schadenfreude Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 http://www.phenomenamagazine.com/0/editori...=22&obj_id=3741So, if they take out religion, the Magdalene, the sacred feminine, Opus Dei, the sex ritual, the Priory of Sion... then, I guess they'll be left with a great car chase movie...The film version of The Da Vinci Code is attempting to reduce the offence that the best-selling book caused to Roman Catholics.Sony Pictures, the studio behind the film starring Tom Hanks and Sir Ian McKellen, is reported to have been so concerned that it has consulted Catholic and other Christian specialists on how it might alter the plot of the novel to avoid offending the devout.Film officials have held talks with Catholic groups and other organisations despite Dan Brown, the author, insisting that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avadakedavra Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 Another article:Da Vinci Code won't translate easily to big screen.By SHARON WAXMANNew York Times News ServiceLOS ANGELES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schadenfreude Posted August 13, 2005 Author Share Posted August 13, 2005 Thanks for the article, avadakedavra. By the way, how old is that article? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade102384 Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 i read the book and i think the movie will be just as good, but thats my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OriginalSin Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 ^^^^^ to disagree with u for absolutely no reason at all except to be a pain in the ass...its rare to find a film (based off a novel) that is as good as that novel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_ed Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 Agree with nic,If you thought Lord of the Rings was good, then you haven't read the novel.Also, those religious people are so touchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blurdk Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 Sony Pictures, the studio behind the film starring Tom Hanks and Sir Ian McKellen, is reported to have been so concerned that it has consulted Catholic and other Christian specialists on how it might alter the plot of the novel to avoid offending the devout.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>They have a movie starring a publicly gay old man who always bring young handsome dates to public events. How can the movie not be offensive to Catholics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schadenfreude Posted August 13, 2005 Author Share Posted August 13, 2005 It doesn't make sense that any movie that seems offensive to Christians gets heavily censored, but The Passion is allowed to be shown, even though it is anti-semitish and many people don't believe in Christ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blurdk Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 It doesn't make sense that any movie that seems offensive to Christians gets heavily censored, but The Passion is allowed to be shown, even though it is anti-semitish and many people don't believe in Christ.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>It's censored for commercial reasons. That's not something you can complain about. The producer can always do whatever he finds best to his movie. Even the MPAA is essentially a system invented by the movie makers to "guide" parents and other concerned people. If the government censored the film, that would be completely different. The Passion on the other hand, did nothing out of commercial necessity. It was just released the way Mr. Gibson wanted it and somehow made a shitload of money. It's a piece of crap, but I have to respect it for that one reason... ANd for selling S&M gore movies to the conservative masses. That's quite something... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_ed Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 ^ I was about to b'tch about that point but I guess you explained everything pretty well blurdk...maybe a little too well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schadenfreude Posted August 14, 2005 Author Share Posted August 14, 2005 It doesn't make sense that any movie that seems offensive to Christians gets heavily censored, but The Passion is allowed to be shown, even though it is anti-semitish and many people don't believe in Christ.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>It's censored for commercial reasons. That's not something you can complain about. The producer can always do whatever he finds best to his movie. Even the MPAA is essentially a system invented by the movie makers to "guide" parents and other concerned people. If the government censored the film, that would be completely different. The Passion on the other hand, did nothing out of commercial necessity. It was just released the way Mr. Gibson wanted it and somehow made a shitload of money. It's a piece of crap, but I have to respect it for that one reason... ANd for selling S&M gore movies to the conservative masses. That's quite something...<{POST_SNAPBACK}>How can the studio earn money this way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avadakedavra Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 My only problem with it, is that they've been portraying other religions (witchcraft, hindu, santera etc) wrong for decades in movies and oh no they get near catholicism and people have a damn hissy fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blurdk Posted August 14, 2005 Share Posted August 14, 2005 How can the studio earn money this way?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well, if you look at the most recent presidential election in the US, it appears that the religious right has something to say... So, a film version that bothers the church may get some bad press (I know America isn't Catholic, but still, the religious right seems to follow the Pope in all kinds of questions). On the other hand, a quiet, discreet change of some details is much less likely to cause a backlash. Of course if you catered to the religious and took the magic out of the Harry Potter movies there would be a backlash, because there wouldn't be any Harry Potter left, but I doubt that The Code is mostly loved for being blasphemic...All this said, only because I love discussing religion... I haven't read the book, I don't care about the movie, I don't care about blasphemy (although it's a subject with a huge humour potential - see Life of Brian) and well, all this is just because I love to hear myself typing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magus Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 and i thought the only reason NOt to watch this film was Tom Cruise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blurdk Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 and i thought the only reason NOt to watch this film was Tom Cruise <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It would be really funny if it was starring a Ron Hubbard heathen, but no, Hanks isn't Cruise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magus Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 and i thought the only reason NOt to watch this film was Tom Cruise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schadenfreude Posted August 19, 2005 Author Share Posted August 19, 2005 Personally, I would rather watch Tom Cruise than Tom Hanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red_ed Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 I can just imagine him in the movie, promoting a conspiracy against Scientology and in the out takes at the end, he'll be bouncing up and down on the director's chair screaming out Tom--> ---( "I KATIE!!!" ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schadenfreude Posted August 22, 2005 Author Share Posted August 22, 2005 It's censored for commercial reasons. That's not something you can complain about. The producer can always do whatever he finds best to his movie. Even the MPAA is essentially a system invented by the movie makers to "guide" parents and other concerned people. If the government censored the film, that would be completely different. The Passion on the other hand, did nothing out of commercial necessity. It was just released the way Mr. Gibson wanted it and somehow made a shitload of money. It's a piece of crap, but I have to respect it for that one reason... ANd for selling S&M gore movies to the conservative masses. That's quite something...<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Looks like these movies won't be censored, albeit not for commercial reasons.The Beast Movie (fictional thriller with bits of facts, somewhat akin to Da Vinci Code)http://www.thebeastmovie.com/http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=40867The God Movie (a documentary film, much like SuperSize Me or Bowling For Columbine)http://www.thegodmovie.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.