Da Vinci Code?
Young_Phonics
8,039 Posts
anyone see it?I saw it last night. Pretty decent, a little confusing but overall it was on point. Audrey Tatou looked bangin'.p.s.a certain hatteur ,when asked if he saw said film, replied
please be serious--no i didn not watch that film
Comments
was this person smoking weed in his underwear when he typed this?
What Crinkle-cut is trying to display here is the DVD of The Da Vinci Code Mr. Delmont recently brought back from Thailand. I can't imagine why they went through the trouble to translate English subtitles for an English film, but it ended up being the only way this movie could possibly be entertaining. (Sorry, Young Phonics, but Ron Howard is nearly as much of a talentless hack as Dan Brown.)
Another favorite part of mine is when they find the "map" inside the "brick." SPOILER ALERT! DON'T LOOK IF YOU DON'T WANT A MAJOR PLOT POINT REVEALED!
OMG! It was the storage guy all along! WTF?
There is a difference between hatting and recognizing a complete lack of talent, subtlety or sophistication.
Two of my friends and I were having this conversation the other day. Two of us argued that Tom Hanks is so steady with his craft that he goes unnoticed. The odd man out -- high and angry -- vehemently disagreed, giving the same reasons you are, to which I responded, "Hasn't Tom Hanks ever dazzled you?" "Never." My teammate, "Not even in Big?!" Odd man out and me, forming new alliance to make fun of this newly revealed piece of information, "You were dazzled by Tom Hanks in Big?" The guy dazzled by Tom Hanks in Big is 5'4".
It was a good thriller/mystery even though I guessed the big secret half way through I was still entertained. I would've actually paid to go see that movie.
critiquing the literary level of the book on the other hand................
Whether it's a "good" book or not, what I find nice about it is that it has brought many esoteric ideas to the mainstream.
How many regular folks would read something like "Holy Blood Holy Grail"?
Peace...
FNM
I read Holy Blood Holy Grail many years ago, so I cant remember a lot of it, but I do think I enjoyed it. I distinctly remember liking John S. Robinson's "Born in Blood," though. The reality is that bringing Disney versions of these "esoteric" ideas to the masses isn't really going to do much. If anything, it takes power away from alternate historical theories by turning them into mindless entertainment. If people really want to learn about the Knights Templar, Masons, the Illuminati and other interesting conspiracy theories, they should try to educate themselves, rather than expect the entertainment industry to "expose the truth."
whats wrong with not watching that film?? and smoking weed in your underwear??
NOTHING THATS WHAT. Underwear, weed, no dumb movie.............im there!
Read what? Capital 'L' literature?
I say anything that facilitates the act of reading these days is a gift, considering how closely tied success is to one's reading level. Ask an English teacher how many of his or her students want to read a classic (I could only get about a fourth of my students to read one of the greatest novels ever written, As I Lay Dying) and he or she will tell you very few. Dan Brown, Nicholas Sparks, John Grisham, Stephen King all win favor with readers -- especially with young readers -- everytime.
What I wanna know is -- why does it matter if Dan Brown writes for people who don't normally read?
That's a good point. When I tried to read the book, it struck me as something I would have loved when I was twelve or thirteen. Kind of like Stephen King.
I think the backlash comes from the people who try to convince everyone they know that this is a masterpiece. That may not describe you (or Joel), but I've met many people who would have me believe that Dan Brown's writing is nothing short of genius, and that if I didn't like the book, "I must not get it." If not for them, I probably wouldn't waste time ridiculing the book or the film.
It doesn't matter to me, it's just not something I would read due to a litany of errors. It is poorly written, filled w/ plot holes and factual errors. I am not holding it to the standard of an educational textbook, but there is a line to be drawn. You can draw parallels to any other medium out there, music, food, etc. I choose to appreciate and reward excellence (through my wallet) to those who put out work that is relevant to me.
I think you're discrediting youth today just a tad bit. There are certainly much better starting material for them to read than the authors you have stated.
The statement simply explains the demographic the book is catered to.
Where should they begin?
That book isn't really deep, though.
You asked for suggestions of literary classics that can appeal to your students. Reasons why "Catcher In The Rye" works.....
a) it's short, overcomes one of their most critical 1st impressions.
b) lead character in their age group
c) disenchanted youth
Crime & Punishment
Anna Karenina
The Cossacks
Heart Of A Dog
For Whom The Bell Tolls
The Great Gatsby
Catcher is HELLA deep. Salinger & eastern philosophy. Very heavy reading.
K.
You brought up the depth of a piece of literature from the get-go, or at least implied it.
Part of becoming a good reader is being able to analyze, compare, and synthesize information from various perspectives. By simply confining teen readers to books that meet a certain criteria, we would be creating worse readers.
If depth or quality is not on the table, why do we need to eliminate any of the other authors I mentioned who students like?
No it's not.
nope, depth was never in question. The focus is on literary quality. You know what they say when you "assume".
Your logic is all over the place, I don't even know where to begin? Who said anything about confining? There are millions of books out there, impossible to plow through in one lifetime. Why not trim the weeds and read the cream of the crop?
Quality is on the table, I am not sure where you're forming all these imaginary points that I've not made. Albeit you have had a history of doing that on this board. Nobody is eliminating anything, rather, give kids more benefit of the doubt and offer them a choice. Don't pander to your perceived "lowest common denominator" and hand out Stephen King books to your students.
Finally, just because Salinger isn't suffocating the reader w/ a 5 tier plot like Brown does, does not mean it's not "deep". The art of writing is being able to convey complex ideas in the simplest form, a talent that is not easily taught. Salinger is a master of this.
Less is more.