I enjoyed reading Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code. You might have noticed the Da Vinci quote at the top of this blog and that book was where I first read of it. Also, the background is a cropped portion of a Da Vinci sketch that I manipulated in one of those ‘photoshop’ things.
I saw the film last evening in a packed theater that must have been 90 degrees. Ugh. Could have done without that. The film was OK, I suppose. It hit the main points of the story, but almost in a mechanical and rushed way. It naturally wasn’t nearly as entertaining as the novel. As an aside, his Angels & Demons (written and published prior to TDVC) was a far better, more action-packed novel, in my view.
What a kerfuffle we’ve got here, eh? Up. In. Arms. To say the least. Wow. Y’know, I found the excitement concerning the novel to be quite charming and entertaining. Here you had people recommending it and talking about it in hushed tones to others as if it were a legitimate, scholarly refutation of core beliefs. I suppose that where intelligence, reason, logic and the scientific method won’t suffice, you’ve always got fiction.
Occam’s Razor comes to mind, once again. You know; that’s the principle, roughly stated, that says when you hear the beating of hooves, think horses, not zebras.
…when multiple competing theories have equal predictive powers,
the principle recommends selecting those that introduce the fewest
assumptions and postulate the fewest hypothetical entities.
Well, this is not a rigorous treatment of the thing, by any means, but it strikes me as rather hilarious that we have an unprovable, untestable supernatural explanation surrounding western civilization’s chief myth, employing hundreds of inter-connecting and self-reliant assumptions, countered by an admittedly fictional though natural explanation for this mythology and some cannot understand the allure. The allure is simple. Dan Brown’s explanation is better. It makes more sense. It’s more "plausible," but certainly only in a relative sense. It’s probably just as whacked as the Bible’s version, but as long as we’re believing in fairy tales, what difference does it make which version?
…the head of one group went further, calling the movie "a real, real danger" to the faith of Catholics and other Christians. ("Danger?" -ed)
…many Catholics and Christians don’t know church history to the detail
that Dan Brown gets into" in his "Da Vinci Code" novel and its film
adaptation. (So the "danger[ous]" Dan Brown knows church history, does he? -ed)
Baehr told the Washington, D.C., news conference that fiction can have a powerful impact on people… (How ironic! -ed)
films can have a particularly strong effect because darkened theaters
eliminate most distractions, giving moviegoers a "monopoly of the mind"
that can be more persuasive than books or other visual media. (…or massive cathedrals of stone and marble adorned with exotic hardwoods and tapestries, whose occupant authorities wear flowing robes? -ed)
he and his organization are also urging the public to boycott the film because it is "a fantasy passing as reality" (…and he should know. -ed)
…the big-screen adaptation of Dan Brown’s best-selling novel distorts history… (…which, you know, we’d like to keep our running monopoly on. -ed)
It deliberately presents fiction as fact. (We are against deliberately presenting fiction as fact. -ed)
…the film muddles fact and fiction… (…completely corrupting the fiction. -ed)
…upsetting people who have been Catholics all their lives who now don’t know what is true and what is lies. (What, still? -ed)
Greek authorities banned the film for viewers under 17, saying it
touched on "religious and historical questions of major importance that
a minor is not able to evaluate." (I guess the Greek Orthodox Church doesn’t ‘touch’ on "religious and historical questions of major importance." -ed)
[Monsignor Jean-Michel di Falco] Leandri said he would not call for a boycott because the movie "really
isn’t worth worrying about — it’s so far-fetched that no one will
believe it." (Obviously an authority on the "far-fetched." -ed)
So, there you have it.
(Article links: Carlos)