mr da vinci & mr brown

cow & buffalo is up. actually it’s been up for about eight hours now, but i keep forgetting to mention it since i started writing updates on this blog.

jen and i saw the da vinci code last night. i kept trying to make time to read the book before i saw it but just never found it. we did see it with someone who did though and he said it stuck pretty close to the book, which i guess just added to some of my frustrations with the movie. i mean it was a decent movie, not great, but entertaining enough and with a terrific cast (i just love audrey tautou). and i love treasure hunt tales and searches for the holy grail and stories of that nature. but the way so much of the story is routed in supposed truths just made a lot of what was said difficult to swallow. and yes, you’d think this would be because of me being a christian, and i’m sure part of it is, but it really had more to do with what i’ve studied in art history and particularly of the last supper. i mean, seriously, right off the bat here- why on earth would da vinci paint only eleven disciples? i mean, if he was commisioned to depict the last supper, don’t you think he’d include john instead of mary? was this the master artist i studied for his keen grasp on persepective or somebody more intent on leaving secret messages in his paintings? and if he wanted to conceil a hidden meaning to be preserved throughout time, why would he experiment with tempera? i don’t know. i didn’t know him. neither did dan brown, but he sure seems to assume a lot of what he did and what da vinci believed in. and that’s kind of the problem. it’s clear mr. brown does believe these accounts and theories presented in the film and he roots the basis of his storytelling in these “facts”. if i felt like i was only watching a fictional thrilling mystery with all these facinating puzzles to solve, that would have been great! i would have loved that. and i would have no problem with some of the religious theories that dan brown has. but don’t present them as based on fact. don’t presume i’m going to accept what you say is true because of your “research”. the fact is that the story depends on the reality of these pesumptions to feel credible. and not buying in to most of them really took away from some of my enjoyment.

ack! i’m rambling. i really did enjoy the movie. i enjoyed how the story unfolded, the inclusion of past events, the history, the conspiracies and the mysteries therein. but i enjoyed them as pure fiction. unfortunately, i don’t think dan brown sees things that way. hopefully, audiences are a little wiser.

3 comments

  1. Wife’s avatar

    Hi baby! I heard something on JOYFM 90.5 this morning (advertisement)
    The Da Vinci Code is a fictional book. So it is fiction from the moment you open the cover until you close it. That means that the page inside where it says it is all fact, is also fiction. I liked that comment.

  2. mike’s avatar

    hah! i like that! i was just doing some ranting yesterday. i feel better now.

  3. The Author’s avatar

    We feel the same way about this. i didn’t see the movie, but i read the book. i’ll bet his “research” comes across more idiotically on the printed page! :)

    Jesus shoots a guy in the face

Comments are now closed.

Buy Cleopatra in Space

On shelves