"Davinci Code" reviews frustrating says Ron Howard, but not all bad.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArtic ... HOWARD.xml

The Deadly Propaganda of the Davinci Code

http://www.catholicexchange.com/vm/inde ... t_id=33083

Wow. I mean, wow... I don't think y'all realize how much that free publicity helped push the DVC to $100mil blockbuster status so quickly. I previously had no desire whatsoever to see DVC, because I was so sick of hearing about it and "Over The Hedge" looked like a better movie (despite its contradictory messages about consumerism), but now I will go out of my way to see what all the fuss is about.

Thanks. This is a textbook example of how *not* to protest a movie....

Bandido,

Give me a break. Somehow I doubt that you had no interest at all in seeing the movie until someone posted here about it and now suddenly you want to see it.

If you truly had no interest before it is unlike you would be interested now. If you wish to go see a movie that is, by all critical accounts, at best mediocre, based on false "facts", lacking in any redemptive value whatsoever ... by all means see it.

But don't blame your actions on the discussions here. It is dishonest and immature.

Nonsense, the truth is that the age old line 'there is no such thing as bad publicity' is simply false, while A LITTLE controversy can be a good thing to get 'buzz' going on a project, everyone knows that TOO MUCH controversy can easily destroy it, if you doubt this, then tell me, where is Michael Jackson's career these days? No such thing as 'bad publicity', huh?

At any rate, the idea that we should be surprised that the movie adaptation of a book which sold 40 million copies makes a lot of money on its opening weekend, and that therefore the success should be attributed solely to the controversy, is really not a very strong argument.

Phil Donahue was on CNN on Friday. He predicted that the movie would do very well opening weekend b/c it has a huge built-in fan base & b/c of the controversy. He thinks it will do pretty well during the long Memorial Day weekend but that sales will fall drastically in June once people realize how bad the movie is.

Zoe

I expect that the b.o. will fall at least 50% next week, both because the movie is awful and because of the opening of the highly anticipated XIII, then later in June is 'Superman Returns', another film which is highly anticipated, and which should be a much better film, IOW, this movie faces some VERY tight compettion very, very soon. I don't expect it will go much higher than the $100 mark, certainly not as high as $200 million.

You're information seems to be a little dated doom, it's already earned $224 mil.

Errr... no it hasn't, it's estimated opening b.o. is $77 million, which is indeed a strong opening, but I expect at least a 50% next weekend, the largest opening of all time is for 'Spider-Man', and that earned 'only' $114 million, it is basically impossible to have an opening as big as $224 million, that would mean that every movie screen in the country was running it and every show was sold out

Don't count on it...movies like this are profitable for a long shelf-life at the dollar theater, video, and cable syndication. I don't think it was a bad movie so much as it was terribly formulaic. I felt like I was watching "National Treasure," as it was NEARLY IDENTICAL in several scenes. Instead of the actual Declaration of Independence (in the former movie), it was actual documents from the Knights Templar. Instead of the John Voight guy as the historical expert in "National Treasure," dropping lemon juice on the Declaration, we get Ian McKellen from LOTR and X-Men as the historical expert. Instead of a treasure hunt for clues hidden on the back of the Declaration of Independence, we get clues hidden in DaVinci paintings. Zero chemistry (and none even implied) between Nicholas Cage and his female counterpart; ditto for Tom Hanks and his co-star. When you consider that very little of the movie was actually *about* Christianity but more about a routine Hollywood thriller, it makes all the boycott nonsense all the more puzzling. Did anybody bother to protest "The Celestine Prophecy" that's currently also showing in theaters? Now, *that* movie is about Christianity. "DaVinci Code" isn't. That's a facade.

I can see why it got panned at Cannes. It's a very mainstream, Hollywood studio "product" that doesn't take any point of view. Does Ron Howard agree with Dan Brown's book? Does he disagree with it? I don't see the point of the Tom Hanks character disputing Ian McKellen's contentions about the Council of Nicea, e.g. Is it tell the audience, "Ok, we understanding this is controversial source material, and we'll give you some cop-out dialogue so you're not uncomfortable?" That would be like if, in "Last Temptation of Christ" (a far superior movie, IMHO), Martin Scorcese stopped and paused every other scene to ask the audience, "Is it ok I talk about this?" Could somebody who's seen the movie tell me- WHAT THE HECK WAS RON HOWARD TRYING TO "SAY"???

It MIGHT have long legs, IF there were alot of people out there that actually liked it, but there don't appear to be. The users at IMDB.com give it a mediocre 6.0 average rating:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0382625/

(Even mediocre movies usually start out on opening weekend ranked much higher than that.)


The users at moviefone.com were very lukewarm also:

http://movies.aol.com/movie/the-da-vinc ... ews-critic

This is really not a very good reaction from an opening week audience.

it did $224 million world wide

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12900729/

ROFL! Posting on a Catholic forum with likeminded individuals is a textbook example of how not to "protest" and is resulting in drawing mainstream attraction to something?

Of course, I would never go see something just to see what all the fuss is about. I can research it for free and get valid information rather than spending ten bucks and wasting that hour and a half of my life.

Even if I weren't Catholic or even Christian, the absolutely terrible reviews and the absolutely lousy excuse for research that Dan Brown uses as his premise of factual data would deter me from seeing the movie. I know plenty of people who are not seeing the movie, who are neither Catholic nor Christian. They just don't appreciate it when an author and then the film industry insults their intelligence.

And then, even when I was agnostic I never thought that being blasphemous about the religions of others was ever appropriate or acceptable. At what point did we forget that it is simply rude and culturally incompetent to be blasphemous?

Dani

You have apparently forgotten the cardinal rule of multiculturalism, 'all cultures are equal, except for western culture, which is inferior, all religions are equally true, except for Christianity, which is completely false'.... thus, 'blasphemy' is rude only when the religion in question is something other than Christianity. Cartoons of Mohammed? Blasphemous! Ought to be banned! Belitting Jesus Christ? Free speech!

Thanks, Lowdenclear.

Doom,

This had me giggling for about a half second, then the humor wore off when I got to thinking about how true it is.

<sigh>...such a sad state of affairs we are in!

Dani

The Code and co.
http://www.catholic.org/views/views_new ... 9959&pid=2

For anyone who wants to follow the ticket sales of the movie, the site is listed below. This is a great site and gives the sales for all movies.

Da Vinci has earned $462 million to date.
Passion has earned $612 million to date.

One interesting item is the Passion had more domestic sales than foreign sales. Da Vinci has more foreign sales than domestic sales. In todays movie market we have to consider the whole world.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=davincicode.htm