Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Vatican chooses to ignore "Angels & Demons" because controversy sells tickets. And here's the news story to tell you all about it   ( washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

597 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 17 May 2009 at 10:32 AM (8 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



27 Comments     (+0 »)
 
 
2009-05-17 09:10:02 AM  
FTA: "...in Round 2 of the battles with Brown, many church leaders are taking a new approach by trying to ignore the film, hoping that the less attention they give it, the quicker it will go away."

Yeah, the Jews tried that 2,000 years ago and look how well that worked.
 
2009-05-17 09:14:32 AM  
Well, personally I have no love for the Catholic church.

But anyone who thinks there is any serious scholarship or any serious merit to Dan Brown's ideas is an idiot.

This isn't worth the Vatican's time getting their knickers in a twist over; these are poorly written, poorly researched adventures stories. Period. Nothing more. And it sounds like the movie relied even more heavily on the thriller aspect than the church aspect.

/but if you're interested, do go to Rome and learn real history. It's one of my favourite cities. Noisy, dirty, busy, crazy, chaotic, beautiful, ancient, soaked in history and simply glorious even on a rainy day.
 
2009-05-17 10:11:46 AM  
I applaud this. They need to realize that the book is in the god damned fiction section
 
2009-05-17 10:24:01 AM  
Religion = The Great Deceiver
The bloodiest falsehood ever perpetrated on man.

The very idea man should be ashamed of himself for simply existing is a self bestowed curse. That man would need a reason other than his own conscience to do good is simply a symptom of lazy parenting. Much easier to scare someone into behaving telling them someone is always watching them and will punish them in the afterlife (convenient for it needs no evidence)than to teach them that peace and contentment only comes from helping others. That trusting your heart is good enough. I don't need a threat hanging over my head to do what I think is right.

Religion is simply a tool used to persuade people to pursue your agenda. Societal control tool. And the "confessions to a priest" practice really demonstrates how they used it to keep the church apprised of the goings on. keeping an eye on it's citizenry is important for the governing bodies. getting them to tell on themselves is genius.

What really makes me laugh is the outrageous flamboyance of excess they preach. a 180 from the teachings of Christ.
Their opulence is only outdone by their hypocrisy.
 
2009-05-17 10:54:27 AM  
Ya know...I never understood the Dan Brown hate. I mean, no, he's not the be all and end all of authors, that title belongs to Pratchett...but his books are, in my opinion, entertaining enough.
 
2009-05-17 11:02:16 AM  
PizzaJedi81 2009-05-17 10:54:27 AM Ya know...I never understood the Dan Brown hate. I mean, no, he's not the be all and end all of authors, that title belongs to Pratchett...but his books are, in my opinion, entertaining enough. Displayed 5 of 5 comments
=================================

A) There's no controversy in A&D like DVC. Hell, the plot of the book of A&D is to _SAVE_ the vatican [from an antimatter device].
B) His 4 books, even the crappy-ass digital fortress, are the only four books I've been able to pick up and read to the end and not have to force myself. They are entertaining, full of interesting facts (esp A&D), and have enabled years of fun research on my part just to see how awesome he is.

Nothing he says is a blatant lie, he finds 'myths' (things that aren't proven either way) and then writes a book where Langdon simply assumes them to either be true or fiction. Like the 666 windows on that pyramid. Which the 'fact' is that there isn't, Langdon takes on a conspiracy theory that there really is 666 panes. And it really was a longstanding myth for a long time.

That's just 1 of about a million different examples.
 
2009-05-17 11:02:55 AM  
As someone who saw the movie Friday, I applaud this concept. It means that a lot of people are not going to go see the movie just so they can see 'what the catholic church doesn't want me to see'. This means less box office. Which hopefully means no more of these movies.

/Tom Hanks didn't have that FAAAABULOUS hair style from the first movie. Enough of a reason to not go see this one.
//Because my wife likes the books, thats why.
 
2009-05-17 11:06:02 AM  
the book was great, because you get to mentally visit the historic locations. the movie attempted to follow the same grandeur.

but it is to simple of a story line - and i am pretty sure that the illumniti temples have been mapped to death prior to this event. so why not have the Swiss Gaurd sit on the four temples and search the city and call in the forces of italy --- pretty sure they had an army; if i remember WWII correctly.

kind of wish the Swiss Guard shot McGregor at the end though - cause you know that whole burning a live thing = pain
 
2009-05-17 11:13:13 AM  

jekxrb: This isn't worth the Vatican's time getting their knickers in a twist over; these are poorly written, poorly researched adventures stories. Period. Nothing more. And it sounds like the movie relied even more heavily on the thriller aspect than the church aspect.


this.

When The Da Vinci Code came out, I wondered why they even bothered with shunning the film. Seems like it's a complete waste of effort and resources to attempt squash any dumbass making a "lol, christians sucks!" comment that gets thrown out.
 
2009-05-17 11:38:21 AM  
But either way, in Round 2 of the battles with Brown, many church leaders are taking a new approach by trying to ignore the film, hoping that the less attention they give it, the quicker it will go away.

So...they're treating the movie like an abusive priest?
 
2009-05-17 11:49:14 AM  

jekxrb: But anyone who thinks there is any serious scholarship or any serious merit to Dan Brown's ideas is an idiot.


The church knows its audience.
 
2009-05-17 12:12:29 PM  

itsdan: jekxrb: But anyone who thinks there is any serious scholarship or any serious merit to Dan Brown's ideas is an idiot.

The church knows its audience.


Bingo!
 
2009-05-17 12:19:22 PM  
One of the biggest idiots I work with is currently reading the book (I suspect it will take him weeks to finish it). Now he's apparently an expert on the Catholic Church and the Vatican. I want to cockpunch Dan Brown for subjecting me to this.
 
2009-05-17 12:31:52 PM  

jake3988: Nothing he says is a blatant lie, he finds 'myths' (things that aren't proven either way) and then writes a book where Langdon simply assumes them to either be true or fiction.


Um, yes some of the things he says are blatantly untrue. I mean, maybe it's just because he doesn't do any research, but I'd call it lying.

Manic_Repressive: One of the biggest idiots I work with is currently reading the book (I suspect it will take him weeks to finish it). Now he's apparently an expert on the Catholic Church and the Vatican. I want to cockpunch Dan Brown for subjecting me to this.


It's even worse if you actually study religion. "Oh you study the History of Christianity? Like Da Vinci code stuff?" Ugh
 
2009-05-17 12:55:30 PM  
itsdan: jekxrb: But anyone who thinks there is any serious scholarship or any serious merit to Dan Brown's ideas is an idiot.

The church knows its audience.


Touché

attackingpencil: It's even worse if you actually study religion. "Oh you study the History of Christianity? Like Da Vinci code stuff?" Ugh

Word. Art History, too. That book is the bane of Renaissance scholars because people are convinced he has brought up a clever alternative theory.

It's as clever as 'aliens built the pyramids'.

I never read the book; I found it too poorly written to stand it, but I looked into his bibliography once after being asked about him during a lecture on Renaissance Art. He did minimal research and it primarily focused on rather unreliable, non-academic sources.

I have no problems with it as a novel (except the quality of writing).
 
2009-05-17 01:03:32 PM  
You'd think they'd welcome anything that distracted the pubic from their issues with wide spread child rape or their policies that help spread poverty and disease in developing nations.
 
2009-05-17 01:59:27 PM  
I never understood why they tried to "debunk" the DaVinci Code the first time. It was a movie based on a novel, which pretty much means it isn't true. I don't recall the Department of Defense writing pamplets to debunk the movie Red Dawn (I did some checking and as it turns out, the Soviets and Cubans did not invade the U.S. in the early 80's), or the National Science Foundation publically debunking the whole Terminator time travel thing.

That being said, I liked Angels and Demons. It was a decent thriller. The plot moved along pretty good, and the locations were pretty cool.
 
2009-05-17 02:08:54 PM  

kevinfra: I never understood why they tried to "debunk" the DaVinci Code the first time. It was a movie based on a novel, which pretty much means it isn't true. I don't recall the Department of Defense writing pamplets to debunk the movie Red Dawn (I did some checking and as it turns out, the Soviets and Cubans did not invade the U.S. in the early 80's), or the National Science Foundation publically debunking the whole Terminator time travel thing.

That being said, I liked Angels and Demons. It was a decent thriller. The plot moved along pretty good, and the locations were pretty cool.


It was a great cheesy movie but even then they had a few problems. Tom Hanks suddenly knowing everything so the plot could continue being one of them. And the whole 'parachute' thing.

Oh, and the video thing at the end. That as well.
 
2009-05-17 03:25:25 PM  

milk_plus: You'd think they'd welcome anything that distracted the pubic from their issues with wide spread child rape or their policies that help spread poverty and disease in developing nations.


I see what you did there.
 
2009-05-17 04:42:17 PM  
This story was played out two years ago with The Da Vinci code. Does it really need to keep making headlines?
 
2009-05-17 05:07:59 PM  
Someone wrote,

"Religion is simply a tool used to persuade people to pursue your agenda."

Man, that statement is so beyond left field, it deserves a new blue suit.

Are you in junior high, or what?
 
2009-05-17 07:27:33 PM  

clambot: Man, that statement is so beyond left field, it deserves a new blue suit.

Are you in junior high, or what?


Don't interrupt the boy's wangst. We all go through it. Just remind him to wash his hands after and join the rest of us when he's ready.
 
2009-05-17 10:38:47 PM  
I saw it Saturday, maybe about 40 people in the theater. To compare Code had a full house for the Friday morning showing when it opened. I give a lot more credit to a less interesting story than Catholic (in)action.
 
2009-05-17 11:58:28 PM  
Dan Brown plays his audience the same way most religions do their own, by providing some mystical, hidden bringer-of-order that is holding all the cards. People are attracted to the notion that someone or something more prescient is in control of the chaos, be it some choice divine immortal or a super-knowledgeable secret society. The legions of conspiracy theorists are just as nutty as your neighborhood fundamentalists, and Mr. Brown is milking this other teat of paranoia for all he can. Gratz to him. He's probably rich as shiat.
 
2009-05-18 02:30:39 AM  

The Voice of Doom:

/remembering that garbage reminded me of this (in)famous CSI clip



i377.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
2009-05-18 01:51:52 PM  
They could have saved a lot of trouble if they hired a geek with a laptop to find the "missing" wifi camera. 2 minutes to figure out what access point it's connected to, and another 20 minutes to walk the coverage area.

Now if the angels all had pringles cans on their swords/spears, then it could take longer...
 
2009-05-18 03:24:44 PM  
Meh, I'm kinda over the whole Dan Brown thing. I'll still read his book when it comes out, but I won't be rushing to purchase it within the first week or even the first month of it's release. I'd much rather spend that time reading up on spoilers for the next Douglas Preston & Lincoln Child novel.

/maybe even read up on the next Steve Berry or James Rollins book
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report