Here's something I bet neither one of you knew about Christ's parents --- Mary and Joseph -- that PMS is mentioned in the Gospels. It distinctly says that 'Mary rode Joseph's ass all the way Bethlehem.'
FYI
I bet there was a big hole in his manuscript then...
Yeah Voxapps I have to agree. the book was fun, but the last 10 pages or whatever where Teabing pulls the Scooby Doo and is like "Hey it was ME! Suprise! Ahahaha!" was fucking lame. Really, really lame. Like something a gradeschooler wrote. I remember being so pissed. I was just so angry, what did he just get fuckin lazy!?
So anyone else who liked the book see the movie?
I think I'll see it tonight or tomorrow, and post my opinion.
1) the book is a fine read. Brown is a one-trick pony (I've read all his books), but by god, it's a good trick and I don't mind watching it.
2) TDVC is not as good as _Angels & Demons_.
3) The movie is ho hum. It's a much better story when it's all vague and in the imagination than it is when it's splayed out in front of you on the screen; in the end, it comes off as kind of hokey. I felt kind of bad not liking it, since I can't imagine that Howard could've done a better job. It's just that the story works better on the page than on the screen.
I bet we'll see that as a movie in 2008. It could be a Bond-like franchise. Maybe Langdon will go after Skull and Bones next.
Yeah. I wouldn't be surprised. Of course, if they let it go long enough we'll wind up with taglines like "Robert Langdon searches frantically for a set of lost keys...TO HIS CAR!"
Or reading the New Testa.......oh, never mind.........bygones......
Ha!
I've got this idea for a new thriller: '...in which the stars investigate the origins of Islam. Pursued by a murderous Muslim cleric, they uncover a series of shocking discoveries: Mohammed was no prophet! The Koran is a hoax, the work of self-serving hypocrites! Modern-day Muslims are dupes, if not deranged psychopaths!'
I'm certain if we could just hammer out a plotline, every publisher on the planet would jump at the chance to print it, and Hollywood would fight over who got to make the movie.
I've got this idea for a new thriller: '...in which the stars investigate the origins of Islam. Pursued by a murderous Muslim cleric, they uncover a series of shocking discoveries: Mohammed was no prophet! The Koran is a hoax, the work of self-serving hypocrites! Modern-day Muslims are dupes, if not deranged psychopaths!'
I'm certain if we could just hammer out a plotline, every publisher on the planet would jump at the chance to print it, and Hollywood would fight over who got to make the movie.
Who's with me!? We'll make millions!
My plagiarism spidey sense just went off. If this was a paper you'd written for me, I'd go search on google.
I'll definitely promote it in Teheran for you - in fact I'll even pay to send you on a signing tour of the whole region.
In fact I'm speaking to some friends at the al-Jihadi mosque about your idea now. They all think it's great - all we need is your full name and address and we'll take care of the rest.....
Very interesting response. Very interesting indeed.
I'll definitely promote it in Teheran for you - in fact I'll even pay to send you on a signing tour of the whole region.
In fact I'm speaking to some friends at the al-Jihadi mosque about your idea now. They all think it's great - all we need is your full name and address and we'll take care of the rest.....
...only if I get to proselytize during the signing tour!
Not that I don't enjoy a bit of sporting misdirection from my original point......you both missed the single quotes and ellipsis? Yes, per TCMoS, single quotes s/b reserved for quotes within quotes or can be used in philosophy to set of certain words.
Wouldn't you rather make a fuss over my punctuation?
well, im about 1/3 of the way through the book now, so here's my opinion so far.
Firstly, I dont have the slightest clue as to the accuracy of the claim that there are codes or conspiricy's as stated within and isn't something I am terribly interested in at the moment. My primary reason for reading the book is that I am interested in the claim that Jesus married and has a bloodline - and how Dan came to that conclusion or whether he knows enough about the hidden truths of religion to conclude that he is claiming it as a metaphor.
So far, I think I've read enough accurate information in the book about about mystery religions to conclude that he has studied them in some detail. That doesn't mean im in a position to judge him as self proclaimed expert on the subject, im a complete novice! but what I have read so far seems to tally with my own understanding of the subject, and nothing has popped out at me as being in error.
So I cant really believe that he knows all this mystery religion stuff, yet is ignorant of the fact that the Jesus story is an archetype or meme, so it must be that he is giving some credence to the gnostic interpretation of the story.
My main opposition to Brown is that as the majority of people who read it understand it literally, his book gives credibility to the illusion that Jesus was a real historical character, albeit of different makeup than orthodox religion tells us. All he really has achieved IMO is to replace one false position with one 'less false' position amongst his readers.
But IF the hysteria and popularity surrounding this book, actually gets people off their dumb asses and gets them to question the authenticity of orthodox religion, and to seek the truth of what really happened, then that could be a good thing.
[B]Firstly, I dont have the slightest clue as to the accuracy of the claim that there are codes or conspiricy's as stated within and isn't something I am terribly interested in at the moment. My primary reason for reading the book is that I am interested in the claim that Jesus married and has a bloodline - and how Dan came to that conclusion or whether he knows enough about the hidden truths of religion to conclude that he is claiming it as a metaphor.
He explains that in the foreward/author's note at the beginning when he talks about _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ (or whatever it's called), which is where he got the idea.
Ok, he lost the plagiarism case and I agree he was not plagiarizing - his book is a novel. Still, every single idea is drawn from HBHG (or twisted somewhat - Da Vinci for Poussin for example to make it easier for the drongos) - but all the same, the debt is acknowledged even by him with the many references and anagrams which confirm the source.
I think I have that book, will go off to see if it is indeed the case....back soon...
So do you think that he doesn't really understand the depths of mystery religions and is just parotting it?
Comments
Originally posted by dmz
It distinctly says that 'Mary rode Joseph's ass all the way Bethlehem.'
Originally posted by dmz
Here's something I bet neither one of you knew about Christ's parents --- Mary and Joseph -- that PMS is mentioned in the Gospels. It distinctly says that 'Mary rode Joseph's ass all the way Bethlehem.'
FYI
I bet there was a big hole in his manuscript then...
So anyone else who liked the book see the movie?
I think I'll see it tonight or tomorrow, and post my opinion.
Answer:
1) the book is a fine read. Brown is a one-trick pony (I've read all his books), but by god, it's a good trick and I don't mind watching it.
2) TDVC is not as good as _Angels & Demons_.
3) The movie is ho hum. It's a much better story when it's all vague and in the imagination than it is when it's splayed out in front of you on the screen; in the end, it comes off as kind of hokey. I felt kind of bad not liking it, since I can't imagine that Howard could've done a better job. It's just that the story works better on the page than on the screen.
Originally posted by midwinter
2) TDVC is not as good as _Angels & Demons_.
I bet we'll see that as a movie in 2008. It could be a Bond-like franchise. Maybe Langdon will go after Skull and Bones next.
Originally posted by BRussell
I bet we'll see that as a movie in 2008. It could be a Bond-like franchise. Maybe Langdon will go after Skull and Bones next.
Yeah. I wouldn't be surprised. Of course, if they let it go long enough we'll wind up with taglines like "Robert Langdon searches frantically for a set of lost keys...TO HIS CAR!"
Originally posted by segovius
Or reading the New Testa.......oh, never mind.........bygones......
Ha!
I've got this idea for a new thriller: '...in which the stars investigate the origins of Islam. Pursued by a murderous Muslim cleric, they uncover a series of shocking discoveries: Mohammed was no prophet! The Koran is a hoax, the work of self-serving hypocrites! Modern-day Muslims are dupes, if not deranged psychopaths!'
I'm certain if we could just hammer out a plotline, every publisher on the planet would jump at the chance to print it, and Hollywood would fight over who got to make the movie.
Who's with me!? We'll make millions!
Originally posted by dmz
I've got this idea for a new thriller: '...in which the stars investigate the origins of Islam. Pursued by a murderous Muslim cleric, they uncover a series of shocking discoveries: Mohammed was no prophet! The Koran is a hoax, the work of self-serving hypocrites! Modern-day Muslims are dupes, if not deranged psychopaths!'
I'm certain if we could just hammer out a plotline, every publisher on the planet would jump at the chance to print it, and Hollywood would fight over who got to make the movie.
Who's with me!? We'll make millions!
My plagiarism spidey sense just went off. If this was a paper you'd written for me, I'd go search on google.
Originally posted by BRussell
My plagiarism spidey sense just went off. If this was a paper you'd written for me, I'd go search on google.
Yes, but if I was really sneaky, I would have left off the ellipsis and the single quotes!
(which I actually thought about doing)
Originally posted by segovius
Great idea.
I'll definitely promote it in Teheran for you - in fact I'll even pay to send you on a signing tour of the whole region.
In fact I'm speaking to some friends at the al-Jihadi mosque about your idea now. They all think it's great - all we need is your full name and address and we'll take care of the rest.....
Very interesting response. Very interesting indeed.
Originally posted by segovius
Great idea.
I'll definitely promote it in Teheran for you - in fact I'll even pay to send you on a signing tour of the whole region.
In fact I'm speaking to some friends at the al-Jihadi mosque about your idea now. They all think it's great - all we need is your full name and address and we'll take care of the rest.....
...only if I get to proselytize during the signing tour!
Originally posted by BRussell
My plagiarism spidey sense just went off. If this was a paper you'd written for me, I'd go search on google.
yeah, mine too.
Originally posted by dmz
I think this hoopla is analogous to people seeing Star Wars, believing it was filmed on location.
very funny
Wouldn't you rather make a fuss over my punctuation?
Firstly, I dont have the slightest clue as to the accuracy of the claim that there are codes or conspiricy's as stated within and isn't something I am terribly interested in at the moment. My primary reason for reading the book is that I am interested in the claim that Jesus married and has a bloodline - and how Dan came to that conclusion or whether he knows enough about the hidden truths of religion to conclude that he is claiming it as a metaphor.
So far, I think I've read enough accurate information in the book about about mystery religions to conclude that he has studied them in some detail. That doesn't mean im in a position to judge him as self proclaimed expert on the subject, im a complete novice! but what I have read so far seems to tally with my own understanding of the subject, and nothing has popped out at me as being in error.
So I cant really believe that he knows all this mystery religion stuff, yet is ignorant of the fact that the Jesus story is an archetype or meme, so it must be that he is giving some credence to the gnostic interpretation of the story.
My main opposition to Brown is that as the majority of people who read it understand it literally, his book gives credibility to the illusion that Jesus was a real historical character, albeit of different makeup than orthodox religion tells us. All he really has achieved IMO is to replace one false position with one 'less false' position amongst his readers.
But IF the hysteria and popularity surrounding this book, actually gets people off their dumb asses and gets them to question the authenticity of orthodox religion, and to seek the truth of what really happened, then that could be a good thing.
Originally posted by MarcUK
[B]Firstly, I dont have the slightest clue as to the accuracy of the claim that there are codes or conspiricy's as stated within and isn't something I am terribly interested in at the moment. My primary reason for reading the book is that I am interested in the claim that Jesus married and has a bloodline - and how Dan came to that conclusion or whether he knows enough about the hidden truths of religion to conclude that he is claiming it as a metaphor.
He explains that in the foreward/author's note at the beginning when he talks about _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ (or whatever it's called), which is where he got the idea.
Originally posted by segovius
I don't think so.
I think he studied Holy Blood, Holy Grail in detail.
Ok, he lost the plagiarism case and I agree he was not plagiarizing - his book is a novel. Still, every single idea is drawn from HBHG (or twisted somewhat - Da Vinci for Poussin for example to make it easier for the drongos) - but all the same, the debt is acknowledged even by him with the many references and anagrams which confirm the source.
I think I have that book, will go off to see if it is indeed the case....back soon...
So do you think that he doesn't really understand the depths of mystery religions and is just parotting it?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...719142-0019157
but I have yet to open it, just wasn't interested in it, an unwanted Sol Invictus present!
have you read it? is it any good?