http://www.churchofthemasses.blogspot.com/

[quote]THE STUFF OF REAL CONTROVERSY?

Columbia Pictures has acquired The Da Vinci Code for a seven-figure sum. Describing writer Dan Brown as a "master Storyteller" Sony Pictures Entertainment chairman, John Calley notes that they "can't wait to bring this puzzle to the screen."

The real puzzle is how come a book that is known to be virulently anti-Catholic can be acquired without a peep of indignation from the people who have been overflowing with horror about how some supposed scenes in The Passion may possibly be contorted by some twisted wackos somewhere into a validation of anti-Semitism? There is nothing subtle about the bigotry in The Da Vinci Code. It's just badly researched, offensive hate-blather which uses Christians as its object.

I try very hard to get my fellow Christians to give Hollywood a break, but then, [expletive deleted], one of the studios goes off and does something indefensible like this.[/quote]

Here's a blurb from the Hollywood Reporter. And remember, according to Ted Baehr, Ron Howard is a Christian -- that's why Baehr gets to say Howard's adaptation of The Grinch was a Christian movie despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Ron Howard Paged for 'Da Vinci Code'
Thursday July 31 2:28 AM ET

Columbia Pictures hopes to lure director Ron Howard aboard its big-screen adaptation of Dan Brown's best-selling thriller "The Da Vinci Code."

There is no script for the project, but Howard was given the book to read and is about halfway through the page-turner; a source said he's enjoying what he's reading.

The filmmaker has a full plate, though, as he is in post-production on the Revolution Studios Western "The Missing" and next will direct the Universal/Miramax boxing film "Cinderella Man."

FWIW, the thread discussing this book is here.

According to Variety, it's official—Ron Howard and his A Beautiful Mind team will indeed make this film.

Diane

Apparently ABC News is doing a special tonight on the book and the controversy around it, according to the New York Times.

Peter T Chattaway wrote:

Apparently ABC News is doing a special tonight on the book and the controversy around it, according to the New York Times.

Seems to me someone should be doing a special on the controversy around the ABC News special.

Amy Welborn on The Davinci Code

Caught part of an interview with the book's author this morning on "Good Morning America" (ABC), obviously part of a campaign to push tonight's special. He presented the book as a sort of effort to rehabilitate the world's image of Mary Magdalene, unfairly maligned by the bad RC church as a prostitute, when really, he pointed, out, the Bible does not actually say she was a prostitute.

Had to give him points for that--the conflation of Magdalene from whom demons were cast out (Luke 8:2) with the "sinful" woman who washed Jesus feet with her hair (Luke 7:36 ff) is not explicit. Nevertheless, the whole marriage thing is, of course, a crock.

And now THIS.

I just returned from a beach vacation :sunny:

Yup, I read DVC on the beach, no less. It's an adequate page-turner, but after the first half really goes down hill. It does introduce interesting historical sites and movements to people unfamiliar with such, but it's a shame the scholarship is so lousy and the agenda so obvious. Even Newsweek, as part of its cover story, did a fair job debunking it. DVC even makes the Jesus Seminar appear cautious and considered.

However, many are being confused by the book. I read it at my wife's request, and she is meeting with a person who's been thrown off by it.

Has anyone read any of Brown's other books? Are they all so out-to-lunch, theologically?

What's the status of the movie? Ron Howard still going to direct?

I'm posting this here, because I didn't notice a thread on the upcoming film that is going into production...

Ordinarily, I would just edit the earlier post to update the link to the book thread -- the earlier post gives the old promontoryarts.com address -- but since that post has blockquotes, and since this new board doesn't do blockquotes, I'm posting a new message. So ...

Link to the thread discussing this book.

Thanks, PTC; I've merged the duplicate threads.

Tom Hanks lands the lead role in "The DaVinci Code."

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo (although that's terrific casting)

Jean Reno also mentioned as a candidate for Bezu Fache.

Hanks and Howard together again? Well, now we can see if Peter's theory about Hank's underperforming on third outings with directors continues.

As for additional casting... has anyone mentioned Audrey Tautou as Sophie Neveu?

Huh. I didn't picture Langdon as being anything like Hanks when I read the book.

Baal_T'shuvah wrote:
: . . . has anyone mentioned Audrey Tautou as Sophie Neveu?

Hmmm, Tautou with red hair ... (The red hair is an essential plot/theme point!)

And y'know, come to think of it, I wonder what this could do to the claims some people have made regarding Tom Hanks's alleged attendance at a Greek Orthodox church -- both he and Ron Howard have generated some are-they-Christian? buzz in the past, but who knows, their association with this story could change all that.

Hanks To Star in 'The Da Vinci Code'
Ending rampant speculation and betting on the Internet over who will play Harvard professor Robert Langdon in the movie adaptation of The Da Vinci Code, Sony's Columbia Pictures announced Tuesday that it had signed Tom Hanks for the role. Hanks' hiring was originally disclosed in last week's edition of Newsweek, but was not confirmed by the studio. Newsweek quoted producer-director Ron Howard as saying, "Tom is an exciting actor to watch thinking. ... We probably don't need his status from a box-office standpoint [the book has spent 87 weeks atop the New York Times'best-seller list] but he gives Langdon instant legitimacy."

As I've said elsewhere, I don't think people go to movies to watch actors think.

I keep meaning to pass this along -- just FWIW...

Dan Brown apparently leaned heavily on a free computer program called Anagram Genius for some of the content of his book, according to this site.



I've had some fun with this software -- a few years ago, I gave our staff various anagrams of their names at the Christmas party -- some hilariously appropriate names, too.

For an example of what the software comes up with, here is what comes from rearranging the phrase:
'Leonardo da Vinci, "The Last Supper':

O! A dull, pathetic Passover dinner.
So, have old-pals-at-dinner picture.
A pie, trout and chips all served, no?
Have Lord and apostles in picture.
Oil and such, painted over plaster.
Lord, pals on a picture: a dish event.

And so it begins again. Tom Wright is quoted, as is this article at Salon.com.

DA VINCI Detractors (FilmStew.com)
[indent]It hasn’t even started production yet. But already, some folks are mobilizing against what they feel is a sacrilegious effort by Hollywood potentates Tom Hanks and Ron Howard.

Whenever a lightning rod personality gets involved in a controversial film project, Internet and PR fireworks are almost sure to ensue. This year, the two people in the eye of the storm were of course Malibu Aussie Mel Gibson and Upper West Side Flint, Michigan refugee Michael Moore.

Next year, the winds of controversy may well stir up things for Pacific Palisades residents Tom Hanks and Brian Grazer. That’s because those two, along with the Connecticut-home-headquartered Howard, will be hard at work on the long-awaited adaptation by Columbia Pictures of Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code.

"Please say NO to this film, so that America can continue to hold you in high esteem,” writes Don Tennison in an open email letter to Tom Hanks received by FilmStew. “This will also avoid a boycott of not only this movie (which will be boycotted anyway), but all of your current and any future movies you have anything to do with, whether acting, directing or producing.”[/indent]

Albinos Want To White-Out Killer from 'Da Vinci' Script
An organization representing albinos has registered its opposition to portraying a killer in the film version of The Da Vinci Code as an albino (which is the way he is represented in the Dan Brown novel). "[Producer/director] Ron Howard and Imagine [Films Entertainment, which is producing the movie] can make a big difference for people with albinism by continuing the trend away from a hack device if they adjust the Silas character to not be an evil albino," said Mike McGowan, president of the National Organization for Albinism and Hypopigmentation (NOAH). "Over the years the stereotyping and misinformation foisted on the albinism community by filmmakers who don't take the time to learn the facts about albinism does real harm to real people," he added.

- - -

I'm guessing there may be some significant reason, tied to the book's interest in Renaissance art, why this character is portrayed as an albino in the book -- just as Sophie Neuveau (sp?) is portrayed with red hair. But then again, it might just be another timeworn cliche (like that albino killer in Cold Mountain).

Sophie has been cast

IT'S

Audrey Tautou

Hmmm, wonder how she'll look with red hair ...

More casting...

Sir IAN MCKELLAN as Sir Teabing
ALFRED MOLINA as Bishop Arigarosa

Zzzzzz (typecasting)

Oh, yeah -- and Christopher Eccleston in talks for Silas

I'm going to have to get this Anagram Genius. I heard that J. K. Rowling used it to come up with that nifty, "I AM LORD VOLDEMORT" anagram. And hey, this is a real find if my church had a big ol' bank-like electronic flashing billboard. Now if I could only find an anacronym genius.

For those who care... the "trailer" is up.

I keep thinking this must all be a joke.

I think I'll watch the Narnia trailer again...

Paul Bettany will play Silas, the albino fanatic.

The Dean of Lincoln Cathedral appeals to Jesus and Paul to justify letting the film shoot there.

Meanwhile, Westminster Abbey refuses to let the filmmakers shoot there...

Uh oh...

[LINK FIXED]

Da Vinci Code + Grace Hill Media + Barbara Nicolosi = BIG TROUBLE.

I imagine some of us will have our turn responding to this situation. I gotta admit, my reaction is very similar to Barbara's on this issue....

The link should be:

Church of the Masses

It had an extra character at the end, which needed to be deleted.

Don't you guys think that some of the stupidity of the book will be toned down from the movie? Seems like if they don't, this may just become a niche movie like all the other movies that made large numbers of Christians mad. I may be wrong, but contrast the box office performance of Saved to that of Bruce Almighty. Based on the "deleted scenes" & the director commentary, the director of the latter was clueful enough to know when he was really stepping over the line. The director of the Saved... well, I admit that I haven't seen it, but from what I've heard... "not as clueful".

Nonetheless, there are so many people who want to take a crowbar to Christianity's sense of exclusivity and "escape" the dominance that it has had on our culture for so many years, I'm sure the movie will play to those symphathies even if it doesn't regurgitate all of Dan Brown's historical inaccuracies. That's almost more what I'm concerned about than someone believing baloney about Mary Magdalene. Here we're not dealing with loss of faith in God as much as trust in His church.

JoelBuursma:
: Don't you guys think that some of the stupidity of the book will be toned down from the
: movie? Seems like if they don't, this may just become a niche movie like all the other
: movies that made large numbers of Christians mad.

I dunno, two or three years of selling hardcovers non-stop hardly indicates that this would be a "niche" movie. If anything, the legions of fans this book has indicates the filmmakers may be obliged to be as true to the novel as possible.

But now I am reminded of how the movie version of a much earlier bestseller, Gone with the Wind, toned down the racism, classism, and feminism of the book to give the story a broader, more universal appeal. (I owe this point to Jim Cullen's The Civil War in Popular Culture: A Reusable Past.)

Will the film downplay the novel's anti-Catholicism?

I am thankful Howard and his writers are going to downplay the attack on Christianity - however the central plot of Goddess worship could not be removed and still have the central theme.

Denny

Three Catholic critics/bloggers agree with you, Denny. They were interviewed by the NYTimes and commented on their experiences in their blogs. This one, by Carl Olson, author of The Da Vinci Hoax, includes quotes from and/or links to the other two (Barbara Nicolosi & Amy Welborn).

I say: go ahead and alienate the fan base.

Barbara Nicolosi is quoted...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/07/movies/07waxm.html? (NY Times)

...executives and others connected with the project acknowledge that their silence is also a measure of concern about the potentially incendiary nature of the subject matter. The book, which is fiction, takes aim at central Christian dogma, claiming that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene, who was meant to be his true heir. It alleges an enormous coverup by the Roman Catholic Church, which, according to the book, usurped Mary's place in favor of a male-oriented hierarchy that has suppressed what Mr. Brown calls the "sacred feminine."

...

Studio officials have consulted with Catholic and other Christian specialists on how they might alter the plot of the novel to avoid offending the devout. In doing so, the studio has been asked to consider such measures as making the central premise - that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene - more ambiguous, and removing the name of Opus Dei.

...

"The phrase I heard used several times was 'Passion dollars'; they want to try to get 'The Passion' dollars if they can," said Ms. Nicolosi, referring to her conversations about the film. "They're wrong," she added. "It's sacrilegious, irreligious. They're thinking they can ride the 'Passion' wave with this. And I said, 'Are you kidding me?' "

Yes, I was talking with my wife yesterday morning about this film, and one of the things that I think will be very difficult to portray in any kind of sensitive/artistic/compelling/interesting way is



watching the grandparents have sex on a ritual altar.


Just the thought of that on film should be enough for people to realize this film is espousing something very different from Christian worship.

Denny

When I was 14-15 I once walked in on my 80+ -year-old step-grandmother Lorna when she was changing. Buck naked.

It wasn't a spiritual moment.

That's the most I've laughed all week!

I responded to Nicolosi's comments at my blog a week ago.

Personally, I'm curious to know if this movie will use any footage from the films that are cited in the novel. Disney did allow the "illustrated edition" of the book to include a photo from The Little Mermaid; perhaps they would do the same for the film? And who knows, Universal might do the same with footage from The Last Temptation of Christ. This is the kind of story that demands a rapid-fire montage of archival footage to back up its arguments, kind of like Pi or The Late Great Planet Earth, and those clips would definitely be useful.

Here's my favorite news item of the day...

TOM HANKS ACCOSTED BY NUNS, SAYS PAKISTANI NEWSPAPER.

Almost deserves it's own thread (but I don't dare!!)
So, to appease my desire to make a big event of this, I will instead direct you to my blog yet again.

Erm ... the news item is from a Pakistani site, but the cathedral is in Lincolnshire, England.

CORRECTED. But dang, I liked that headline better.

Speaking of post Nazis...the new software upgrade will automatically consolidate sequential posts from the same user into one post. It's going to ruin DanBuck's day.

But this is off topic, so I'll have to whack myself (what I get for watching Sin City while posting).

ME a post Nazi? I vas only follovink orders!

Too bad the new software won't do it for y—hey! Ouch!

Um... So if I post something tonight and say, "I'm off to see a particular film," and then I post in the morning to say, "I've seen the film! Here are my thoughts!" ... and no one posts inbetween... those two posts will become one post?

Nope -- sorry I wasn't more precise -- posts are only consolidated if they're close together.