm inclined to say historically, movies have been overwhelmingly biased in favor of Chrisitians and their religion, but I'd have to put a little time and research into it before I'd commit to a definitive answer. Regardless, I really don't see any reason whatsoever why they would have any obligation to be fair to or give favorable treatment to Christians. Do you?

[GDC]

it was a tarp!!!111!!!


it's just a book. if you read fiction, dan brown is better than most. predictable, yes. exaggerated, yes. but isn't most fiction? i'm no DB fan. at the very least, he brings up things that might make me do a little non-fiction reading (like looking up a certain work of art mentioned in his stories...)

veritas is ill from drinking the kool-aid in lincoln. he'll believe bill callahan saying championships are in the future....but he won't read dan brown.

it's sad really................

Oh yeah, it was a tarp. What I meant was I'm not offended by any of the religious stuff, I don't care about that one way or the other.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

What's the difference between playing the victim card politically and playing it religiously? At the end of the day it's the same thing: whining that someone else is pushing you down when they aren't, just to draw attention and sympathy to yourself.

Regardless, I really don't see any reason whatsoever why they would have any obligation to be fair to or give favorable treatment to Christians. Do you? Hollywood, in recent years, has ridiculed Christianity a lot more than they have treated it favorably. No argument from most people. I don't think the comparison of pointing that out to playing victim cards for political gain is a fair comparison, because it's pointing out a fact compared to pointing out probable bull*hit, in most cases.
I don't know of anyone saying that Hollywood has any obligation to be either fair to or favorable to Christians. There is no evidence they will likely be in the foreseeable(sp?) future.

[etouffee]

Hollywood, in recent years, has ridiculed Christianity a lot more than they have treated it favorably. Sorry, can't just accept that at face value. Can you support that with details?



No argument from most people.You've talked to "most people" about their views on this? Where'd you find the time?


I don't think the comparison of pointing that out to playing victim cards for political gain is a fair comparison, because it's pointing out a fact compared to pointing out probable bull*hit, in most cases.It's not a fact, it's your opinion.


I don't know of anyone saying that Hollywood has any obligation to be either fair to or favorable to Christians.
No, but you're sure as hell bending over backwards to IMPLY it by your last few posts, even if you're not saying it.

[slickdawg]

I heard Ron Howard on the radio coming back from the hospital, he
was sounding very similar to W on Iraq in his defense of the movie.

Well, if it offends you, don't watch it, until you have a friend that watches it and tells you about it, so you can make a good decision for you.

[etouffee]

little opie cunningham

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Etouffee, we apparently either read and hear almost a totally different set of data, at least on this issue, or we interpret that data differently. It doesn't seem we agree on much here. I do like crawfish and shrimp. Is it safe to say we agree on that? Whichever, "laissez le bon to roulet"(sp.?).

[mrowl]

isn't this kind of obvious? a VERY poorly written book, should probably make a bad movie.

[etouffee]

Etouffee, we apparently either read and hear almost a totally different set of data, at least on this issue, or we interpret that data differently. what data are you talking about? that's what i was asking you for. you say recently hollywood portrays christians/christianity in a bad light more often than in a favorable one, and i'm simply asking you to back it up. i didn't mean the request in a nasty way, i'm genuinely interested in what you're basing that on.


It doesn't seem we agree on much here. I do like crawfish and shrimp. Is it safe to say we agree on that? Whichever, "laissez le bon to roulet"(sp.?).Doesn't everybody?

[handcrafted]

Etouffee, we apparently either read and hear almost a totally different set of data, at least on this issue, or we interpret that data differently. It doesn't seem we agree on much here. I do like crawfish and shrimp. Is it safe to say we agree on that? Whichever, "laissez le bon to roulet"(sp.?).

Don't bother with Etouffee, Will. He's got the hate on for us. He'll ask you for data to back up your statements, attack your logic, but when the tables get turned and you try to hold him to the same standard, he'll start with the hysterics and name-calling. Typical lib humanist "Barbra Streisand."

[etouffee]

isn't this kind of obvious? a VERY poorly written book, should probably make a bad movie.poorly written by what standard? yes, it's crap when compared to great works of literature, but it does hold its own next to 90% of contemporary mystery/thriller genre books.

[etouffee]

Don't bother with handcrafted, Will. He's got the hate on for anyone who doesn't share his extremist, fanatical religious views. He'll ask you for data to back up your statements, attack your logic, tell lies in the name of his god for the sake of winning arguments on the internet, but when the tables get turned and you try to hold him to the same standard, he'll start with the hysterics and name-calling. Typical rightwing wackjob "Michael Savage".

Fixed.

YWIA.

[handcrafted]

Fixed.

Michael Savage is Jewish.

And I don't hate you. Since when does informing someone that they're wrong about a certain subject = hating? Oh, I forgot, in this relativistic post-modern PC world we live in, everybody can have their own truth, so it's bad form to say anyone's wrong about anything. 2+2=5 is okay.

You, OTOH, called me a liar and some other names in the other TDC thread.

[etouffee]

Which has no bearing on him being a rightwing wackjob. But if it's easier to get your mind around it, you can substitute Falwell.

In any case, thanks for coming along and injecting your negativity and personal attacks into our heretofore civil discussion. I'm sure that's um, exactly what Jesus would do.

[slickdawg]

Also on the radio, they said that the Catholic Church is really ****ed off at the movie.

Maybe they'll give it up for lent?

[NormanPride]

What the hell happened to this thread? Are people complaining that Hollywood has an agenda against Christianity? The tinfoil hat thread is this way (http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69434).

Besides, I thought TDC was a fictional novel about exposing religious secrets, not mocking the faith...

[etouffee]

And I don't hate you. Yet it's perfectly ok for you to tell other people I hate them (see your post above), when I've said nothing of the sort. Who the hell said you get to play by different rules?


Since when does informing someone that they're wrong about a certain subject = hating? Well I've informed you of your wrongness on numerous occasions and apparently you've interpreted it as hate, so perhaps you're in a better position to answer that question.


Oh, I forgot, in this relativistic post-modern PC world we live in, everybody can have their own truth, so it's bad form to say anyone's wrong about anything. 2+2=5 is okay.yes, judging by your argumentative style on this topic, that appears to be the case. whatever you say is truth, whatever anyone else says is wrong, and you have a duty to arrogantly inform them they're wrong and not provide any substance to back it up.


You, OTOH, called me a liar and some other names in the other TDC thread.Yes, and you called me a number of names in that thread as well, in addition to showing up out of the blue in this thread and calling me a "lib" (I'm not) and "Barbara Striesand" and telling people I hate them (I don't). Again, who the hell said you get to play by different rules, mr. holier than thou?

[NormanPride]

etouffee told me he hated my haircut. It made me cry. :(

[etouffee]

I was just kidding.

ok, I wasn't.

But don't cry. It'll grow back.

[TUSooner]

fiction.

F. I. C. T. I. O. N.

fiction.

come on, say it with me, real slow:

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick shuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnnnn.

Then, um, keep saying it over and over til you get it.

Do you get this outraged when members of other groups are the ficticious villians in fictional books and movies, or just when it's one you're sympathetic to?
I dunno, but maybe somebody needs to tell DAN BROWN that there's a difference between fact & "fick-shun." If Dan was up-front and said, "yeah, but that old Merovingian conspiracy hoax makes a good story" then nobody would get their skivvies in a wad.
But I think we've done plowed this ground.

[Scott D]

this thread amuses me more than the other one.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Don't bother with Etouffee, Will. He's got the hate on for us. He'll ask you for data to back up your statements, attack your logic, but when the tables get turned and you try to hold him to the same standard, he'll start with the hysterics and name-calling. Typical lib humanist "Barbra Streisand."I don't feel like hashing this out ad nauseum.

[etouffee]

Nor do I. I was hoping to have a well-reasoned, civil discussion, but then Holy Handcraft showed up and started flinging insults to turn all the attention to himself again. He does that quite a bit. I'm guessing he doesn't get any, but it could be something else.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Nor do I. I was hoping to have a well-reasoned, civil discussion, but then Holy Handcraft showed up and started flinging insults to turn all the attention to himself again. He does that quite a bit. I'm guessing he doesn't get any, but it could be something else.Yeah, and it's obvious we disagree. I'm okay with that.
So, are you an LSU fan, or what?

[picasso]

Sorry, can't just accept that at face value. Can you support that with details?


You've talked to "most people" about their views on this? Where'd you find the time?

It's not a fact, it's your opinion.


No, but you're sure as hell bending over backwards to IMPLY it by your last few posts, even if you're not saying it.
dude, c'monnnnnn. it's common to make fun of stuffy conservative Christians, anywhere from the movies to sitcoms to even The Simpsons.
I could care less, it's more or less providence.
I'm a thick skinned type and I've come to expect much of it.
kinda like what Gandalf said recently to the question posed by Matt Lauer. He asked the actor if he thought the movie should have a disclaimer at the intro stating it's being fiction? to which Ian replied he thought the bible should have the same.

I totally agree many Christains need not be so stuffy and get a little dirty and gritty and get outside the comfort zone, but they also have a right to take offense.

[TUSooner]

Nor do I. I was hoping to have a well-reasoned, civil discussion, but then Holy Handcraft showed up and started flinging insults to turn all the attention to himself again. He does that quite a bit. I'm guessing he doesn't get any, but it could be something else.

...said the pot to the kettle.

[proud gonzo]

http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/data/media/1/8_ugly_people.jpg

[SOONER44EVER]

The only movie I've ever seen that was equal to the book.....Shawshank Redemption....and the only reason I think it worked, it was a short story by King, not a full length book. IMO most full length books are too hard to convert into movies because you have to leave stuff out. Books are WAY more detail oriented. A movie would have to be 9 hours long to fit in everything the book had.

But I still want to see TDC. I'll probably try to hit a matinee after it's been out a week or so.
I thought I had read all of King's stuff but I don't recall reading Shawshank. Was it in one of his collection books?

[OU4LIFE]

It was in the book Different Seasons, which also contains The Body, which was made into the film Stand By Me, and Apt Pupil, which was also made into a film by the same name. In that book it's actually called Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption.

[Mjcpr]

None of us really believe that you read anything, Harry.

[OU4LIFE]

good call.

it's braille

[sooneron]

The one inaccuracy about TDC that really bugs me is where Dan says the Louvre pyramid has 666 windows. It has 673! That's just **** poor lying or bad research. I equate it to a book about NYC that states the Empire State Building has 106 floors to make a story spookier.

[crawfish]

RottonTomatos rating is up to 21%...that's, like, infinitely better than yesterday. :D

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

Why is the number 106 spooky?

[sooneron]

Why is the number 106 spooky?
It's not really, unless I write a story whereby the number 106 is spooky, And lo and behold the Empire St Building holds the key to the secert.

[toast]

Why is the number 106 spooky?


oh

[toast]

Why is the number 106 spooky?



my

[toast]

Why is the number 106 spooky?



gosh!!!!


<---- post count!!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:


Is someone trying to tell me something????


:D

[picasso]

gosh!!!!


<---- post count!!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:


Is someone trying to tell me something????


:D

yes, now get down to the local bathouse and search for your next young male model.

[mrowl]

gordos column... :D :D

http://www.quickdfw.com/columnists/gkeith/stories/DN-pg3--gordoncolumn_18ick.ART.State.Edition1.1da4d35d.htm l

Newspaper Column: 'Da Vinci Code' is so crazy, it just may work

11:37 AM CDT on Thursday, May 18, 2006

By GORDON KEITH

Two years ago in a sunlit office on the West Coast ...


"Jennifer, could you send in Ron Howard please?" Bob turns to Pete. "Pete, you realize that this is Potsy, that little kid from Barney Griffith?"

"Really?" The two men settle into the couch under a Kandinsky print. "I'll be damned."

"Yeah. He's sensitive about it, so don't bring it up."

The door opens. Ron Howard is all smiles, buckteeth and bald head.

"Howard, good to see you! Sit down, sit down. Cocaine?"

"No thanks."

"Well, we have read the script for The Da Vinci Code, and we just love it. Don't we Bob?"

"Absolutely, Pete."

"Great stuff. Really great stuff," Bob says. "Now, we haven't really read the script, but we are familiar with your other films. Why don't you tell us what this one is about?"

Ron Howard is a little taken aback. "It's about hidden clues in the paintings of Leonardo Da Vinci that point all the way back to a conspiracy surrounding Jesus Christ," he says.

"Perfect, just perfect! Who does Jesus kill to get the paintings back?" Bob says.

"No one," Ron says.

"OK. I see, I see. He has them stolen from Him! By who? Carjackers?" Pete asks.

"No. Jesus is simply the backdrop of a present day mystery set in Europe," Ron says.

"People have heard of Jesus, so we get some great name recognition right there," says Bob. "But –and this is just talking you understand – couldn't we make sure we have a few explosions in there?"

"Maybe from carjackers," Pete adds.

"Perfect Pete," says Bob, "and since Jesus is from the Middle East, we should definitely put some terrorists in there!"

"But hot terrorists. I'm thinking Heath Ledger, with Ashton Kutcher as a wisecracking sidekick. And they are after Jesus' paintings because they heard he dissed them at a party."

"Yes! A party for 9/11 victims."

"What?" Ron says.

"Or maybe, since he is Jesus and all, an orphanage party, but we need something a little more hip than Leonardo Divinci. I am just thinking out loud here, but how about Kayne West?"

"Perfect, Bob!" says Pete. "Kayne West is an artist, say from Detroit, but instead of painting, he raps! Jesus hears that hot terrorist carjackers are going to shut down the 9/11 orphanage in Detroit, so he has a rap-off with Kayne West to keep the orphanage going and get his paintings back."

"What do you think, Ron?"

"You're both out of your minds. In the book, Jesus marries Mary Magdalene and they have a child whose offspring exists in France today."

Bob and Pete stare at Ron, then each other.

"Come on now, Ron. Let's not get crazy."

Pitch your film ideas to Gordon at [email protected]. Hear him audition for the part of wisecracking sidekick on "The Ticket" KTCK-AM (1310) weekdays from 6 to 10 a.m.

[Sooner24]

So how was the movie for those of you who went?

[Big Red Ron]

dude, c'monnnnnn. it's common to make fun of stuffy conservative Christians, anywhere from the movies to sitcoms to even The Simpsons.
I could care less, it's more or less providence.
I'm a thick skinned type and I've come to expect much of it.
kinda like what Gandalf said recently to the question posed by Matt Lauer. He asked the actor if he thought the movie should have a disclaimer at the intro stating it's being fiction? to which Ian replied he thought the bible should have the same.

I totally agree many Christains need not be so stuffy and get a little dirty and gritty and get outside the comfort zone, but they also have a right to take offense.Here, here.

[etouffee]

it's common to make fun of stuffy conservative Christians, anywhere from the movies to sitcoms to even The Simpsons...

...but they also have a right to take offense.It's common to make fun of all kinds of of groups in movies and tv. Gay people are often portrayed in overly-flamboyant ways. Overweight people are ridiculed to no end, as are unattractive people. Southerners are routinely depicted as poor, stupid, bigoted rednecks. Police officers are often depicted as bumbling, stumbling fools, and are just as often depicted as corrupt and even murderous. Any sense of respect for the POTUS and members of congress has long ago been discarded, as they are often as not portrayed as murderous villains with all manner of sinister agendas. Those are just a few examples.

Do you feel that every group that gets made fun of or portrayed in a negative light on tv or in a movie has a right to be offended, or are you one of those that is always saying people should lighten up and stop acting like victims all the time?

[Sooner24]

I would be offended to be with anyone from LSU.

[etouffee]

great answer

[Sooner_Bob]

http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/data/media/1/8_ugly_people.jpg



What the?

[royalfan5]

Clint Howard > Ron Howard

[Sooner24]

Clint Howard > Ron Howard


In what regard? :confused:

[royalfan5]

In what regard? :confused:
General awesomeness. Who would you rather party with Clint or Ron?

[soonerbrat]

So how was the movie for those of you who went?



it was ok. i was really sleepy when I saw it today and almost dozed off, but overall it was pretty good. of course the book was better. I"m not sure i'd know what the heck was going on if i hadn't read the book first.

and the screenwriter did his/her best to kind of make it less controversial than the book.

[Sooner24]

General awesomeness. Who would you rather party with Clint or Ron?


That's almost like asking how I would rather executed, hung or electrocuted.

[Howzit]

I thought it was pretty good.

People that feel it ventured too far from the book are unrealistic. Howard did about as well as could be expected in 2 1/2 hours.

[Scott D]

that one-fifth of an hour is always a deal maker or a deal breaker.

[Howzit]

I have no idea of what you speak.

;)

[Scott D]

It was in the book Different Seasons, which also contains The Body, which was made into the film Stand By Me, and Apt Pupil, which was also made into a film by the same name. In that book it's actually called Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption.

Different Seasons was his second best collection of short stories...The Bachman Books #1 forever ;)

[Big Red Ron]

General awesomeness. Who would you rather party with Clint or Ron?Uhm.. Ron?

[Scott D]

but Clint was THE ICE CREAM MAN!!!!

[soonerbrat]

I thought David Lee Roth was the Ice Cream Man

[SCOUT]

Different Seasons was his second best collection of short stories...The Bachman Books #1 forever ;)

The Long Walk is greatness. I read that story over 20 years ago and I still find myself wondering how fast I am walking.

To keep on topic, I am not a fan of The DaVinci Code. I have said it before and I will say it again. The DaVinci Code is a religious version of National Treasure. They both have some basis in reality but are embellished to the point of absurdity.

[yermom]

it was ok. i was really sleepy when I saw it today and almost dozed off, but overall it was pretty good. of course the book was better. I"m not sure i'd know what the heck was going on if i hadn't read the book first.

and the screenwriter did his/her best to kind of make it less controversial than the book.

i was kinda wondering about that, some parts seemed a bit weird... but i haven't read the book

[yermom]

It was in the book Different Seasons, which also contains The Body, which was made into the film Stand By Me, and Apt Pupil, which was also made into a film by the same name. In that book it's actually called Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption.

hmm... i should pick that up... 2/3 of those are movies i REALLY like, and Apt Pupil wasn't bad

[Scott D]

I thought David Lee Roth was the Ice Cream Man

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/11/231511.jpg

[soonerbrat]

i was kinda wondering about that, some parts seemed a bit weird... but i haven't read the book



in the movie, langdon, when hearing teabing talk about the Last Supper painting and other theories would argue "that's only a theory"

in the book, he did not.

[King Crimson]

I thought David Lee Roth was the Ice Cream Man

actually, Tom Waits did it before DLR. and a lot of other folks before TW.

[soonerbrat]

DLR was my favorite

[crawfish]

Different Seasons was his second best collection of short stories...The Bachman Books #1 forever ;)

The Long Walk was one of his creepiest stories ever...it'd make a boring movie, though. :)

[StoopTroup]

I thought David Lee Roth was the Ice Cream Man
http://www.kewadinsault.com/entertainment/calendar/events/images/DavidLeeRothEvent.jpghttp://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/tv_pix/teen/teen_choice_awards_2003_photos/stephen_collins/teen.jpg

My Wife says Stephen Collins looks like Roth.

I think Collins might be his Dad.

Talk amost yourselves. :D

[etouffee]

The Long Walk was one of his creepiest stories ever...it'd make a boring movie, though. :)I disagree. A couple hours of clean shots to the head could be kinda interesting.

[Scott D]

The Long Walk was one of his creepiest stories ever...it'd make a boring movie, though. :)

The Long Walk would make a very good story. Can you imagine how irate the william favors of the world would get over the USA being a Police State ;)

[Norm In Norman]

So ... I really can't wait until X3 comes out.

[Norm In Norman]

OK, I honestly thought that the movie could have been 100 times better than the book. The book was really predictable to me, even though there was a lot going on and a lot of twists and turns. Honestly though, in the book I thought Teabing was "the teacher" when he was introduced then they kept driving it into me that Fauche was the man so I changed to Fauche and was surprised to see that Teabing really was the teacher after all.

ANYWAY, I was really surprised to find out that such a fast paced book could be made into such a boring movie. I was quite disappointed. They left a TON of explaination out of the movie, so I don't see how someone who didn't read the book would even know what was going on. They changed a few random things for apparantly no reason (like making the grandfather not be the grandfather and taking our her brother). I dunno, I was just hella disappointed. I give it a 5/10, which to me means rent it or pirate it when it comes out on DVD but don't bother seeing it on the big screen.

Ron Howard, I thank ye for Arrested Development. Please go back to directing it and stay away from movies. Or maybe you should have quit after AD, because I don't think you (or anyone) can top that.

I'm sure I'll think of more things to complain about later.

[Sooner24]

I'm sure I'll think of more things to complain about later.


I MAY HAVE JUST FOUND MY NEW SIG LINE!!! :D

[Norm In Norman]

you see? it's just not interesting unless people are arguing about it.

[Hatfield]

i see now where they are probably going to do Angels and Demons next...which is odd that they do the second book into a movie and then the first book...

[etouffee]

they do the second book into a movie and then the first book...One more reason to hate George Lucas.

[crawfish]

I can't wait to not see "Digital Fortress".

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

I think it would have been better if the girl had been able to perform miracles at the end.

I read a book a while back about some mad genetic scientist that was working in a high dollar fertility clinic. He was obsessed with holy relics and the like.

Anyway, it turns out that he was getting these women pregnant with DNA he had gotten off of these holy relics in trying to make a clone of Christ. I don't quite remember, but I think the protagonist gets pregnant and has a son. At the end, they don't tell you much except that the mom thought that the boy's goldfish had died, and she goes back into his room to dispose of it, but then the boy is there feeding it and it's alive again and you're like. "WHAT?"

[TexasLidig8r]

The movie gets a rousing...

http://www.salariya.com/web_books/gladiator/ouch/images/thumbsdown.jpg

And.. I kept imagining the little french strumpet must have had grooming issues throughout the entire film... Thank you for THIS snore fest!

[OU4LIFE]

I'm going to see it this afternoon.

I've already been preprogrammed by the natianal media to like it, so here's my review.

It was great. I laughed, I cried, I went to the restroom and peed.

I want to be an albino.

[jeremy885]

I think it would have been better if the girl had been able to perform miracles at the end.

I read a book a while back about some mad genetic scientist that was working in a high dollar fertility clinic. He was obsessed with holy relics and the like.

Anyway, it turns out that he was getting these women pregnant with DNA he had gotten off of these holy relics in trying to make a clone of Christ. I don't quite remember, but I think the protagonist gets pregnant and has a son. At the end, they don't tell you much except that the mom thought that the boy's goldfish had died, and she goes back into his room to dispose of it, but then the boy is there feeding it and it's alive again and you're like. "WHAT?"

The Outer Limits did a similar show where a fundamentalist group used DNA off of the Shroud or Turin and impregnated a woman with a clone of Jesus. It made it seem that Jesus was someone with physic power than being the son of God.

Saw the Da Vinci Code, thought it sucked big donkey d*ck. I never read the book, but the movie was way too predictable.

[Okla-homey]

Mrs Homey and Homey-daughter liked it.

I haven't seen it. Prolly won't 'til it comes out on DVD...I read the book.

[47straight]

fiction.

F. I. C. T. I. O. N.

fiction.






A G E N D A

Say it with *me*. Read Angels and Demons. Read his wink wink nudge nudge. The man wants to show that if there is any evil, it's in faithful Catholics.

And it's not me that has a problem that it's fiction. A recent poll showed that Britons were quite likely to change their opinion after reading the book. Well, as bad as Catholics have had it legally in this country, it's quite worse over there. Catholic cannot be prime minister. Catholics cannot go to elementary school safely in northern ireland. So, yeah, a movie reinforcing anti-Catholic rhetoric kind of sucks in a real way.


Do you get this outraged when members of other groups are the ficticious villians in fictional books and movies, or just when it's one you're sympathetic to?

Don't have to. The've already got removed "mammy," native american, and japanese characters from bugs bunny. They also hound out any holocaust deniers.

And, in further irony, Danny Brown did apologize for portraying an albino in such a bad light.

And do you only justify lies and agenda when it's against a group that you're not sympathetic to?


come on, say it with me, real slow:

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick shuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnnnn.

Then, um, keep saying it over and over til you get it.

Oh yeah... don't talk down to me. It's funny to see in another post how you claim to be trying to carry on rational conversation, then to see this.

[47straight]

Gay people are often portrayed in overly-flamboyant ways.

But always with acceptance! <Will and Grace>


Southerners are routinely depicted as poor, stupid, bigoted rednecks.

And often associated with being religious and conservative.


Police officers are often depicted as bumbling, stumbling fools, and are just as often depicted as corrupt and even murderous.

Except when they are investigating priests on law and order! The order of operations of bad guys works in their favor on that one.


Any sense of respect for the POTUS and members of congress has long ago been discarded, as they are often as not portrayed as murderous villains with all manner of sinister agendas. Those are just a few examples.

But not when they're pro-choice "Catholic" liberal presidents on the west wing!

[Scott D]

Say it with *me*. Read Angels and Demons. Read his wink wink nudge nudge. The man wants to show that if there is any evil, it's in faithful Catholics.

And it's not me that has a problem that it's fiction. A recent poll showed that Britons were quite likely to change their opinion after reading the book. Well, as bad as Catholics have had it legally in this country, it's quite worse over there. Catholic cannot be prime minister. Catholics cannot go to elementary school safely in northern ireland. So, yeah, a movie reinforcing anti-Catholic rhetoric kind of sucks in a real way.



Don't have to. The've already got removed "mammy," native american, and japanese characters from bugs bunny. They also hound out any holocaust deniers.

And, in further irony, Danny Brown did apologize for portraying an albino in such a bad light.

And do you only justify lies and agenda when it's against a group that you're not sympathetic to?



Oh yeah... don't talk down to me. It's funny to see in another post how you claim to be trying to carry on rational conversation, then to see this.


GIVE IRELAND TO THE IRISH!!!! :D

[etouffee]

i'd respond, but i'm busy working myself into a tizzy over the horrible ways monkeys are misrepresented in king kong.

[47straight]

i'd respond, but i'm busy working myself into a tizzy over the horrible ways monkeys are misrepresented in king kong.

Hey, whatever interrupts your rationalization of bigotry works for me!

[Beano's Fourth Chin]

easy

[GottaHavePride]

Well, as bad as Catholics have had it legally in this country, it's quite worse over there.
OK, I agree that Catholics aren't in a good situation in Ireland, but the "Catholic can't be PM of the UK" is totally false. In 2004 Tony Blair was considering converting to Catholicism.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/15/ncath15.xml

They said there is no constitutional law preventing a Catholic from being Prime Minister. The only awkwardness is that the PM advises the Queen on the appointment of bishops in the Church of England - but that is a state duty, not a religious one.

Also, how have Catholics had it bad legally in the US? I mean, Roman Catholics are the single largest denomination in the country, and as of 2004 there were over twice as many Catholics as the next-largest denomination, which is Baptist.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/us_rel2.htm

And give me something other than the prayer in school or ten commandments in the courtrooms business - those are not Catholc-specific AND those decisions are based on not forcing Christian dogma upon Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, etc. - NOT as a means of suppressing Christianity.

[Big Red Ron]

There's no law against a black man or a woman from being President of America but....

[GottaHavePride]

There's no law against a black man or a woman from being President of America but....

He said "cannot" - I was saying it's possible, however unlikely.

[OUinFLA]

Well, back to the subject of the thread..........an unjacking in progress.

I went to see the movie last night.
I was somewhat shocked that there were only about 25 people in the audience, but pleased as I usually hate going to the theatre. I just did it to appease my family.

I will say the movie was about as well played as it could have been considering the complexity of the plot in the novel. If I had not read the book a couple of years ago, I would have been a bit lost at times.

All in all, I think the movie was decent entertainment and I view it as such along with the book being a novel to be enjoyed as entertainment as well.

How much is fact and how much is fiction? I guess I dont really care. Im pretty sure all the Star Wars movies were fictional as well, but I enjoyed watching most of them. Im sure the Huts of the universe dont feel like their clan was portrayed in the best of light, and you dont here them protesting.

I was well entertained by the book, and entertained somewhat by the movie.
It doesnt offened my deeply conservative Baptist roots to have read or seen it.

[soonerbrat]

*yawn*

[Norm In Norman]

I think you picked the wrong Da Vinci code thread to post in. but then again, so did we all.

[soonerbrat]

who me?

i was just getting bored with the arguing about the book.

[OU4LIFE]

A recent poll showed that Britons were quite likely to change their opinion after reading the book.


If Britons faith is so weak as to change it after reading a fictional book, well.......how sad is that.

[Norm In Norman]

who me?

i was just getting bored with the arguing about the book.
Not specifically.

[OU4LIFE]

I would neg you for that if I wasn't so afraid of you.

[OUinFLA]

who me?

i was just getting bored with the arguing about the book.


Nah, I think he meant me, but I was just too lazy to see if there was a "How did you like the movie" thread.
I just posted my movie experience in one that was somewhat vague in the title, and again I'm too lazy to read 6 gazillion posts to determine the direction of discussion and arguments.
:)

ps. sorry I caused you to "yawn", that happens a lot with my wife too.

[SweetheartSooner]

fiction.

F. I. C. T. I. O. N.

fiction.

come on, say it with me, real slow:

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick shuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnnnn.

Then, um, keep saying it over and over til you get it.

Do you get this outraged when members of other groups are the ficticious villians in fictional books and movies, or just when it's one you're sympathetic to?


Your mother is a whore.

















But it's just fiction. Don't worry about it.

[colleyvillesooner]

wow, I'm not sure that could BE any further out of line.

I'm gonna guess....1 day for a first time offense.

[OU4LIFE]

that's probably a good guess.

[etouffee]

Spoken like a true defender of the faith. Jesus must be beaming with pride.

[SweetheartSooner]

wow, I'm not sure that could BE any further out of line.

edited.

[SweetheartSooner]

But - since it is fiction - i don't see the big deal. I mean, it's just fiction right, and that is what we're talking about

[SweetheartSooner]

Spoken like a true defender of the faith. Jesus must be beaming with pride.


I wasn't defending anything. I'm just making a point.

[SweetheartSooner]

You people get so worked up over fiction. ;)

[colleyvillesooner]

But - since it is fiction - i don't see the big deal. I mean, it's just fiction right, and that is what we're talking about

Yeah cept for this:

http://66.34.250.71/forums/faq.php?faq=soonerfans_faq#faq_da_rules


By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

You calling Phil's rules fiction?

:D

[etouffee]

But - since it is fiction - i don't see the big deal. I mean, it's just fiction right, and that is what we're talking aboutabsolutely. you have every right to make asinine fictional statements, just as people have the right to make fantastical fictional books and movies like the da vinci code (and star wars and harry potter, too!). the difference here is that i'm not going to whine and protest and pretend to be a vicitim and make myself look ridiculous, because i know the statement is a false one made by a complete buffoon, i haven't been harmed, and i understand that most people are smart enough to take it for what it is: nonsense.

there... see how easy that was?

[colleyvillesooner]

oh, and IBTL, IBTPD, IBTB for sure.

[SweetheartSooner]

Yeah cept for this:

http://66.34.250.71/forums/faq.php?faq=soonerfans_faq#faq_da_rules



You calling Phil's rules fiction?

:D


OMG - have you read any of the south oval?? Half of the threads violate this rule. :D Any threads involving Stanley and young girls, that is....

[SweetheartSooner]

absolutely. you have every right to make asinine fictional statements, just as people have the right to make fantastical fictional books and movies like the da vinci code (and star wars and harry potter, too!). the difference here is that i'm not going to whine and protest and pretend to be a vicitim and make myself look ridiculous, because i know the statement is a false one made by a complete buffoon, i haven't been harmed, and i understand that most people are smart enough to take it for what it is: nonsense.

there... see how easy that was?


sounds like you're whining to me. :yawn:

[picasso]

while we're at it, I've heard 3 different art scholars talk about how diffictult the book was to read mainly due to inaccuracies about the old man artist.:D

I'm just so up in arms over this book! I'm rock hard I tell ya.

[etouffee]

Sounds like your juvenile attempt to make a point failed miserably to me, and in the absence of a meaningful comeback, you've decided to go with the :yawn: approach to try and save face. Sorry, didn't work.

Also, you might try looking up "whine" in the dictionary, because clearly it doesn't mean what you think it means.

[etouffee]

while we're at it, I've heard 3 different art scholars talk about how diffictult the book was to read mainly due to inaccuracies about the old man artist.:D

I'm just so up in arms over this book! I'm rock hard I tell ya.Well yeah, because polls show Britons are likely to change their mind about art now!

[SweetheartSooner]

Are you always this hostile toward fiction writers?

[colleyvillesooner]

http://www.uwbg.org/tools/workplace/tool_6UwN6Qucp5/links/Merry%20Go%20round.jpg

Glad to see everyone is still on.

[yermom]

usually the ones that are so sensitive about someone calling their mother a whore are the ones that know there might be a shred of truth to it

maybe that is why the so many people are worried about this book/movie? ;)

[etouffee]

Are you always this hostile toward fiction writers?No, I've never called for a boycott of a fiction writer or filmmaker, or protested a work of fiction so that I look foolish and give the work more publicity. You?

[picasso]

Well yeah, because polls show Britons are likely to change their mind about art now!
oooo good one. the hell do brits know about art in the first place?

[Scott D]

or maybe Britons are still bitter about being 'de-paganized' by the Irish ;)

[SweetheartSooner]

No, I've never called for a boycott of a fiction writer or filmmaker, or protested a work of fiction so that I look foolish and give the work more publicity. You?


Actually, no. I have not called for a boycott, I have not protested. But I have said the book is stupid. My point wasn't about the book itself. I could care less about it. My point is fiction isn't harmless. Sometimes it hurts groups of people.

If Dan Brown wrote a book about an "evil" homosexual group involved in a conspiracy to take over the world and convert all heterosexuals to gayness... the book would be quickly written off as bigoted and discriminatory. But since his book was about Christians, especially Catholic Christians, it's just fiction. Who does it hurt? Get over it you whiny babies... yada yada yada. It's a double standard.

[Norm In Norman]

Yeah, the gays get all the breaks.

[SweetheartSooner]

I'm not saying that everyone is always nice to gay people, just that there would be a public outcry about the book. Just sayin

[Scott D]

Actually, no. I have not called for a boycott, I have not protested. But I have said the book is stupid. My point wasn't about the book itself. I could care less about it. My point is fiction isn't harmless. Sometimes it hurts groups of people.

If Dan Brown wrote a book about an "evil" homosexual group involved in a conspiracy to take over the world and convert all heterosexuals to gayness... the book would be quickly written off as bigoted and discriminatory. But since his book was about Christians, especially Catholic Christians, it's just fiction. Who does it hurt? Get over it you whiny babies... yada yada yada. It's a double standard.

I thought that was the point of homosexual groups....or so some Baptist groups tell us ;)

[picasso]

people don't seem to understand that althought it is fiction, the book mocks the very foundation of faith and the church.
distorting something many live their lives by just might get a reaction or two.
you may not understand because you have no faith in anything. or you might be a bit hypocritical by defending this book much like those crazy Christians are attempting to defend their beliefs?

crazy concept I know.

at least we're not rioting in the streets over a cartoon image.

[picasso]

I thought that was the point of homosexual groups....or so some Baptist groups tell us ;)
oh, don't just single out the Baptists.;)

[Scott D]

oh, don't just single out the Baptists.;)

well I wanted sweetheart to feel that I wasn't piling on the catholics ;)


my offer still stands sweetheart :D

[colleyvillesooner]

at least we're not rioting in the streets over a cartoon image...yet.

Fixed.

[SweetheartSooner]

well I wanted sweetheart to feel that I wasn't piling on the catholics ;)


my offer still stands sweetheart :D

Aren't you a sweetie! ;)

[etouffee]

If Dan Brown wrote a book about an "evil" homosexual group involved in a conspiracy to take over the world and convert all heterosexuals to gayness... the book would be quickly written off as bigoted and discriminatory. But since his book was about Christians, especially Catholic Christians, it's just fiction. Who does it hurt? Get over it you whiny babies... yada yada yada. It's a double standard.Actually, no. You're comparing apples to oranges. The premise of the DaVinci Code is nothing nearly as sinister as taking over the world or forcibly converting people to a lifestyle. (you should be hoping that nobody ever makes a major motion picture about your church's non-fictional little experiment with that, eh?) But TDC simply presents, in a fictional context, an old, alternate theory about whether Jesus was celibate or hooked up with Mary M. and had a kid.

A lot of us are really trying to figure out why that constitutes an attack on Christians or Christianity. In the big picture, even if that fictional premise WAS true... so what? Would that mean Jesus is no longer the son of God? Would it mean Jesus no longer offers salvation and grace? Would it mean anything at all about the true foundations of Christianity? No. At most it would mean some mostly trivial dogma about Jesus being single and celibate would have to be updated. Whoop de fricken doo. I really don't see how that would cause anyone to decide against becoming a Christian, or cause anyone to renounce their Christianity if they already were one.

Or maybe it's not the Jesus/Mary/offspring theory that has people upset. Maybe it's the notion of the Church's cover-up and conspiracy behind it, and the suggestion that a few people may have been killed to protect the secret. Is that what gets you so upset, having your church portrayed that way? I hate to break it to you, but there are things in your church's REAL history which are far, far darker than that. I doubt Mr. Brown's little conspiracy yarn is going to have any impact on the Church's reputation one way or the other.

[Scott D]

Aren't you a sweetie! ;)

I try...now back to concentrating on my learning to speak, read, and write in Gaelic :)

[Norm In Norman]

MERGIFICATION! Since they are almost the exact same threads. Well, except for my movie thread that never got used.

[OU4LIFE]

define "used"

[Norm In Norman]

I don't know what you're going for.

[Scott D]

tapadh leat Norm.

[OU4LIFE]

that makes two of us.

[picasso]

Fixed.
no comparison.

[OUinFLA]

MERGIFICATION! Since they are almost the exact same threads. Well, except for my movie thread that never got used.


There was a movie thread????????

[Norm In Norman]

Exactly.

[OU4LIFE]

Norm needs to add more spaces to his posts.



















































































like this.

[Norm In Norman]

You're just jealous.

[colleyvillesooner]

Thats not that much.

























































































IS it?

[JohnnyMack]

Thats not that much.

That's what your last date said.

[colleyvillesooner]

That's what your last date said.

burn.

[OU4LIFE]

You're just jealous.


true that.

pinky extender drinker.

[etouffee]

that's just wrong.

[OU4LIFE]

but not fiction.

[colleyvillesooner]

This seems appropriate:

http://www.str.com.br/BadReligion/stfsf.jpg

;)

[TUSooner]

THIS JUST IN!
Dan Brown says his work is fiction, mostly, but his ideas are good anyway, and worth discussing. Or something.

I
am
done.
:norm:

[JohnnyMack]

burn.

I've been on vacation and my skillz aren't sharp. Gimme some leeway.

[colleyvillesooner]

I've been on vacation and my skillz aren't sharp. Gimme some leeway.

:D

[picasso]

It's common to make fun of all kinds of of groups in movies and tv. Gay people are often portrayed in overly-flamboyant ways. Overweight people are ridiculed to no end, as are unattractive people. Southerners are routinely depicted as poor, stupid, bigoted rednecks. Police officers are often depicted as bumbling, stumbling fools, and are just as often depicted as corrupt and even murderous. Any sense of respect for the POTUS and members of congress has long ago been discarded, as they are often as not portrayed as murderous villains with all manner of sinister agendas. Those are just a few examples.

Do you feel that every group that gets made fun of or portrayed in a negative light on tv or in a movie has a right to be offended, or are you one of those that is always saying people should lighten up and stop acting like victims all the time?
I had to go back and read this again. you compare social groups to a religious group do you?
do you see constant ragging on any other eligious group as much as Christians? cricket chirping....

[Scott D]

I mock anarchy lovers daily.

[etouffee]

you compare social groups to a religious group do you?Yes. Why shouldn't I?


do you see constant ragging on any other eligious group as much as Christians?

a) I don't see all that much "ragging" on Christians, frankly. I see it from time to time, but I also see Christians and Christianity portrayed in very positive ways in the media as well. (Passion of the Christ, Narnia, Touched by an Angel, ministers on countless movies and shows as good characters, tv Christmas specials, artists releasing Christmas records, and the list goes on). Sorry, but I'm just not convinced that Christians are portrayed as bad more often than good.

b) Even if such disproportionate "ragging" exists in the US, you should hardly be surprised, since the population calls itself Christian by a very, very wide margin. When your the biggest and most well known, you're going to be the topic of a lot more books and movies, and a lot more criticism as well. And when you add fuel to the fire with molestation scandals, plus people like Jimmy Swaggart with his scandals in the news, frauds like Benny Hin (sp?) all over the place, and Jerry Falwell out there running his mouth, you've got to expect a little blowback.

c) I don't agree that TDC is "ragging" Christianity at all. I think that's a pretty paranoid view. Whatever the message was, it wasn't "Christians are bad", "Christianity is bad" or "Don't be a Christian".

[handcrafted]

c) I don't agree that TDC is "ragging" Christianity at all. I think that's a pretty paranoid view. Whatever the message was, it wasn't "Christians are bad", "Christianity is bad" or "Don't be a Christian".

I dropped out of this discussion because I didn't care for the attitude that I was starting to generate within myself. However, for those who care to listen, perhaps I can 'splain the answer to the above. You'll have to take my word for the following if you are not a believer and don't know or understand Christian doctrine.

I understand that TDC is not doing what you say it is not doing. It is not overtly criticizing Christianity in general, or saying a person should not be involved in any aspect of the religion.

However, it does attack several basic Christian doctrines, the primary one of which is the inerrancy of the Bible. The whole premise of the story is that the Bible is unreliable. As an abstract concept, whether or not Jesus could (i.e., permissively and maintain his sinlessness) have been married and had children is not the issue. Because in the abstract, it would not have been a sin for Jesus to be married and have children.

However (and this is the critical issue) the Bible does not mention it, and it would, if such were true. Ergo, Jesus was not married. In fact, Jesus is married to the Church. The Church is "the bride of Christ". His kingdom is not of this world. Also, Jesus had a good reason to stay celibate. He knew he would be departing this world in a violent and shameful manner (according to the traditions of men), and he would not have wanted to put a family through that, plus those considerations would possibly have been a source of great torment for him, and he was already set to endure a whole bunch of that. And, of course, he could not stay on Earth after the resurrection. For Jesus, given his nature and his ministry, and what he was here to do, being married and having children would have been sinful. Therefore, he did not do it.

To suggest Jesus was married and had children is to suggest that the Bible is not true. To suggest that the Bible is not true is to undermine the foundation of Christianity. And this is in addition to all of the gnostic stuff that's in the book/movie, which the average viewer cannot sort out from what's actually Scriptural. Bottom line: The book/movie will not convert anyone to Christianity, but it already has led people astray. That is why I, personally, oppose it.

[Scott D]

you know..instead of typing all of that you could have just said.. "It's overhyped, which generally means it will suck. And that is why I, personally, will never see it." :D

[handcrafted]

you know..instead of typing all of that you could have just said.. "It's overhyped, which generally means it will suck. And that is why I, personally, will never see it." :D

That'd be a good general statement on pretty much any Hollywood production. Except X3. :D

[Scott D]

That'd be a good general statement on pretty much any Hollywood production. Except X3. :D

hence my 2nd rule about theaters....they suck because they peddle crap, and are full of zombies :D

[Rhino]

Someone like Pat Robertson should offer a $3 million bounty for the death of Dan Brown. Then, someone should firebomb a theatre, in say, Berkeley, California. The people should be shot an at embassy somewhere. Then they should burn the DVDs throughout the world. Acquaintences of Brown should be stabbed and beated. Hotels should burn. Then a musician, say, Clay Aiken, should support the killings and burnings and claim Brown should be burned in effigy.

If you're gunna be offended, at least be violent about it.

:meat:

[Scott D]

I think we need to find if there are any Disco DVD's and get them to burning! :D

[OU4LIFE]

Did the book or movie lead you astray?

Why is your faith stronger than mine?

Why is your faith stronger than the "average" person?

Why do you consider yourself above others?

[Mjcpr]

I think "da Vinci" means "of Vinci".

I'll check back when I know for sure.

[JohnnyMack]

Why do you consider yourself above others?

Well I don't consider myself above most people, however you have the IQ of a manatee with down syndrome, so I'm gonna say I'm at least not at the bottom of ye olde food chain.

[OU4LIFE]

you have the IQ of a manatee with down syndrome

you know me too well.

scary really.

[handcrafted]

Did the book or movie lead you astray?

Why is your faith stronger than mine?

Why is your faith stronger than the "average" person?

Why do you consider yourself above others?

1. No.

2. I don't know that it is, but whatever the case, faith is a gift of God, so I cannot boast in it.

3. The average person or the average Christian?

4. I don't.

[Norm In Norman]

Here's what drives me crazy. it's comments like this:

"However (and this is the critical issue) the Bible does not mention it, and it would, if such were true. Ergo, Jesus was not married."

You are using your belief that the bible is true to prove that the bible is true. Surely you can see that logically this doesn't make any sense. TDC seems to suggest that stuff was left out, and I don't see how this can or can't be proven. And really, I guess he never said things are particularly wrong, more like things were omitted and things were subject to interpretation.

[handcrafted]

Here's what drives me crazy. it's comments like this:

"However (and this is the critical issue) the Bible does not mention it, and it would, if such were true. Ergo, Jesus was not married."

You are using your belief that the bible is true to prove that the bible is true. Surely you can see that logically this doesn't make any sense. TDC seems to suggest that stuff was left out, and I don't see how this can or can't be proven. And really, I guess he never said things are particularly wrong, more like things were omitted and things were subject to interpretation.

Okay, sorry I wasn't clear enough. I wasn't attempting a logical proof with that post. I was simply explaining what is orthodox Christian doctrine and why TDC is antithetical to it. The premise of some previous posters was that orthodox Christianity and TDC are compatible. I was just pointing out that they are not.

However, I do want to point something out to you, too. Nobody is truly objective. As humans we can't help (at least to a small degree) injecting our belief system into our logic. Logical discourse has to have some basic assumptions as a foundation for rational thought. Our beliefs color those assumptions, whether consciously or unconsciously.

[47straight]

If Dan Brown wrote a book about an "evil" homosexual group involved in a conspiracy to take over the world and convert all heterosexuals to gayness... the book would be quickly written off as bigoted and discriminatory. But since his book was about Christians, especially Catholic Christians, it's just fiction. Who does it hurt? Get over it you whiny babies... yada yada yada. It's a double standard.

In a delicious bit of irony... V for Vendetta references Guy Fawkes, who in his day was fighting back for the repressed Catholics. However, in V for Vendetta - now it is the gays who are repressed. What is more likely to be repressed in the next 20 years? Gay culture, or conservative religious theology that objects to the gay culture?

[etouffee]

"However (and this is the critical issue) the Bible does not mention it, and it would, if such were true. Ergo, Jesus was not married."I don't think you really want to start a discussion about things not mentioned in the Bible that The One True Church teaches as truth. Or maybe you do, I dunno. Either way.

[critical_phil]

I don't think you really want to start a discussion about things not mentioned in the Bible that The One True Church teaches as truth. Or maybe you do, I dunno. Either way.


just as a refresher for me......who is The One True Church again?


tia.

[proud gonzo]

I believe it's "brouhaha"

YWIA

[BigRedJed]

SPELLING NAZI!!

[proud gonzo]

STALKER!!

[etouffee]

just as a refresher for me......who is The One True Church again?


tia.The Catholic church commonly referred to itself that way for years, although it's not as common any more. Down in my part of the world, though, many hardcore Catholics still refer to their Church that way, usually as a precoursor to sneering pompously and saying all the "born-agains" are going to hell.

I believe the origins of that particular nickname are still in the catechism, unless it's been recently updated:


"This is the sole Church of Christ, which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic." Pg. 214, #811

"In fact, in this one and only Church of God..." Pg. 216, #817

"First, the Church is catholic because Christ is present in her. Where there is Christ Jesus, there is the Catholic Church." Pg. 220, #830
So you see, the Catholics are the Real Deal, and the rest of you wannabe Christians are just posers, apparently.

[47straight]

Slowly but surely, their shared agenda comes out.

[TUSooner]

I really didn’t want to mes with this deal so much any more, because some of the arguemnts are retarded and most of the good ones have already been made (and probably overlooked by me). But Here's what it boils down to.
I share H L Mencken’s creed that: The truth is better than a lie; it is better to be free than a slave; and it is better to know than not to know.

I therefore tend to resent any author who treats me disingenuously. This is what Dan Brown seems to do, however coyly. Even secular and cynical sources point out that much of Brown's TDC "history" is pure silliness. (For example: The Priory of Sion, which isn't 60 years old, much less founded in 1099, is an admitted hoax, and the “nonfictional” Holy Blood Holy Grail is based on the Priory hoax.) But Brown, while conceding he writes "fiction" nonetheless tell us that his fictional (i.e., bogus) history is a good basis for discussing his ideas.

Now, Dracula was still one of the best and scariest books I ever read, even though I have never believed in vampires. So I know how to suspend disbelief and enjoy a good story. But Bram Stoker never proposed, as far as I know, that his readers should engage in a lively debate on the possibility of real supernatural vampirism based on the "science" of vampirism as stated by Van Helsing and other characters in Dracula. For me, that is where Dan Brown crosses the line between being a writer of fiction and an elevator of false over true. If Brown wants to make a point about the suppression of feminism in religion (or any other point worth discussing), he might do better by basing even a fictional discussion on better history.

So Brown has lost my respect at Mencken's first proposition: The truth is better than a lie.

I recognize, however, that TDC has generated a good bit of discussion about early Christianity, and that’s good because it has brought some thoughtful Christians (and others, including cynics) out of the woodwork to emphasize the falseness of Brown’s history. Enter Mencken’s proposal that it is better to know than not to know.

BOTTOM LINE: I accept TDC as a work of pure fiction (regardless of whatever else DB might coyly suggest it is). Because TDC may well be a good story, I intend to read it, if not buy it. ;)
BUT,
if anyone chooses to believe that TDC is more than fiction, he or she ought NOT to presume Brown's fictional history is good, and then put the burden on someone to refute it. Rather, he or she ought to find an argument that rests on something other than the novel itself and its discredited "sources."

[SweetheartSooner]

The Catholic church commonly referred to itself that way for years, although it's not as common any more. Down in my part of the world, though, many hardcore Catholics still refer to their Church that way, usually as a precoursor to sneering pompously and saying all the "born-agains" are going to hell.

I believe the origins of that particular nickname are still in the catechism, unless it's been recently updated:


So you see, the Catholics are the Real Deal, and the rest of you wannabe Christians are just posers, apparently.




"This is the sole Church of Christ, which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic."

It's a small c catholic which means universal, not Catholic.

cath·o·lic: adj. Including or concerning all humankind; universal: “what was of catholic rather than national interest”





In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.



I don't think there is anything wrong with acknowledging the fact that Christians are not completely united. Christ didn't start 15,000 churches, he started one, and over time, rifts arose. And if you actually read the next part...



However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.

and


"Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity



So I swore off never talking about the Church again, but I couldn't overlook this obvious inaccuracy.


I don't know what your deal is with the Catholic church, but you obviously have some deep seeded hatred for it, and/or Christians in general. I don't know what to say really.

[etouffee]

I don't know what your deal is with the Catholic church, but you obviously have some deep seeded hatred for it, and/or Christians in general.Bravo! The "you don't share my views so I'll just say you're full of HATRED" manuever. Well played,sir! Well played!

[etouffee]

I don't know what your deal is with the Catholic church, but you obviously have some deep seeded hatred for it, and/or Christians in general.Bravo! The ever popular "You don't share my views so I'll just say you're full of HATRED" manuever. Well played,sir! Well played! You should audition for a spot on a liberal talk show, they LOVE that move.

[JohnnyMack]

If Christ were alive today, he'd shake his head. Then he'd go back to smoking his bong and chillin' out on a hill somewhere in northern California.

[TUSooner]

Bravo! The ever popular "You don't share my views so I'll just say you're full of HATRED" manuever. Well played,sir! Well played! You should audition for a spot on a liberal talk show, they LOVE that move.
:rolleyes:

[SweetheartSooner]

Bravo! The ever popular "You don't share my views so I'll just say you're full of HATRED" manuever. Well played,sir! Well played! You should audition for a spot on a liberal talk show, they LOVE that move.


Well, what exactly do you want people to believe looking at your comments over the past several pages taken in context? Maybe hatred was too strong of a word, but you've definately displayed a great disdain for Christians. What do you want people to think?

Oh and you've really pinned me down. I am a liberal man, fo' sure.

[Fugue]

Oh and you've really pinned me down. I am a liberal man, fo' sure.

:D

[IronSooner]

I'm surprised this thread has gotten so far without anyone opining that the french chick in the movie is hawt. Maybe I'm alone in that assessment. Oh well, argue on.

[etouffee]

Oh and you've really pinned me down. I am a liberal man, fo' sure.I didn't say you were a liberal man; I already knew you weren't from reading your blog. I simply noted that you used a really lame argumentative tactic that liberals often employ.