Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → The Da Vinci Code
The Da Vinci Code
2005-05-18, 3:16 PM #1
http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/da_vinci_code/large.html

Starring Tom Hanks and directed by Ron Howard. Well...judging by those 2 names you already know it has to be good.

Though I think 1.) They should have started with Angels and Demons (a far superior book, and one of the best books I ever read IMO) and 2.) Hanks just doesn't fit my mind going for Robert Landon. Then again I think Hanks is the greatest actor of the past generation, but meh.
I can't think of anything to put here right now.
2005-05-18, 3:20 PM #2
You people didn't know who was acting/directing this? Its been known for months.

Hanks doesn't fit, harrison ford would be a better actor.
nope.
2005-05-18, 3:22 PM #3
Angels and Demons was good until the end, when it just became rediculous.
Detty. Professional Expert.
Flickr Twitter
2005-05-18, 3:29 PM #4
Quote:
Originally posted by Boco
...harrison ford would be a better actor.


Quoted for truth

And you got a point, Landon came off as somewhat of a pimp, and the guy was in his mid 40s. Sure Ford is like 62 but he could pass the 45 year old role with some good make up.

Ian McKellen as Sir Leigh Teabing fits the bill almost perfectly. Jean Reno isn't much a shock, seems he plays every American role for a French man haha.

As for Sophie, I looked her up in the Internet Movie Database, and I can't remember how they described her in the book. I have a problem imagining her character physically cause one of my friend's is named Sofie, and is a short little blonde girl.
I can't think of anything to put here right now.
2005-05-18, 6:36 PM #5
I just know some stupid person will inevitably say the movie rips off National Treasure.
一个大西瓜
2005-05-18, 7:01 PM #6
Ugh. Historically innacurate Hollywood, doing a movie about a book that promotes an insane revisionist history. Yeah, that'll be a movie worth watching. :rolleyes:
So sayest the Writer of Silly Things!
2005-05-18, 7:11 PM #7
The book wasn't intended to 'promote' revisionist theory, it was FICTIONAL
一个大西瓜
2005-05-18, 7:14 PM #8
stfu:mad:
2005-05-18, 7:53 PM #9
I'm with pommy on this.

Ever read Jurassic Park?

Was that book written to promote DNA experiments with dinosaurs, or do change history or to show how dinosaurs TRULY acted?

no... it was fictional.
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2005-05-18, 10:04 PM #10
Quote:
Originally posted by Krig_the_Viking
Ugh. Historically innacurate Hollywood, doing a movie about a book that promotes an insane revisionist history. Yeah, that'll be a movie worth watching. :rolleyes:


Yes yes, damn Hollywood for going back to what movies used to be about. Just damn them.
"We came, we saw, we conquered, we...woke up!"
2005-05-19, 1:05 PM #11
Of course the book is fictional. Mind you the author, Dan Brown, doesn't seem to be aware of that. He claims that his religious conspiracy theory is real, and he just wrote up some fictional characters to "discover" the truth.

Add to that the fact that he has his fictional scholar, Teabing, spout off all kinds of ridiculous historical innacuracies that no real historian would be caught dead endorsing, and you can see why I'm not exactly full of love for this book. If you're going to write a book that deals with history, you should at least check to make sure you have your facts right.
So sayest the Writer of Silly Things!
2005-05-19, 2:08 PM #12
Quote:
Originally posted by Krig_the_Viking
Of course the book is fictional. Mind you the author, Dan Brown, doesn't seem to be aware of that. He claims that his religious conspiracy theory is real, and he just wrote up some fictional characters to "discover" the truth.

Add to that the fact that he has his fictional scholar, Teabing, spout off all kinds of ridiculous historical innacuracies that no real historian would be caught dead endorsing, and you can see why I'm not exactly full of love for this book. If you're going to write a book that deals with history, you should at least check to make sure you have your facts right.

Woah boy, calm down. Could you provide a link for Dan Brown saying the book is anything but fiction?
2005-05-19, 3:48 PM #13
Quote:
Originally posted by tofu
Woah boy, calm down. Could you provide a link for Dan Brown saying the book is anything but fiction?


It does say so, in the front. This is a direct quote:

Quote:
FACT:
The Priory of Sion—a European secret society founded in 1099—is a real organization. In 1975 Paris's
Bibliothèque Nationale discovered parchments known as Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of
the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Leonardo da Vinci.
The Vatican prelature known as Opus Dei is a deeply devout Catholic sect that has been the topic of recent
controversy due to reports of brainwashing, coercion, and a dangerous practice known as "corporal mortification."
Opus Dei has just completed construction of a $47 million World Headquarters at 243 Lexington Avenue in New
York City.
All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.
2005-05-19, 3:51 PM #14
tofu, even though I agree that the book is fiction, I watched something on TV a few weeks ago (maybe a month and a half?) on one of those "learning" stations, you know, DSC, TLC, whatever. Anyway, they were discussing the "facts" of the Da Vinci Code and had Dan Brown himself on it, and he said himself that the stuff in the book is based on fact, despite giving no proof.

And in all honesty just open the book, in the very first page he says the stuff is true.
I can't think of anything to put here right now.
2005-05-19, 6:07 PM #15
.. but the things that are listed in the front are historical facts that you will find in any relevant reference or textbook.
一个大西瓜
2005-05-19, 6:15 PM #16
Actually, the Priory of Sion never existed. It was made up by some guys in the 60's as some sort of prank, or something.
Stuff

↑ Up to the top!