our Booker said it was tracking extremely high....like record breaking high.

I think it will be pretty damn close between Da Vinci and Pirates for the number one spot(highest overall gross for the summer). Who knows, maybe X-Men or Superman can even have a chance. It looks like MI:3 did a bit less than expected. Tom Cruise and his bad publicity...ohh well.

Back to the Da Vinci Code, I've never read the book. I know what it's about and I think it would be a fine story for a movie. Seriously though if I have to hear someone else talking about the book like it's nonfiction I might have to choke a bitch.

5/10/2006 2:39:34 AM

BUT IT'S BASED ON A TRUE STORY

5/10/2006 2:41:23 AM

I will never see it. If the book isn't good, well, I'm doubting the movie will be.

I predict people will see it en masse.

5/10/2006 2:48:33 AM

I am totally going to see it.

I refuse to read the book. If a bemulleted Tom Hanks were in the book, I would definitely read it.

5/10/2006 2:57:47 AM

I refuse to read the book, because....dammit, that's what movies are for. That shit only takes 2 hours... or in this case... 2 hours 45 minutes.

yeah, i forgot to mention that.


the current running time for da vinci is damn near Lord of the Rings long

5/10/2006 2:59:38 AM

Oh, is this why people don't read anymore?

5/10/2006 3:00:35 AM

I read, just not a lot, or often.

I don't have a whole lot of sit down and read time, so a book has to be really good to keep my attention long enough for me to carry it around and read it til I'm done.

I like movies....they pay my bills

5/10/2006 3:07:12 AM

I'll be seeing Snakes on a Plane and X3. 'Tis all.

5/10/2006 4:09:04 AM

What is the whole fascination surrounding box office revenue competition? If Pirates makes more this summer than "M:I:3" or Da Vinci does that automatically make it someone's favorite?

I really liked Da Vinci, Pirates was okay, but since it made more money I'm going with Pirates as my favorite.

5/10/2006 7:29:38 AM

thats why the backstreet boys is my favorite band.

5/10/2006 7:49:51 AM

the book was good.

but the whole time i was reading it (it was already super popular at the time, and I knew a movie adaptation was inevitable), I was thinking to myself what an awful movie it would make. I thought this because so much of book deals with explanations and internal dialogue.

but yea, i'll probably go see it.

5/10/2006 8:30:38 AM

^^^you do realize people make these movies for money right

nobody got together and decided to make a sequel to POTC out of the kindness of their own heart

5/10/2006 8:43:56 AM

you mean the MPAA aren't the nice guys?

5/10/2006 10:32:34 AM

Quote :

"Seriously though if I have to hear someone else talking about the book like it's nonfiction I might have to choke a bitch."

Amen.

WHen I was initially reading the book I was really into it (I simply love theological thriller or historical thriller type stuff, ie Umberto Ecco) and thought the book was great when I finished. However, not 24-48 hours after I finished it I actually thought about it and realized how bad the book actually was (and I don't mean story validity or anything like that)... it really wasn't well written or remotely "deep".. in fact I remember thinking that it felt more like I had watched a movie than read a book. Plus, I had also just read a recent Michael Crichton book and he just gives so much more detail and rich background.

5/10/2006 10:43:03 AM

who cares if its well written if you enjoyed it.

5/10/2006 11:06:51 AM

^^^^Who cares if it makes a lot of money or not if you enjoy it (which was my point). Of course the financial backers care how much money it makes.

5/10/2006 11:13:05 AM

i'm confused as to what your point is

[Edited on May 10, 2006 at 11:16 AM. Reason : thosten runs a theater, its in his best intrest to know what films are going to do well]

5/10/2006 11:16:12 AM

^Oh, I was speaking more from the point of someone watching a movie, not someone that stands to gain/lose financially from a movie.

5/10/2006 11:22:30 AM

im with msb2ncsu

while I was reading it i thought it was pretty good, but when I was finished...well....
you know how when you are really hungry and eat lots of pizza, then only to wish later that you could throw it all up....

thats about how I felt abotu da vinci code

Dan Brown made too much money off of this book, and he's just gonna make more

5/10/2006 11:30:18 AM

p.s. I'd see anything with Audrey Tautou in it.

5/10/2006 11:33:05 AM

Quote :

"p.s. I'd see anything with Audrey Tautou in it."

DING DING DING!

5/10/2006 11:40:22 AM

I'll probably netflix it when it comes out on DVD. I read the book, and it was what I'd call a "beach read." Entertaining but no other value than that.

5/10/2006 11:53:58 AM

anyone who has read the book:

does this movie need to be over two and a half hours long?

5/10/2006 12:42:26 PM

this was one of the few books I've actually sat down and read in a while

it was a damn good book, IMO

and yes, I do think the movie should be 2.5 hours long, they covered a lot of stuff in the book. Too many times nowadays movies based on novels cut out various parts in order to make the movie 'feature length'. Sometimes they cut out non-essential parts that often go unnoticed, but with all of the historical and biblical ramifications the book had, I would hope the movie would be true to the novel.

5/10/2006 12:52:15 PM

i forgot that ron howard directed this...

5/10/2006 1:06:19 PM

^^ yeah, I cant wait to sit on my ass listening to a fictional history lesson for hours

5/10/2006 1:22:02 PM

well I know its not a TRUE historical/biblical story (although it possibly could be on to something), but there are definetly some ramifications coming from this book. Look at how the Catholic church is urging its followers to boycott the movie. the movie is stirring shit up and making people second guess everything they've believed in religiously.

5/10/2006 1:48:09 PM

well, the Catholic church also urged its followers to boycott Dogma. I'm pretty sure that movie wasn't on to anything, historically.

Just b/c something creates controversy doesn't make it interesting.
controversy exists everywhere today.

5/10/2006 1:54:57 PM

No no that was based on the true story of the rubber poop monster.

5/10/2006 2:15:34 PM

they should make a flying spaghetti monster movie, so the Catholics can boycott that too.

5/10/2006 2:23:40 PM

just a few more days..... im excited.

ohh, and can churches please stop trying to plan protests infront of theaters

5/15/2006 8:50:52 PM

^^ Yeah, except that I wouldn't go on principle that the FSM thing just makes atheists look frivolous.

5/15/2006 9:13:20 PM

Quote :

"well I know its not a TRUE historical/biblical story (although it possibly could be on to something), but there are definetly some ramifications coming from this book. Look at how the Catholic church is urging its followers to boycott the movie. the movie is stirring shit up and making people second guess everything they've believed in religiously. "

take a look on the spine of that shitball book you have, it says FICTION for a reason

5/15/2006 9:17:04 PM

might be good but doubt i'll pay $7 to see it. probably blockbuster it, eventually.

and really, they were all about how handsome and good looking langdon was. and then they cast tom hanks with a mullet. wtf. based on appearances only, eric bana would've been great, imo.

5/15/2006 9:36:48 PM

Hey, lets have this thread again

5/15/2006 9:40:30 PM

Honestly, they could throw together Ron Howard and Tom Hanks and make a movie about damn near anything, like doing one's taxes...and it would make $texas

what's the count up to now?

okay it's only 2, but it seems like more...maybe i'm just sick of Ron Howard films

[Edited on May 16, 2006 at 12:04 AM. Reason : oops]

5/16/2006 12:02:35 AM

After Arrested Development, I'll put up with a lot from Ron Howard.

5/16/2006 12:19:55 AM

I'm a finalist in the Google Da Vinci Quest challenge, bitches!

5/16/2006 8:51:39 AM

Quote :

"Seriously though if I have to hear someone else talking about the book like it's nonfiction I might have to choke a bitch."

to every person who says this tell them to read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and The Messianic Legacy...
fun shit...
non-fiction...
and pure speculation, but at least they admit it's pure speculation...

5/16/2006 9:02:09 AM

The Catholic Church is going to suggest boycotting any movie that suggests ideas that are heretical, promotes practices that the church says are wrong, or is slanderous to the Church.

I'm sure if a movie came out that promoted cruelty to animals PETA would suggest that its members boycott it. I'm sure if a movie promoted racism the NAACP would suggest a boycott.

[Edited on May 16, 2006 at 9:48 AM. Reason : .]

5/16/2006 9:45:32 AM

I don't get why everyone feels they have to point out that the book is fiction

OF COURSE it's fiction. How could jesus be married to mary magdalene if neither one of them really existed? Use your heads!

5/16/2006 9:48:22 AM

Quote :

"Honestly, they could throw together Ron Howard and Tom Hanks and make a movie about damn near anything, like doing one's taxes...and it would make $texas"

i believe you're thinking about either "meg ryan" or "steven spielberd"

5/16/2006 9:49:02 AM

Quote :

"Great. Now even more dumbasses will think they are experts on the history of Christianity. "

-Nerdchick

5/16/2006 4:06:43 PM

The Catholic church is nervous because it knows that the people who view the movie aren't intellectual college students, and therefore can easily know that this is a work of fiction. They're worried about the idiot who watches a movie and takes it to be true, or at least starts to wonder if it is true. You know, the ones who would never set foot in a bookstore to read the fiction label on the cover. Unless the movie flashed ("This story is entirely fiction") at the beginning and end of the film, you're going to find quite a mass of people who are going to buy into this.

I mean, look at some of the people who wondered if there was such a thing as the Matrix when that movie first came out. Even the most rediculous of stories, if argued logically, could make anybody start to wonder.

5/16/2006 5:03:45 PM

So, there's a Community Church that holds service at the theater I work at... It's not that uncommon anymore, there was an article in the paper a few month back about how popular it is for a church to rent several auditoriums in a movie theater every Sunday. One for service, one for bible school, one for nursery...etc. They have been doing this for YEARS. Anyways. I am not a religious person by any means, but these people are quite tolerable.

Rather than protest this movie like most churches, they asked us to give them a showing of this movie on Sunday. (something we do for them a couple times a year)

Still don't know how I feel about this movie being over 2 and a half hours long

5/17/2006 2:50:17 PM

Quote :

"OF COURSE it's fiction. How could jesus be married to mary magdalene if neither one of them really existed? Use your heads!"

Even I think this post is stupid.

5/17/2006 2:57:29 PM

that's fine, but if you can produce for me one single reference to jesus that was written during his supposed life or, say, 20 years after he supposedly died, I'll be impressed, since they don't exist

Quote :

"therefore can easily know that this is a work of fiction. "

people, give it a rest. everyone knows that the story is fiction with some well-researched and some not-so-well-researched historical fact. there are alot of reasons to think that if jesus existed (which he didn't) there are tons of references to his being married, possibly to mary magdalene

there are also theories that the story of jesus (yeshua, which means joshua) was a retelling of the story of the jews and moses. the jews travelled through the desert for 40 years, jesus was in the wilderness for 40 days, moses died at the end of the 40 years and handed over care of the jews to joshua, and jesus died and rose from the grave to care for everyone. the crossing of the jordan river is mirrored by jesus' baptism in it, etc etc etc

also of course, there are the TONS of pagan god-men who have similar and sometimes almost the same story, are portrayed the same way, died and rose from the grave, born of a virgin, died on a post/cross/tree, rose after 3 days, you name it.

Quote :

" The early Christians, Origin, for instance, in his reply to the rationalist Celsus who questioned the reality of Jesus, instead of producing evidence of a historical nature, appealed to the mythology of the pagans to prove that the story of Jesus was no more incredible than those of the Greek and Roman gods. This is so important that we refer our readers to Origin's own words on the subject. "Before replying to Celsus, it is necessary to admit that in the matter of history, however true it might be," writes this Christian Father, "it is often very difficult and sometimes quite impossible to establish its truth by evidence which shall be considered sufficient" [Origin Contre Celsus. 1. 58 et Suiv.] This is a plain admission that, as early as the second and third centuries the claims put forth about Jesus did not admit of positive historical demonstration. But in the absence of evidence Origin offers the following metaphysical arguments against the skeptical Celsus: 1. Such stories as are told of Jesus are admitted to be true when told of pagan divinities, why can they not also be true when told of the Christian Messiah? 2. They must be true because they are the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies [Ibid.] In other words, the only proofs Origin can bring forth against the rationalistic criticism of Celsus is, that to deny Jesus would be equivalent to denying both the Pagan and Jewish mythologies. If Jesus is not real, says Origin, then Apollo was not real, and the Old Testament prophecies have not been fulfilled. If we are to have any mythology at all, he seems to argue, why object to adding to it the myths of Jesus? There could not be a more damaging admission than this from one of the most conspicuous defenders of Jesus' story against early criticism. Justin Martyr, another early Father, offers the following argument against unbelievers in the Christian legend: "When we say also that the Word, which is the first birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified, died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter." [ First Apology, Chapter xxi (Anti-Niacin Library.] Which is another way of saying that the Christian myths is very similar to the pagan, and should therefore be equally true. Pressing his argument further, this interesting Father discovers many resemblances between what he himself is preaching and the pagans have always believed: "For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribe to Jupiter. Mercury, the interpreting word (he spells this word with small w, while in the above quotation he uses w to denote the Christian incarnation) and teacher of all; Aesculapius ... to heaven; one Hercules ... and Perseus; ... and Bellerophon, who, from mortals, rose to heaven on the horses of Pegasus." [Ibid.] If Jupiter can have, Justin Martyr seems to reason, half a dozen divine sons, why cannot Jehovah have at least one? Instead of producing historical evidence or appealing to creditable documents, as one would to prove the existence of a Caesar or an Alexander, Justin Martyr draws upon pagan mythology in his reply to the critics of Christianity. All he seems to ask for is that Jesus be given a higher place among the divinities of the ancient world."

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html

anyway, that's not what this thread is about, so keep on going ahead. if you wanna argue jesus' existence, some old threads in the soapbox should suffice.

[Edited on May 17, 2006 at 3:47 PM. Reason : .]

5/17/2006 3:34:41 PM

and while you're doing that

i'l be looking for the froshkiller quote

5/17/2006 4:26:12 PM

Quote :

"^^ yeah, I cant wait to sit on my ass listening to a fictional history lesson for hours "

did you the The Passion?

5/17/2006 4:30:43 PM

wow

did that guy really post 8 paragraphs of off-topic shit??

wow

5/17/2006 4:46:25 PM