Comments on: Yes, I’m Going To See The Da Vinci Code… Here’s Why

By: Arjun Kanuri

Arjun Kanuri — Fri, 03 May 2013 03:54:05 +0000

I have been surfing on-line greater than 3 hours these days, but I never found
any interesting article like yours. It is pretty worth sufficient for me.
In my view, if all web owners and bloggers made just right content as you did, the web will be much more helpful than ever before.

By: Ben Leigh

Ben Leigh — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:31:29 +0000

I think the most disappointing thing was how much was left out in the film, that was in the book? Found that to be frustrating, but not sure how many people saw that film that hadn’t read the book already…

Angels and Demons was better for this, but still would have prefered a 3 hour epic with everything in there!!!

By: jupsdgreat

jupsdgreat — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:09:54 +0000

The point that a lot of people are missing is that Leonardo Da Vinci’s passion was for his inventions. He just used the money from painting to fund these inventions. It is true that he is a genius but a struggling painter during those times would not or could not have had the time to think about embedding codes into his artworks.

Nice article!

By: Running Stretches

Running Stretches — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:18:58 +0000

They’ve been showing TDVC on tv this weekend, loved it. Can’t wait for Angels & Demons to come out in theaters.

By: WarAxe

WarAxe — Sun, 11 Jun 2006 12:09:10 +0000

The book was good. I will see the movie soon… I haven’t yet because since I got back from Cancun I’ve been wicked busy.

Don’t forget to read up on some of the main tenets of the story. Much of the “history” is taken from the book “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” which was based on the Priory of Sion hoax that was made up by some French “throne-seeker” in 1956.

By: DaInfidelsInfidel

DaInfidelsInfidel — Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:47:15 +0000

As my “call sign” suggest, I am far from devout. I’m one of the guys who call upon “Religious Guy” WarAxe for his point of view. From a heathens standpoint, this movie mirrors my belief. If you ever watch the movie, my beliefs mirrors those >exactly

By: WarAxe

WarAxe — Tue, 30 May 2006 01:42:30 +0000

Yeah, I saw that article. Oh well. So long as the people in my circles are going to be seeing I feel I should see it, too.

That being said, last night I had a perfect chance as Tami took me to the movies… but we saw X-Men 3 instead! It was great!

By: alissa

alissa — Mon, 29 May 2006 23:44:18 +0000

Did you know that you are exactly what Sony Classic dreamed of? All us people who thought we were being so original and cool and going against the flow by wanting to see the film and engage in dialogue are actually exactly what the marketing of the film was trying to promote. (Check out the feature about the marketing in the New Yorker two weeks ago . . . )

Bugger.

At any rate, I was going to go see it, but it looks like it sucked, so there’s no way I’ll pay to see it. I’ll Netflix it some day . . . when I am suffering from insomnia.

By: WarAxe

WarAxe — Thu, 18 May 2006 23:00:31 +0000

That’s a fair question, Misty, and thanks for asking.

Yes, I’ve been reading the Cannes reviews and they paint the movie a clumsy and plodding tale. So, if I was going to see it on its theatrical merits I might have just passed.

Definitely if I was seeing it on its level of glorifying God it would be pretty near the BOTTOM!

But, alas, I know many “un-churched” in my circles of influence who are definitely going. So I’ll still go… and instead of talking about Jesus between “wasn’t that awesome when…” I’ll be talking about Jesus between “wasn’t that so lame”.

Thanks for stoppin’ by!

By: MIstyK

MIstyK — Thu, 18 May 2006 21:28:54 +0000

I appreciate your post! I’m wondering though, since the film is being laughed at during the Film Festival, if you still think it’s worth seeing, as it doesn’t fit the “great movie” category, anymore? If it’s just poorly delivered heresy about the Savior you love, is it still necessary to watch?

Keep writin!
Misty

By: WarAxe

WarAxe — Sat, 13 May 2006 02:54:27 +0000

Wow, great comments all! That’s what great about blogs… is that when my friends come on and give me their perspectives on my thoughts I can go back and actually enhance portions of what I was trying to say that were unclear or misleading. I have done so in my post. Iron sharpen iron.

Simon :: Hey thanks for stopping by and come back anytime. Email me about the theme you’re using… I need someone to bounce enhancement ideas off.

Mike :: Good point. I added some verbage to indicate that a balance needs to exist. I remember Brad Stine’s book “Being a Christian Without Being an Idiot” (one of my fav’s) where he talked about a friend who actually brought strippers to Christ in a local strip club!?!? Now, that would SURELY not be a suitable place for me to engage anyone (imho) but perhaps Phillip’s Ethiopian eunoch friend could.

Tony :: Yeah… many will go and just think it was a good story… as they did with the Indiana Jones movies, like you said. Actually when I was writiing my post I often thought about the parallels between the two. Needless to say, Raiders and Last Crusade probably weren’t very accurate, either. But, as you pointed out, it’s not what started the discussion… it’s where the discussion was able to go.

Scott :: Yeah, you know I’m leary of the Christian label thing. I did modify what I was saying above because it sounded like I was too harsh… in reality I indicated any movie that wasn’t great was one I would not see because it was dubiously mediocre, when in reality I may be lenient toward many a movie for many a reason… and I might go easy on a Christian movie because of the theological depth or some other factors like the ones you mentioned. But surely I wouldn’t go just because it had the label, and that’s what I tried to say but didn’t really. On a side note regarding labels, I remember buying a Christian rap audio tape back in the mid-eighties before there were any big name Christian rap artists… it was friggin’ terrible!

Phil :: “A Thief In the Night” *gags* Those are some scary memories… If you didn’t know better you’d think they depicted the mark of the beast in the form of bad sideburns.

By: Phil Taylor

Phil Taylor — Sat, 13 May 2006 00:42:22 +0000

As long as Scott or anyone ever, ever makes me watch Kirk Cameron in one of those stupid Left Behind movies . . . speaking of crappy apocolyptic movies . . . “A thief in the night” is available for netflixers, with a long wait.

By: Scott W

Scott W — Sat, 13 May 2006 00:22:21 +0000

I’m with you completely, with one exception (I guess that’s not completely then…..). Your quote “I only watch so-called Christian movies when they also are great movies”, makes sense at face value, but lacks future thinking. If everyone were to think like that, no one would go to Christian films (although I think the term Christian Film is just as silly as Christian Music or Christian Cars, but that’s another blog altogether). And if no one went to Christian films, no money would go towards Christian filmmakers, which means, if they are still able to make movies, the films will suck, because they have no budget. One of the greatest ways Christians can influence films, is to make films that communicate their values, and if they can’t do that, they should find a way to support other Christians that make films. And unfortunately, that sometimes means sitting through a film that isn’t “great”.

By: Tony G

Tony G — Fri, 12 May 2006 21:03:36 +0000

I work with and know several people who are not Christians. Some are even atheists. Which is worse – not recognizing the importance of Jesus, or not recognizing any god at all? That’s for another post…
But the Axe of -99 has a point. The movie will be a nice way to begin a conversation of religion and the bible. I remember when Harrison Ford got to play with God’s relics when he acted as Dr. Indiana Jones. Those movies worked on many levels. In both movies, the religion aspect was the catalyst for the rest of the plot to develop. Whether it was the Ark of the Covenant or the cup of Christ, you had religion, suspense, mystery and action, all rolled into one movie. The religious aspect could be easily dismissed (for those who wanted to dismiss it) as the characters searching for some ancient religious artifact. But for those who asked of you “Hmm, why was the Ark so important in the first place?” or “What’s so special about a cup Jesus used during his last meal with his friends?” you could have taken a deep breath and began the discussion.
Tom Hanks gets to play a Harvard professor who is trying to find an ancient religious artifact while being hunted down by a crazy monk and the chief of Paris Police. Some will dismiss the religion and enjoy the adventure, but others might ask us “Do you think any of that stuff is true?” We can all take deep breaths and begin the discussion.
‘That’s my 10 cents – my 2 cents are free’ – Eminem

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 12 May 2006 18:35:24 +0000

Nice post! I like all your reasons except that I am not so sure that I follow your logic on the thing about engaging. How much ‘evil’ (speaking in general, not just about TDVC) must one know to be informed enough to credibly engage? I agree that to ignorantly condemn something is, well, ignorant. But I think it would be folly for a Christian to constantly try to be informed about ‘the dark side’ so that they can intelligently engage. Sometimes that river runs too swift to play safely in the shallows.

“Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature.” – Paul, after Athens, in 1 Cor 14:20

By: Simon Durrant

Simon Durrant — Fri, 12 May 2006 16:25:06 +0000

Hey, great post. I was really just dropping by to say thanks, as I’ve used one of your WordPress themes on my new site, so getting to read all the great common sense above was an unexpected pleasure!