The Da Vinci Code

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Christians ready to refute 'Da Vinci Code' movie

Rather than organize protests or boycotts, Evangelicals and Catholics are mobilizing 'truth squads.'

By Jane Lampman | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

In a world accepting of docudramas and reality TV shows that aren't real, how does one counter a blockbuster movie whose theme challenges the orthodox religious history of the Western world?

 

That's the task facing Christians already distressed by Dan Brown's wildly popular novel, "The Da Vinci Code," and his claim that the thriller is based on historical facts.

 

 

 

In the Monitor

Thursday, 03/23/06

 

 

 

 

With sales of more than 40 million, the book has become a cultural phenomenon. Unless the copyright-infringement trial in London (which now awaits the judge's decision) brings an injunction against use of the material, the May release of the film starring Tom Hanks will surely magnify its global impact.

 

Rather than organize protests or boycotts - steps taken in the past against controversial films - Evangelicals and Catholics instead are mobilizing "truth squads." They're producing books, websites, TV documentaries, DVDs, and study guides. Some hope to use the film as a "teachable moment" that could turn the occasion to their advantage.

 

"Our task is to be the missionary to the unbelievers," says the Rev. James Garlow, pastor of Skyline Wesleyan Church in San Diego, Calif. He's developed a four-phase strategy for churches leading up to the film's release.

 

Yet others suggest there's more involved than a question of historical accuracy. They say part of the book's appeal is that it raises deeper issues about the nature of Christianity that many people, including devout Christians, want to talk about.

 

Eric Plumer, a theology professor at the University of Scranton, a Catholic institution in Pennsylvania, has been surprised by the intense interest he's encountered when giving talks about "The Da Vinci Code" in public libraries, colleges, and senior-citizen centers.

 

"The turnouts have been mainly standing room only," he says. "Some want to know how to refute the book; some want their belief in it strengthened.... Even if people can't wholly accept what Dan Brown has to say, they feel he has touched on something they want to discuss."

 

Dr. Plumer is now writing a book on why the novel has struck such a chord despite dozens and dozens of books published to debunk its claims.

 

Those claims include that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and their bloodline still survives; that the idea of Jesus' divinity did not exist until Emperor Constantine formed the Council of Nicea to establish it; and that the Roman Catholic Church has conspired to hide this throughout history, even to the point of murder.

 

The novel is first and foremost a fantastical murder mystery, an intriguing page turner that grabs even those wholly opposed to its thesis. It catches people's imaginations, many say, because it involves a conspiracy.

 

"Americans love a conspiracy theory," says Lynn Garrett, religion editor at Publishers Weekly. "It also tapped into people's disillusionment with the Catholic Church following the sexual abuse scandals."

 

Some say Mr. Brown's controversial approach to history plays on people's limited knowledge.

 

"One reason it works so well on readers is that he tends to begin with a kernel of something historical and then quickly spins off into fiction - or you could say falsehood, since he represents it as something researched," says Timothy Beal, professor of religion at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.

 

Professor Beal used Brown's novel last fall in a course on the New Testament and early Christianity, illustrating pop culture interest in the topic. "Half of the students had already read the book and many believed it," he says.

 

Yet people agree, too, that the novel appeals because it offers a different way of seeing Christian tradition, particularly issues of patriarchy and women in the early church. This appeal has helped spur new subcategories in the publishing business, Ms. Garrett says, with each season bringing new books on Mary Magdalene and on what's now called "alternative Christianity."

 

For Catholics, the primary concern is countering the historical charges as well as the representation of the church and the lay Catholic group, Opus Dei. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops is mounting a campaign tied to the film, with an extensive website launched this month and a TV documentary. "Jesus Decoded," presenting Catholic teaching on Christ, will be offered to NBC-TV affiliates for broadcast the week the movie opens. In addition, Opus Dei, which is controversial even among Catholics for its secrecy, has begun a PR campaign.

 

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, has pressed Sony Pictures and director Ron Howard to put a disclaimer at the start of the film saying it is fiction. "We have a deceitful writer who has said it's based on historical facts, and a co-producer who has called the movie 'conservatively anti-Catholic,' " says Mr. Donohue.

 

The filmmakers have not responded to his request. Instead, they've encouraged Christians to discuss the issues on a Sony-sponsored website: www.thedavincidialogue.com. A number of prominent Evangelicals are providing essays, while others suggest they're being co-opted.

 

The concern is global: The Russian Orthodox Church has complained about the film, and Evangelicals in South Korea are even trying to keep it out of theaters. One Christian leader, according to Yonghap News Agency, has compared it to the Danish cartoons denigrating Islam.

 

Evangelicals in the US plan to launch their own website in late April. Backed by an anonymous philanthropist and hosted by Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS) in Philadelphia, the project also involves people close to Billy Graham.

 

"While we recognize the right to present a good yarn, we're concerned the mix of fact and fiction is sure to lead many to question the Bible's integrity, its message, and Christianity's impact on history," says William Edgar, a professor of apologetics at WTS. "We want to help the curious viewer ... set the record straight, or at least put some doubt into the doubting."

 

Some church leaders aim to equip their congregations to handle the claims. Wheatland Presbyterian Church in Lancaster, Pa., plans a seven-week Sunday School class beginning in April to cover key issues raised by the novel. "We also hope to have an evening event for the community ... and encourage our members to invite neighbors to home-group discussions," says the Rev. Bruce Mawhinney, senior pastor.

 

Others, particularly leaders who have written debunking books, are more ambitious - packaging books, DVDs, and outreach materials. Dr. Garlow, author of "The Da Vinci Codebreaker," hopes his strategy for churches will lead people to throw Da Vinci parties, or gatherings at work to discuss the film with "unbelievers."

 

Yet some say Evangelicals are less likely than others to have even read the novel. Moviegoers who have read it may have other interests in mind.

 

"In our sort of postsecular society, there is a question out there among many: 'Is this all there is?' " Case Western's Beal says. "Given the socioeconomic realities and the established institutions, there's a desire to discover something more that's been there, but that we didn't know. A longing for something spiritual that is not possessed or controlled by established institutional religion."

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

I'm guessing that no matter what that judge rules that the movie is still going to come out. But I have to wonder... for every Marilyn Manson, Judas Priest, or V for Vendetta don't thay realize the more they hoot and hollar the more publicity they give the material? I really what these stuffy types think is going to happen when they make such a stink. All the same it is fun watching them get mad regardless if it is rooted in facts or not. So far I haven't read the book, but I probably will before the movie comes out. Is the book any good?

[MrRant 0]

nunna nunna nunna nunna... TRUTH SQUAD! nunna nunna nunna nunna... TRUTH SQUAD!

[The Metal Maniac 0]

You know, had I not already read the Da Vinci Code, I'd be angry at this article. It basically gives away the entire book.

 

Angels and Demons is a better book anyway; I hope Da Vinci Code makes a billion dollars so they'll make Angels and Demons.

[starvenger 0]

My wife said that "Angels and Demons" was better.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

Look at it this way: Da Vinci Code and Angels are Demons are basically the exact same book.

 

Langdon gets called to the scene of a murder, meets some girl who was releated to the dead guy, finds some clues, and goes off to unravel some conspiracy while a mysterious assassin skulks around.

 

The difference is, in Angels and Demons, everything seems more important, because they're not trying to discover some old "secret" that you could've read about in any library ten years ago; they're trying to stop lots of people from getting killed.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

I don't understand why they care...because it's FICTION.

 

 

FICTION. FICTION. FICTION.

 

 

It doesn't merit any of this at all. You don't see Truth Squads hunting down Christopher Lloyd for doing the impossible and building a TIME MACHINE, now do you? No, you don't...know why? Because just like this...it's FICTION.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

That's another good point about the book.

 

If the stuff in the book was real, then Mary being Jesus' wife would be a known fact.

[The Amazing Rando 0]

That's another good point about the book.

 

If the stuff in the book was real, then Mary being Jesus' wife would be a known fact.

 

 

Well let me tell you, when Christ hits 88 miles per hour...we're going to see some serious shit.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Terrible book. Stupid protest. A movie I won't see, and that's all I need to know.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

there's a new trailer for it.

[2GOLD 0]

That's another good point about the book.

 

If the stuff in the book was real, then Mary being Jesus' wife would be a known fact.

 

 

Well let me tell you, when Christ hits 88 miles per hour...we're going to see some serious shit.

 

He asked the Romans to hang him on the cross while he held some nails. He thought it would be the perfect way to get 1.21 jigawatts. Sadly, there was a miscommunication and they thought he said "hang me on the cross using nails".

 

Boy, was his face red after.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Terrible book. Stupid protest. A movie I won't see, and that's all I need to know.

I haven't read it, but it seems like a big favorite among uninteresting people. You know, an easy way for them to say "hey, I read books!"

[SuperJerk 0]

That's another good point about the book.

 

If the stuff in the book was real, then Mary being Jesus' wife would be a known fact.

 

 

Well let me tell you, when Christ hits 88 miles per hour...we're going to see some serious shit.

[razazteca 0]

You know, had I not already read the Da Vinci Code, I'd be angry at this article. It basically gives away the entire book.

 

Angels and Demons is a better book anyway; I hope Da Vinci Code makes a billion dollars so they'll make Angels and Demons.

It's directed by Opie Taylor and staring Tom Hanks! Of course it will make more $$$$$ than the Passion!

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

The only thing I fear is the mullet that Hanks supposedly sports during the movie.

 

Maybe they'll be protesters out in the parking lot opening night like for Dogma.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Yet another "cultural phenomenon" that doesn't even make a blip on my radar. It's starting to pay more and more to ignore the entertainment industry.

[Jingus 0]

For anyone who's never read his stuff: Dan Brown is a poor man's Michael Crichton who often substitutes ancient religious mythology instead of cutting-edge technology.

 

Angels and Demons was a better book, but I don't think the right-wing world is ready for a Tom Hanks film about a murdered pope and a bunch of slaughtered cardinals, especially once the villain's true identity is revealed.

 

I do actually like the "truth squad" idea though, as lame as it sounds. Offering your own differing point of view is much better than blind fanatical tactics like boycotts, which is essentially economic terrorism.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

Angels and Demons was better from a "thriller" standpoint but i didnt think the overall story/characters and material were all that interesting.

[iggymcfly 0]

Terrible book. Stupid protest. A movie I won't see, and that's all I need to know.

I haven't read it, but it seems like a big favorite among uninteresting people. You know, an easy way for them to say "hey, I read books!"

 

I agree completely.

 

Whenever someone says "Did you read the Da Vinci Code?", I expect them to follow it up with something like "Wasn't it awful what happened to that girl on American Idol?"

[notJames 0]

Terrible book. Stupid protest. A movie I won't see, and that's all I need to know.

I haven't read it, but it seems like a big favorite among uninteresting people. You know, an easy way for them to say "hey, I read books!"

 

I agree completely.

 

Whenever someone says "Did you read the Da Vinci Code?", I expect them to follow it up with something like "Wasn't it awful what happened to that girl on American Idol?"

 

There's your Truth Squad right there. I can't believe I wasted that whole weekend reading that crap book. Right up there with The Celestine Prophecies and Dianetics.

[Red Baron 0]

I found neither book to be all that interesting, and at times very difficult to read.

 

Mind you I can see why people will want to read it.

[HollywoodSpikeJenkins 0]

You found them difficult to read? It was like an 8th grader wrote them.

[2GOLD 0]

You found them difficult to read? It was like an 8th grader wrote them.

 

Which makes things difficult to read. Makes your head hurt for entirely different reasons.

[Mystery Eskimo 0]

I found the Da Vinci Code quite funny, especially the albino assasin guy. Hilarious.

[haws bah gawd 0]

At the Cingular kiosk I work at, we have marketing adds up advertising some Da Vinci Code game you can play on your phone or something like that. Anyways when I came in today, I got a call from upper management saying all the signs had to be taken down and destroyed because we've been getting calls from customers who are offended by the movie/book.

[MrRant 0]

If you actually want to read something with some research... check out The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail

[BigPoppaKev 0]

Angels and Demons was better than Da Vinci. Dan Brown's other two books Digitial Fortress and Deception Point are both really good as well and deal with new age issues.

[Art Sandusky 0]

At the Cingular kiosk I work at, we have marketing adds up advertising some Da Vinci Code game you can play on your phone or something like that.

Quoted to emphasize cultural collapse.

[Mole 0]

This shit pisses me off so much. Why are you getting offended when IT IS A WORK OF FICTION?!? IT ISN'T REAL.

 

I have yet to hear a Catholic say they are offended, but if I do, we are going to have a nice talk.

[Dangerous A 0]

There is word coming out of Cannes that "Da Vinci Code" is not that great and is already getting some shoddy reviews from some critics who screened the movie in New York.

 

Here is Variety's movie review...

 

 

A pulpy page-turner in its original incarnation as a huge international bestseller has become a stodgy, grim thing in the exceedingly literal-minded film version of "The Da Vinci Code." Tackling head-on novelist Dan Brown's controversy-stirring thriller hinging on a subversively revisionist view of Jesus Christ's life, director Ron Howard and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman have conspired to drain any sense of fun out of the melodrama, leaving expectant audiences with an oppressively talky film that isn't exactly dull, but comes as close to it as one could imagine with such provocative material; result is perhaps the best thing the project's critics could have hoped for. Enormous public anticipation worldwide will result in explosive B.O. at the start in near-simultaneous release in most international territories, beginning May 17 in some countries -- day-and-date with the official Cannes opening-night preem -- and May 19 in the U.S. and elsewhere.

 

Sitting through all the verbose explanations and speculations about symbols, codes, secret cults, religious history and covert messages in art, it is impossible to believe that, had the novel never existed, such a script would ever have been considered by a Hollywood studio. It's esoteric, heady stuff, made compelling only by the fact that what it's proposing undermines the fundamental tenets of Christianity, especially Roman Catholicism, and, by extension, Western Civilization for the past 2,000 years.

 

The irony in the film's inadequacy is that the novel was widely found to be so cinematic. Although pretty dismal as prose, the tome fairly rips along, courtesy of a strong story hook, very short chapters that seem like movie scenes, constant movement by the principal characters in a series of conveyances, periodic eruptions of violent action and a compressed 24-hour time frame.

 

The appearance of its easy adaptability may have been deceptive, however, as what went down easily on the page becomes laborious onscreen, even with the huge visual plus of fabulous French and English locations, fine actors and the ability to scrutinize works of Da Vinci in detail.

 

What one is left with is high-minded lurid material sucked dry by a desperately solemn approach. Some nifty scene-setting, with strong images amplifying a Paris lecture delivered by Harvard symbology professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) intercut with the Louvre murder of curator Sauniere by albino monk Silas (Paul Bettany), spurs hope that Howard might be on track to find a visual way to communicate the book's content.

 

But from the first one-on-one scene between Robert and French police cryptologist Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou, occasionally hard to understand), in which she convinces him that cop Bezu Fache (Jean Reno) intends to hold him for the murder, the temperature level drops, and continues to do so as the pair goes on the run to stay one step ahead of Fache while using their complementary specialties to decipher the meaning of the cryptic messages Sauniere scrawled on his body in his own blood before he died.

 

Part of the quick deflation is due to a palpable lack of chemistry between Hanks and Tautou, an odd thing in itself given their genial accessibility in many previous roles. Howard, normally a generous director of actors, makes them both look stiff, pasty and inexpressive in material that provides them little opportunity to express basic human nature; unlike in the book, they are never allowed to even suggest their fatigue after a full night and day of non-stop running, nor to say anything that doesn't relate directly to narrative forward movement. It's a film so overloaded with plot that there's no room for anything else, from emotion to stylistic grace notes.

 

The pursuit of a man and a woman barely known to one another was a favorite premise of Alfred Hitchcock, and one need only think of the mileage the director got out of such a set-up in films from "The 39 Steps" to "North by Northwest" to realize some of the missed opportunities here.

 

Temporary relief comes, an hour in, with the arrival of Ian McKellen as Sir Leigh Teabing, an immensely wealthy Holy Grail fanatic to whom it falls to explain, in unavoidably fascinating monologues, the alternate history the story advances. It is Teabing's thesis that the early Church, beginning with the Emperor Constantine, suppressed the feminine aspects of religion both stemming from pagan times as well as from the prominent role in spreading the faith he insists was played by Mary Magdalene, a role underlined by a close look at Da Vinci's celebrated "The Last Supper."

 

More than that, however, Teabing insists that Mary Magdalene, far from having been a prostitute, was actually Jesus' wife and that they had a daughter whose bloodline has persisted. McKellen seems to relish every moment and line, which can scarcely be said of the other thesps.

 

Given the widespread readership the book has enjoyed and the howls of protest from Christian entities beginning with the Vatican, it is hardly spoiling things to point out that the baddies here are members of the strict Catholic sect Opus Dei, including Silas and Alfred Molina's Bishop Aringarosa, defenders of doctrine determined to eliminate the threat to the established order posed by the so-called Priory of Sion, an organization secretly holding the "knowledge" that could cripple the church.

 

Even after the action moves from France to England, there's still a long way to go, and the final dramatic revelations, however mind-boggling from a content p.o.v., come off as particularly flat.

 

The darkly burnished stylings cinematographer Salvatore Totino brought to Howard's previous two films, "The Missing" and "Cinderella Man," prove rather less seductive in the largely nocturnal realms of "The Da Vinci Code." Hans Zimmer's ever-present score is at times dramatic to the point of over-insistence.