Curse

Stalker Haras · May 04, 2006, 10:25 PM // 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by ~ Star Maiden ~

I'm nearly done reading the book and I find it interesting, although frankly I don't consider it a can't-put-down page-turner the way some of the other novels I've read are. Like I haven't read it in weeks and I don't really feel a desire to pick it up anytime soon, though I'll prolly finish it just before the movie comes out.

The movie looks good, though. Anything with Sir Ian in it makes me happy. Go Gandalf!

Likewise. I've gotten about halfway through it so far, and I have read better book's, but it is still good so far. I can set it down whenever i need too.

unda dawg · May 05, 2006, 01:14 AM // 01:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Van Der Sloot

You're right, it should have been Mel Gibson. Man I loved Mel Gibson in Starwars.

wtf? mel gibson? i pictured some guy like 30-40 years old...clean cut, thin face with like sorta pointy hair in front...its not really a flip i cant describe it. o and btw, i finished the book too, i thought it was good except for some "unecessary" parts.

Guillaume De Sonoma · May 05, 2006, 03:12 AM // 03:12

I loved all of his books, I would rather not see the movie because it will disapoint me.

awesome sauce · May 05, 2006, 03:37 AM // 03:37

Well, the claim is now that Brown commited plagiarism and completely ripped off some other book called The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. The authors of that book took him to court, too.

fiery · May 05, 2006, 01:39 PM // 13:39

How can you take someone to court when he cited his information and gave acknowledgement to his sources?

Raptox · May 05, 2006, 01:53 PM // 13:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiery

How can you take someone to court when he cited his information and gave acknowledgement to his sources?

I can give you hundreds of reasons. Just say "money" hundreds of times, and there you go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by awesome sauce

Well, the claim is now that Brown commited plagiarism and completely ripped off some other book called The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. The authors of that book took him to court, too.

And he was acquitted on all counts. This was in the news a week or two ago.

Clearly this book is a work of fiction (duh), but I'm not really sure why people are saying there's "no proof" of the plot elements in the book. Historical research exists that proves that all of these groups (Knights Templar, Priory, etc.) do/did exist. Opus Dei 100% exists, as well as the books they reference (The Way, for example), but their practices may or may not be accurate. The locations in the book are all real-world places you can find on Google Earth, in which you can clearly see the Louvre's glass pyramids. Mr. Brown is not pulling the pieces out of the air.

Now, how he pulls these pieces together is a different story. Interpretation of symbolism is, of course, always up to the observer, so Mr. Brown is free to interpret the symbols however he wishes. It's up to the reader whether or not to agree with his interpretations. Some of the ties he makes seem plausible, and some do not. Seeing as how none of us were around 2,000 years ago* to say "THIS IS EXACTLY HOW IT HAPPENED", I don't see any reason why his interpretation is any less valid than any other.

On the other hand, I always got better grades in English when I made up the most outrageous and silly interpretations of symbolism I could, so take that as you will.

*Unless you have a time machine, in which case, why aren't you sharing?!

Kailynn Ember · May 05, 2006, 02:01 PM // 14:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptox

I can give you hundreds of reasons. Just say "money" hundreds of times, and there you go.

And he was acquitted on all counts. This was in the news a week or two ago.

Clearly this book is a work of fiction (duh), but I'm not really sure why people are saying there's "no proof" of the plot elements in the book. Historical research exists that proves that all of these groups (Knights Templar, Priory, etc.) do/did exist. Opus Dei 100% exists, as well as the books they reference (The Way, for example), but their practices may or may not be accurate. The locations in the book are all real-world places you can find on Google Earth, in which you can clearly see the Louvre's glass pyramids. Mr. Brown is not pulling the pieces out of the air.

Now, how he pulls these pieces together is a different story. Interpretation of symbolism is, of course, always up to the observer, so Mr. Brown is free to interpret the symbols however he wishes. It's up to the reader whether or not to agree with his interpretations. Some of the ties he makes seem plausible, and some do not. Seeing as how none of us were around 2,000 years ago* to say "THIS IS EXACTLY HOW IT HAPPENED", I don't see any reason why his interpretation is any less valid than any other.

I always got better grades in English when I made up the most outrageous and silly interpretations of symbolism I could, so take that as you will.

*Unless you have a time machine, in which case, why aren't you sharing?!

You are exactly right on the "organizations", cults, sects (whatever you want to call them) and the Opis Dei. They were (and are) very real... there is evidence that the Priory of Zion is still around. Thats what makes his book very misleading. He uses very interesting and FACTUAL information but mixes it with his own opnions/imagination. But thats just where it stands its a fictional book, found in the fictional section at your local bookstore. I so enjoyed the book and I do hope that he continues writing such captivating fiction.

fiery · May 05, 2006, 03:53 PM // 15:53

^ Agreed.

Lou · May 05, 2006, 04:35 PM // 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lharus

lol, I read Angels and Demons, and The Da Vinci Code. Both were good. Like many have said before however, it really is fiction without much to substantiate the books claims. But, it is a very entertaining to say the least.

The only thing wrong with Tom Hanks in the upcoming movie is.. his flippin HAIR.

Just.. wow...

I think its better then the bush he used to have growing on his head 0_O

Jiao Yang · May 05, 2006, 04:52 PM // 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommarrow

If you can't read how did you read this post? Hmmmmm

Shhh!

Omega_2005 · May 05, 2006, 05:08 PM // 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptox

Clearly this book is a work of fiction (duh), but I'm not really sure why people are saying there's "no proof" of the plot elements in the book. Historical research exists that proves that all of these groups (Knights Templar, Priory, etc.) do/did exist. Opus Dei 100% exists, as well as the books they reference (The Way, for example), but their practices may or may not be accurate. The locations in the book are all real-world places you can find on Google Earth, in which you can clearly see the Louvre's glass pyramids. Mr. Brown is not pulling the pieces out of the air.

Now, how he pulls these pieces together is a different story. Interpretation of symbolism is, of course, always up to the observer, so Mr. Brown is free to interpret the symbols however he wishes. It's up to the reader whether or not to agree with his interpretations. Some of the ties he makes seem plausible, and some do not. Seeing as how none of us were around 2,000 years ago* to say "THIS IS EXACTLY HOW IT HAPPENED", I don't see any reason why his interpretation is any less valid than any other.

On the other hand, I always got better grades in English when I made up the most outrageous and silly interpretations of symbolism I could, so take that as you will.

*Unless you have a time machine, in which case, why aren't you sharing?!

whoa! I was about to say the same thing: they do tours in Italy about a BOOK that's clearly fake, and millions of people are claiming it's the real thing!!

I could make a book just like the guy who takes the rip out of america - for britain anyday, and then maybe they'll do tours about that?? sheesh...

It's only a book for crying out loud!!!

/rantoff

jules · May 05, 2006, 07:10 PM // 19:10

If you have the time, this is an interesting read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory_of_Sion

Raptox · May 05, 2006, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by jules

If you have the time, this is an interesting read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory_of_Sion

Heh, be careful, that's a hot Wiki article and may not be totally unbiased. Check out the accompanying discussion and you'll see some obvious debate between, shall we say, "opposing sides." Even much of the article's text clearly flips between supporting and attacking tones.

This is just what you get with Wikipedia. If you're looking for info on something less controversial, Wiki is the place to go. Unfortunately, if you're looking for the facts of a hot-button issue, you're just as likely to find biased drivel on Wiki as on any other site with an agenda.

"The problem with the internet is that it knows everything, regardless of whether it's true."

Mr. Brown also left a very carefully worded description inside the front cover: "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

DESCRIPTIONS. Very important. He leaves himself wiggle room in order to say something like "the description of the manuscript is accurate; however, as to whether it's true or not..."

On the other hand, I've heard that he believes all of his theoretical ties and conclusions are the truth, so he might be out of his mind, too. Oh well!

jules · May 05, 2006, 08:32 PM // 20:32

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the article was unbiased. Do read it with a critical mind. (as with anything else on the Web)

I'm going to type a section from the book verbatim:

Quote:

Fact:
The Priory of Sion - a European society founded in 1099 - is a real organisation. In 1975 Paris's Bibliotheuque Nationale discovered parchments known as Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Sandro Botticelli, Victor Hugo and Leonardo da Vinci.

That doesn't leave any wiggling room as far as I'm concerned. It has been well established that Pierre Plantard forged the parchment (look this up and there's good evidence that it's true) and therefore one of two things is true:
1. Dan Brown is knew this and used it to sell his book.
2. Dan Brown was ignorant about this fact and published it as 'fact' anyway.

Regardless of what you believe, the Da Vinci code is a decent piece of fiction. Like the Harry Potter series, it's making more people read and that's not a bad thing at all (not that I'm a fan of either of these books myself). I do, however have issues with the book because it misleads the public into believing that an old hoax is true. Whatever sells your book, right Mr Brown?

At least talking about this book makes for a decent distraction from exam revision.

Woutsie · May 05, 2006, 08:59 PM // 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiery

But why Tom Hanks WHY?

Because he owns?

Diablo™ · May 06, 2006, 01:33 AM // 01:33

No kidding...

captainccc · May 06, 2006, 01:44 AM // 01:44

Ugh, this book was terrible and awsome at the same time. The content of the book was great about the "secret" life of Jesus and how he had a wife and kids. The controversy about it was that people actually started to belive the story. When you open a first couple of pages there is a caption that says "This story is based on fiction, not history". The author was writing this in fiction not there actuall theories. Look foward to seeing the movie though. Its a really fasinating outline and story. (Even if i dont belive it, its still good to read)
Definetly recommend if if your religious or not.

~Captain CCC

captainccc · May 06, 2006, 01:51 AM // 01:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptox

I can give you hundreds of reasons. Just say "money" hundreds of times, and there you go.

And he was acquitted on all counts. This was in the news a week or two ago.

Clearly this book is a work of fiction (duh), but I'm not really sure why people are saying there's "no proof" of the plot elements in the book. Historical research exists that proves that all of these groups (Knights Templar, Priory, etc.) do/did exist. Opus Dei 100% exists, as well as the books they reference (The Way, for example), but their practices may or may not be accurate. The locations in the book are all real-world places you can find on Google Earth, in which you can clearly see the Louvre's glass pyramids. Mr. Brown is not pulling the pieces out of the air.

Now, how he pulls these pieces together is a different story. Interpretation of symbolism is, of course, always up to the observer, so Mr. Brown is free to interpret the symbols however he wishes. It's up to the reader whether or not to agree with his interpretations. Some of the ties he makes seem plausible, and some do not. Seeing as how none of us were around 2,000 years ago* to say "THIS IS EXACTLY HOW IT HAPPENED", I don't see any reason why his interpretation is any less valid than any other.

On the other hand, I always got better grades in English when I made up the most outrageous and silly interpretations of symbolism I could, so take that as you will.

*Unless you have a time machine, in which case, why aren't you sharing?

Well the reason ppl (including me) belive in religion today is because there is so many manuscripts of things that happend, and written by so many people. *cough* the bible

~Captain CCC

jules · May 06, 2006, 01:45 PM // 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by captainccc

When you open a first couple of pages there is a caption that says "This story is based on fiction, not history". The author was writing this in fiction not there actuall theories.

I think what you mean is that Dan Brown wrote a fictional account based on (what he claims to be) 'facts'. He still maintains that this is true. (read my previous post)

Lou · May 09, 2006, 03:59 PM // 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by captainccc

Well the reason ppl (including me) belive in religion today is because there is so many manuscripts of things that happend, and written by so many people. *cough* the bible

~Captain CCC

Is there an original text of the bible left?