![]() Oh, can someone please provide proof that Opus Dei is involved in murder? I mean if they are so secretive and deadly, how does Dan Brown know so much, and live to tell about it? Why is it that those who defend Brown and his work, defend him and his work as if its the truth? Well, the DA Vinci Code will now go down in history just like the Protocols of Zion: bad and hateful fiction that only provides bigots with more ammunition to hate those who believe in a religion and set of morals that are different than their hateful bigotry. and it seems that for all the people who say it is just entertainment and fiction, why do some people, like you Andy, seem to feel if this movie is rated low, or if catholics are pissed off, that your anti-catholic reliigious beliefs are somehow being criticised? Its all fiction Andy, why are you so upset? How does it feel to have your religion criticised, since thats all this piece of trash is, a smear campaign against the Catholic Church and the divinty of Christ. So what gives people? The movie and the book are offensive and based on anti-catholic lies. Also, the person who the Priory of Sion gave their "historical" documents too for safe keeping stated they were forgeries. All the documents about the secrets of the Catholic Church and the Knights Templar were proven to be false becasue the script used never existed in the time period that Brown and Plantard said the documents were from. He was even arrested for being a con-man in the mid 1950s. ![]() His name is Pierre Plantard, and a recent 60 Minutes episode exposed Plantard as a mentally deranged anti-Semite. In regards to the Priory of Sion, that is a fabricated organization created by a neo-nazi in 1956. On a religious note, yes Da VInci was no saint, was very much a naturalist in his religious beliefs, maybe even neo-pagan, maybe even gay (hey, it was the renaissance for crying out loud) but there is no proof by any historian that Da Vinci was putting anything anti-catholic in his artwork. Yes the acting is "wooden," directing is sloppy, if not lazy. On a religious note, yes Da VInci was no saint, was very much a naturalist in his religious beliefs, maybe even neo-pagan, maybe even gay (hey, it was OK Andy, the movie sucked. I had high expectations and they were brutally not met. If my girlfriend, who also hated it, hadn't been so determined to stick it out, I would have left the theater and salvaged some of my time. This is the first movie in I don't remember how long that I kept wanting to actually leave while it was playing. There was also an overabundance of cheesy film effects to help us, the viewer follow what really wasn't a difficult story line along. Also, some of the changes made to characters deprived them of their depth, and once again a chance to shine in their roles. And if they had been a little more faithful to the book, there would have been some serious acting going on in this film. Its all aout getting from A to B as quickly as possible. But for almost 45 minutes there isn't any character interaction for any of the superb cast members to play with. The changes made to this movie from the book served no other purpose than to simply be different. But for almost 45 minutes there isn't any character The 2 is for casting, which I thought was inspired. The 2 is for casting, which I thought was inspired.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |