Da Vinci Code
DOR
Two Ron Toe 9,905 Posts
Who's going to see this? I'm thinking it's going to be no where near as good as the book. And I kinda liked Angels & Demons more than DVC.That said. I'll still go check it out.But there sure is alot of BLAH BLAH BLAH coming from the church. Don't they realize the more they condemn it, the more people will probably go see it just for curiosity sake?I'm thinking all the conspiracy talk about the church trying to not get people to read/see it, is almost better than the story itself.
Comments
just like mel's "Passion..." movie.
im going to wait til its on cable unless folks are trippin on it. i liked the book and all my nwo/illuminati fun facts were represented quite nicely.
I thought most Christian bodies endorsed that movie?
Damn snuff film.
Tyler Perry was on Ed Gordon this AM talking about his counter docu called:
"Oh Hell No, Jesus Wouldn't Touch no Chickenhead Bitch (Not Even With Peter's Peter)."
Yes, Xians were HUGELY supportive of Passion
I've been hearing a lot of blah blah blah about this movie from fanatics on teevee... including a local public access show denouncing which I found somewhat amusing
That's kind of scary considering how poorly the book was. Great ideas, fucking terrible writing and boilerplate thriller narrative.
The movie is going to rake in crazy fucking money though regardless if there's a controversy or not. At least opening weekend - I wonder if word of mouth, which played a major role in the book's success, could also crush the film if it turns out to be not-so-good.
On a vaguely related topic, as someone who's gotten tired of Tom Cruise since, well, always, I'm happy to see that MI:3 is underperforming and everyone in Hollywood is running around like chicken little over it.
I don't know, I've only seen positive reactions to the numbers so far. "His seventh $100+ million movie in a row"
I was hoping to see that nutball's career go down in flames
It hasn't gone 100+ yet. It probably will, but it's not projected to sell like his last two installments:
http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117942708&categoryid=1082
Par's 'Mission': Impossible?: Cruise spark sputters
By BEN FRITZ
"Mission: Impossible 3" lit the fuse on the summer B.O. season but didn't deliver much of a bang. Auds seemingly grew weary of Tom Cruise's pervasive media presence, from his chair-hopping antics on the "Oprah" show to his ongoing advocacy for Scientology.
Paramount's season-opening tentpole bowed to an estimated $48 million -- below industry expectations and studio hopes. Notably, debut was almost $11 million below that of "Mission: Impossible 2," which opened six years ago at 400 fewer playdates, and just $2.6 million above the original "Mission: Impossible," which opened a decade ago at 1,000 fewer theaters.
Previous two "Impossible" films opened on Memorial Day weekend, however, giving them a boost for Sunday evening shows.
"MI3" averaged $11,846 at an ultrawide 4,054 theaters.
Pic certainly didn't suffer from competition.
Despite having earned positive reviews and posted good audience scores, U's "United 93" dropped 55% in its second frame, grossing $5.2 million. Pic took in $2,865 per play at 1,819 theaters in its second weekend. Cume is $20.1 million.
It turned out nobody gave a hoot about "Hoot," as New Line and Walden's kidlit adaptation opened to a dismal $3.4 million. Other wide debut, Freestyle Releasing's "An American Haunting," grossed a modest $6.4 million.
Overall weekend was up significantly from a year ago, but that's because 2005's frame was led by the weak $19.6 million opening of "Kingdom of Heaven."
Par is now left hoping "MI3" will show stronger legs than a typical tentpole in order to get the gross at least close to $200 million. Opening perf was just below that of another spy actioner, "Mr. & Mrs. Smith," which bowed to $50.3 million last summer on its way to a cume of $186.3 million.
Demos for the Tom Cruise starrer were nearly identical demos to those of the last two "Impossible" pics, indicating an overall softening rather than one particular group losing interest in the franchise or its leading man.
"MI3" auds were 56% male and, somewhat surprisingly for a big-budget actioner, skewed older, with 64% of ticket buyers over 25.
"You're always trying to aim for a bigger number, but we have a lot of momentum going into next weekend," said Par marketing, distribution and operations prexy Rob Moore. "We have to do a little work so that younger audiences know this is a franchise for them."
Word of mouth should be good, as "MI3" drew an A- CinemaScore and reviews were mostly positive. It also has the advantage of weak competition next weekend, as "Poseidon" is tracking poorly, but will face "The Da Vinci Code," which should be one of the biggest hits of the year, in two weeks.
I don't know if the professed belief is legit, but the sheer number of people who are convinced this is fact and not a work of fiction is disconcerting to say the least...
When 'X-Files' was big years ago, I found it sad and funny that people who couldn't even deal w/ the normal regimen of daily life were so absorbed in entertainment founded upon the paranormal...
PEK, in all fairness, it's disconerting the sheer number of people who think the Bible is fact and not fiction (or at the very least, HIGHLY revisionist history).
What's wrong with "entertainment founded upon the paranormal"?
I know, right?
I don't want to ruffle any feathers but the fact that so, SO many people base their lives on it because it is "The Word of God" when it is clearly a very human book (which makes sense as it is written by HUMANS, and has even been altered considerably by other humans over the years) is just plain cuckoo
The "dinosaurs are only 5000 years old" crowd.....
Is that it? I thought they had never existed at all, and the evidence of them in the fossil record was merely placed there to test our faith?
O -
As someone who studied Systematic Theology as one of his 2 majors @ a Jesuit college, I more than concur w/ you... I used to see folks bristle @ one iconoclastic professor who referred to the Judeo-Christian deity as a lower case god... But it's likely that those who subscribe to the Brown's book as truth are cut from the same cloth as those who would take the Bible @ face value verbatim... Truth be told, had it not been for the adoption of Christianity as the official state religion by the Roman Empire for political expediency amongst other reasons throughout their territory, it's likely Christianity itself may have remained the remote, parochial, regional backwater phenomenon it started off as...
Being obsessed w/ the paranormal when they couldn't get a grip on normal was what was
Well, no becuase if that were true, they wouldn't buy into Brown's revisionism of Mary M. and Christ as a couple. Nor the idea that their kids eventually produced a French gentry class.
I guess I should've clarified as to same cloth: susceptibility to believe... Not pertaining specifically to subject matter...
Are people reading Brown's book to ask questions or for entertainment value and use it as an ersatz Lonely Planet guide when going through the Louvre? As for the Bible - I don't defend that either... Not one iota...
I think most people that read that book did so to pass time on the crapper (or at the beach, or on the bus or whatever). The big question it inspired should have been, "why didn;t I buy a real book?".
you know he would have a fucking field day with this...
Indeed...[/b]
step down, please.
Agreed. I'm not looking for something to work on a B.A. in english language and literature. I just wanna be entertained. I know a few people that have told me they started reading again just because of the interest they had in picking this book up. Better time spent than watching TV IMO.
I'm not saying that isn't true. It's just that books like this do have their place. Hell, I wish that 100% of all those trashy romance novels didn't get made. But I can't hate on people that enjoy them.
Peace
T.N.