Da Vinci Code

[Boy Torotot]

hirap din kasi isiksik sa 2hr. movie ang whole book, unless gawin 4hr+ movie e by the middle part tulog na mga nanonood hehe

exactly..hehehe. baka di lang 4 hours at ubos budget ng producer kung lahat ng nangyari at scenes sa novel lagay sa movie.

[stinkaboy]

sa lingo ako manonood nito ;)

[oldblue]

exactly..hehehe. baka di lang 4 hours at ubos budget ng producer kung lahat ng nangyari at scenes sa novel lagay sa movie.

basta andun message oks na yun! sayang oras.

[Eismann]

[QUOTE=theveed]Why do you even need to put a disclaimer, are people THAT DUMB? Do you need to put that People Can't Fly after showing Superman?

Clarification: Fiction disclaimer is something you see in the end saying that the persons and scenes shown does not in any way depict the real persons and scenes living or dead.

Put your self in the shoes of the Opus Dei or the Catholic Leadership in Rome...those depicted or implied here in this movie to have been capable of commiting murder just to "protect the secret of the grail". The least that the movie owner could do is to put a fiction disclaimer to protect the decency and moreso the sanctity of the people or organizations mentioned. To some extent, what they did was even blasphemous.

THINK AGAIN.....

[theveed]

Eismann: hehe, yah, and how other movies portray other religions aren't???

Decency of the organizations? That depends on what angle you're looking at.

[Eismann]

THE VEED: ....and what movie or book in your recent memory was able to portray a similar blasphemous connotation?

What angle of decency? THINK AGAIN.....
Opus Dei was founded in Spain in 1928 by a Catholic priest, St. Josemaría Escrivá, with the purpose of promoting lay holiness. It began to grow with the support of the local bishops there and was approved as a secular institute of pontifical right by the Holy See in 1950. Opus Dei's work has been blessed and encouraged by Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II. In 1982, John Paul II established it as a personal prelature of the Catholic Church after careful study of its role in the Church's mission. The culmination of the Church's support for Opus Dei and its message came with the 2002 canonization of its founder. Pope John Paul has called Opus Dei's founder "the saint of ordinary life."

How does the real-world Opus Dei compare to the one in The Da Vinci Code?

There is a large number of inaccuracies in the picture of Opus Dei painted by the novel. Some of the most significant are catalogued and critiqued by Finnerty:
• The author evinces a remarkable lack of understanding of the structure of the Catholic Church and its various component institutions. Besides his mischaracterization of Opus Dei as "a sect," he variously calls it "a Catholic Church," a "congregation," a "personal Prelature of the Pope himself," and a "Personal Prelature of Vatican City."
• Calling Opus Dei "a Catholic Church" makes no sense. Opus Dei provides supplemental
spiritual formation rather than ordinary diocesan functions, except in a few isolated cases in which the Pope or a bishop has asked Opus Dei to take care of some task. Moreover, it is intrinsic to the concept "catholic" that there can be only one Catholic Church, the Catholic Church, and Opus Dei is a fully integrated part of it.
• Congregation is also a term that cannot be applied to Opus Dei, since it refers to religious. The very raison d'etre of Opus Dei is to provide a way of holiness for people who are not called to life in a religious order. For the same reason, the depiction of the Opus Dei villain as a monk in robes and Opus Dei's centers as cloistered residence halls where people withdraw from the world to live a life of prayer is the exact opposite of reality.
• The various permutations of "personal prelature" the author uses to describe Opus Dei are redolent of something like the papal equivalent of a personal army, i.e., an extra-legal operation not subject to the rest of the Church's established authorities. "Personal" does not mean that Opus Dei belongs personally to the Pope or Vatican officials but refers to the fact that the prelature's jurisdiction applies to persons rather than a particular territory.
• Opus Dei places special emphasis on helping lay people seek holiness in their daily lives. It has no monks, nor any members anything like the novel's creepy albino character named Silas.
• The author's descriptions of Opus Dei's "practices," as represented by Silas's bloody
purging rituals, are at best grossly distorted and at worst fabrications. He has taken pious accounts of the penances of some of the Church's great saints, including St. Josemaría Escrivá, and transformed them into a monstrous horror show.
• Likewise, teaching the faith, giving spiritual guidance, and being a Christian witness
("brainwashing," "coercion," or "recruiting," for the author) are fundamental aspects of the Christian faith, not just Opus Dei practices.
• The idea that Opus Dei entered a corrupt bargain with Pope John Paul II-bailing out the Vatican Bank in exchange for status as a personal prelature-is offensive and has no basis in reality.

[theveed]

Well, there's another thread about religious debates here... So we can discuss it there... but the point of this thread is the Novel... Which, is O.A. and undermines the faith of the believers, this "uproar" is no different from how the Muslims were reacting on the cartoons.

Basis in reality argument - Does ANY religion have concrete facts on that other than human scriptures and writing?

[rsnald]

nagkakainitan na pala dito anyway... i watched the movie, and of course read the novel, not only da vinci code, but also angels and demons.
yung movie..umm... masasabi ko lang, di sya bagay gawing movie. masyado madaming na short cut. some of the audience who may have not read the book was kinda left confused. madami na short cut eh... mas ok siguro kung gawin na lang nilang TV series.

THE VEED: ....and what movie or book in your recent memory was able to portray a similar blasphemous connotation?

Eismann... I wonder if you were already old enough to have watched "The Last Tempatation of Christ" before. It was shown almost 20 years ago, 1988 to be exact. That movie was more blasphemous that this Da vinci code. pinakita si Jesus dun na mahina...having human weaknesses and even carnal desires for Mary Magdalene. Back then, it also generated a lot of criticism and backlash from so called devout catholics...pero just the same, napanood pa rin sya at wala namang naging Iglesia ng Last Temptation. google mo na lang siguro para malaman mo sinasabi ko.

anyways... as theveed said, this thread started as a discussion on the novel... check mo yung nakalagay sa likod nung paperback edition nung novel... and you'll see there, printed clearly .... "FICTION". sa ibang thread na lang i-discuss yung religious debates.

peace out...



teka..isang hirit pa pala

Catholics should be concerned about the book because it ... misrepresents their Church as a murderous institution ....

I wonder what you call the Inquisitions then? A holy quest? anyways... I think that question and debate is best discussed elsewhere.

[boybi]

hirap din kasi isiksik sa 2hr. movie ang whole book, unless gawin 4hr+ movie e by the middle part tulog na mga nanonood hehe

wait nalang ng Special Extended Edition Director's Cut DVD.

[Eismann]

I haven't watched that movie(The Last Temptation)....if it's blasphemous 20 years ago, it is still blasphemous today. Thanks for the information.

Anyway, the point here is not religiousity, the point here is decency. Respect for others......good thing, OPUS DEI just turned the other cheek because that is the correct and Christian thing to do.....but to depict the organization in such a bad light and in a worldwide bestselling novel and film is unthinkable..........we are all rational people and siguro most of us are Christians also. It is but our duty to state the facts.....and separate fiction from it! I hope the novelist and filmmaker has this intention in the beginning and not just to make tons of money by laying misleading concepts about Catholics and Opus Dei in people's minds.

Peace sir THEVEED......and to those who I might have offended reading this thread.

[theveed]

Eismann: No bro, not offended at all hehe... I don't think you offended anyone... Don't even mind my ramblings hehe. Discussion lang naman eh...

With controversies kasi simple lang sakin... If it's totally untrue, there's no need to make noise just to defend yourself, coz ika nga "the truth will set you free..."

If you make so much effort to protest someone's claims it boils down to "why are you being so defensive?"

That's how I look at it...

Kinda like yung depiction ng mga pari as molesters dun sa movie ni Richard Gere at ni Edward Norton.... kaya ba di nagka"uprising" dahil fact yun? But that doesn't mean all of the priests are...

At the end of the day, it's Fiction...

Much like how Homer Simpson views Christianity, or SouthPark views the Mormons, etc etc. To react to something that trivial in such a scale is shallow, in my opinion...

The Muslims must be snickering right now, the way the Christians were during the cartoon fiasco...

[Eismann]

Thanks bro....
I like SIMPSONS...a very intelligent cartoon show which is parang not for kids...I use to watch it with my 7 year old son and there was a scene in our recent tv watching where Homer, in the interest of SAFETY FOR THE KIDS AT HOME covered all the pointed ends of a Hindu goddess with eight hands........and he collected fees from the Hindu owners.....funny and intelligent and most of all fiction!

[BlueGirl]

in my experience, the book is always so much better than the movie. never have i encountered yong mas maganda yong movie - from john grisham's novels to tom clancy's and ludlum's - the movie version had always been a disappointment compared to the novel. i assume da vinci code would be the same.

sabi din ng hunny ko yan,mahirap din kasi isiksik lahat sa movie yung mga important details lalo na limited yung oras...bukas pa kami manunuod..grabe wednesday pa kami bumili ng ticket at ang mahal sa gb3 P170.. take advantage na ata..

[theveed]

Grabe mahal ng ticket... check ko nga sa Sta. Lu kung magkano hehe...

[Bogeyman]

Eismann... I wonder if you were already old enough to have watched "The Last Tempatation of Christ" before. It was shown almost 20 years ago, 1988 to be exact. That movie was more blasphemous that this Da vinci code. pinakita si Jesus dun na mahina...having human weaknesses and even carnal desires for Mary Magdalene. Back then, it also generated a lot of criticism and backlash from so called devout catholics...pero just the same, napanood pa rin sya at wala namang naging Iglesia ng Last Temptation. google mo na lang siguro para malaman mo sinasabi ko.

Galit na galit si Manoling sa pelikulang yan. As far as that movie is concerned, in the end, Christ chose to go with the Divine Plan rather than give in to the temptations of being mortal. The story was the final test, and as expected, Jesus passed with flying colors.

Fanatics who call for the head of Dan Brown for portraying Jesus as a mortal don't seem to realize that the Bible itself was the first to do so. Particular evidence is Mark 14:36, depicting Christ's agony in the garden of Gethsemane: "And he said, Abba, Father, all things [are] possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt." This indicates that, even for a brief moment, Jesus himself exhibited the human traits of doubt, hesitation and fear when it came to the Father's Divine Plan, but ultimately realizes the value of the role he must assume for humanity's salvation.

[theveed]

Lalim ah hehehe

[OTEP]

Put your self in the shoes of the Opus Dei or the Catholic Leadership in Rome...those depicted or implied here in this movie to have been capable of commiting murder just to "protect the secret of the grail". The least that the movie owner could do is to put a fiction disclaimer to protect the decency and moreso the sanctity of the people or organizations mentioned. To some extent, what they did was even blasphemous.
THINK AGAIN.....

Hindi ba sinabi naman ni Tom Hanks sa movie na hindi lahat ng Opus Dei ay ganun. May adjective siyang ginamit. 'Fascist' ba? Not very sure (english kasi ).

Parang yung mga Muslim extremists sa pelikula. They are not representative of your average Islamic fellow.

[wulf]

basta all religions have their extremists/fascists, doesn't mean they're characteristic of every member/believer...g'night guys

[jipi]

Is this for me ba? PM your e-mail addy to me. And I'm a girl po.

hi sis,

my email add is qtr20_4*yahoo.com

thanks

[oldblue]

[QUOTE=Eismann]

Why do you even need to put a disclaimer, are people THAT DUMB? Do you need to put that People Can't Fly after showing Superman?

Clarification: Fiction disclaimer is something you see in the end saying that the persons and scenes shown does not in any way depict the real persons and scenes living or dead.

Put your self in the shoes of the Opus Dei or the Catholic Leadership in Rome...those depicted or implied here in this movie to have been capable of commiting murder just to "protect the secret of the grail". The least that the movie owner could do is to put a fiction disclaimer to protect the decency and moreso the sanctity of the people or organizations mentioned. To some extent, what they did was even blasphemous.

THINK AGAIN.....

me naman *eismann, I kinda like the idea of the Vatican sending off assassins or that term "soldiers of God". there are too many demons in these world and I think this Dan Brown is one of them.

akala ko pa naman kung ano na i-reveal nito Da Vinci code. it's nothing but an author's impure thoughts about Jesus Christ and his alleged ***ual relationship with Mary Magdalene. kahit yun mga jologs sa squatter baka naiisip din yan noon pa at ginawan ng storya and now he's making money out of it.

mas lalo pa nakakaasar na claim nya na Magdalene was to setup the Church of Christ and not Peter. yun pala Church eh lahi ni Jesus Christ. grabe sobrang dumi ng utak nitong Author na'to.