Ban on the movie Da Vinci Code?

[mango]

lucifer, have you watched american media shows? watch jon stewart or listen to howard stern and tell me that there is more free speech in india than in the united states. show me a radio station or tv channel where sex, violence, and drugs (in addition to a differing viewpoint) are allowed to the extent they are in the united states. i'm not trying to offend anyone by claiming that i'm happy living in california where i enjoy freedom of speech and press. i have lived in both countries and believe that my position is accurate. if you have experienced this, then you have your own assumptions and opinions. but do not start making accusations that my claims are blatantly unfounded. for gods sakes, theres a CENSOR board. freedom of speech you say?

[labelle]

read the book last year around the same time. a well written book. rather than seeing the book as an attack on christianity this book can been be seen as the pure work of fiction. there is a very good story line that the novel has. the people who say that it is against their beliefs but can anyone tell me how do we have these beliefs. we get these beliefs by what our parents and elders have told us and we pass on the same to our next generations. every religion has its own set of contradictory views and beliefs. for example in hindu religion there are people who believe in idol worship and there are people who dont. its all about perceptions and how people take it. i do understand that religion is a very sensitive topic to discuss but everyone has got his freedon of expression so let them express it, if one does not wish to agree its fine but why create a hoopla around it! any which ways i am going to see the movie at the earliest possible date.

[Dell-RS]

labellllllllllllleeeeeeeeeeee long time

[gyanster]

I don't think this book has a good story line. Just some controversial story.



Just think, if the French police (or any country's police) is chasing someone for four days and then when they catch them, just let them go.

[Free entity HP]

lucifer, have you watched american media shows? watch jon stewart or listen to howard stern and tell me that there is more free speech in india than in the united states. show me a radio station or tv channel where sex, violence, and drugs (in addition to a differing viewpoint) are allowed to the extent they are in the united states. i'm not trying to offend anyone by claiming that i'm happy living in california where i enjoy freedom of speech and press. i have lived in both countries and believe that my position is accurate. if you have experienced this, then you have your own assumptions and opinions. but do not start making accusations that my claims are blatantly unfounded. for gods sakes, theres a CENSOR board. freedom of speech you say?

Mango...if you think a free-for-all and seamless system exists in the US, you're blissfully ignorant. Where do the americans get all the ratings for their movies from? Why should a group of people choose who can see a movie and who can't?



And I don't think I really would need to list out the various bans on books and movies that have been passed or called for in the US. You just need to google it and you'll see the results.



Mind you that censorship does exist in all societies, though the look and feel might be different from place to place.

[lonewolf]

Mango...if you think a free-for-all and seamless system exists in the US, you're blissfully ignorant.

Mango, do you even read the news? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01429.html
All that this Falun Gong activist did was protest against the Chinese premier and yell "President Bush, stop him from killing! President Bush, stop him from persecuting Falun Gong!". For that, she was arrested.

Prosecutors maintained that the yelling at Hu was threatening and constituted a crime -- willfully intimidating, coercing, threatening and harassing a foreign official.

Mango, try wearing a swastika chain or tshirt, and see what happens.



There are varying levels of censorship in both countries. You cannot just make a sweeping generalisation that the US is totally liberal with regard to free speech. I cannot put up a Christmas star on my balcony because it is prohibited here (in the US) out of the possibility of "offending" others. In India, I used to put up a star every Christmas season. Saying "Merry Christmas" is prohibited in offices and public/government places in many parts in the US. In India, you can wish anyone for any religious festival without any fear of "offending" him or her.

[The Jackal]

Without Disclaimer, 'Code' Remains Banned in India


Although reports on Friday indicated that Indian censors had agreed to permit The Da Vinci Code to be released next Friday, a full week after its planned opening, it appeared today (Monday) that the film could remain in limbo there as Indian censors and Sony Films officials locked horns over a disclaimer that the censor board wants to have inserted at both the beginning and at the end of the film. The board insists that the message state: "It is a work of pure fiction and has no correspondence to historical facts of the Christian religion." Sony has agreed to only a single generic statement be inserted, reading "The characters and incidents portrayed and the names herein are fictitious, and any similarity to the name, character or history of any person is entirely coincidental and unintentional." Reports indicate that Sony is wary of agreeing to the Indian demand, fearing that other censor boards will thereby feel emboldened to make similar demands regarding other films.

Got that from IMDB.

[Mayavi Morpheus]

Watched the movie last sunday and I liked it. I havent read the book yet but I am sure that the book is much more interesting than the movie is and that those who read the book will not like the movie.

Coming to the controversy part, I do not understand why the book is so controversial. This is not the first book that talks about Jesus Christs married life or the priore of sions or the magevalian(?) dynasty but I agree that this is the most famous and well reasearched than others. The existence of priore of sions is not conclusively proven yet but there are no doubts about the existance of the Templar code, their immense wealth and their secret practices. There is a gospel in which the intimate relation between Christ and Mary Magdalene although it is not conclusive proof of their marriage. But still this is conclusive proof that Mary Magdalene was Jesus christs biggest follower and infact it is she who totally understood the essence of Jesus Christs teachings.

I am an atheist who does not believe in god or any miracles, but I do believe in saints and prophets - Ordinary men who did extraordinary things. So I believe in Moses, Jesus, Muhammed, Rama, Krishna, Buddha and Sai Baba - all human beings who lead normal lives till they attained nirvana and lead saintly lives.

[CtrlAltDel]

...I am sure that the book is much more interesting than the movie is and that those who read the book will not like the movie.

thats true! the book is always better than the movie. since the book itself is not exactly a masterpiece, maybe that is why the critics (who might have read it) have savaged the film.

...There is a gospel in which the intimate relation between Christ and Mary Magdalene...

:shock:



BLASPHEMY!!!!!







Off With His Head!!!!!

[Reality]

Mango, do you even read the news? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01429.html
All that this Falun Gong activist did was protest against the Chinese premier and yell "President Bush, stop him from killing! President Bush, stop him from persecuting Falun Gong!". For that, she was arrested.

Prosecutors maintained that the yelling at Hu was threatening and constituted a crime -- willfully intimidating, coercing, threatening and harassing a foreign official.

You answered your own question there. Disrupting any public gathering of that stature would have resulted in more than an arrest in most countries.



About the wishing about religious festivals,, I personally think US is overdoing the "Merry Christmas" thing.

[CtrlAltDel]

...I cannot put up a Christmas star on my balcony because it is prohibited here (in the US) out of the possibility of "offending" others....Saying "Merry Christmas" is prohibited in offices and public/government places in many parts in the US...

:shock:



wtf???? are u serious?????? this is crazy!!! why would a Christmas Star or saying "Merry Christmas" offend anyone?

[Fun Kay]

Coming back to the Da Vinci Code...has anyone who's posted on this thread seen it??

Read a coupla reviews, and supposedly, if u've read the book, the movie's gonna kinda be dissapointing....

not that THAT'S gonna stop me from seeing it...

[CtrlAltDel]

its not yet released in India

[Fun Kay]

Obviously, my Q was directed to all the Non-India-livin' ppl who're reading this thread!

Thought it wud b silly to mention it, coz most ppl know that the movie hasn't been released in India as yet!

So...anyone?

[Reality]

Obviously, my Q was directed to all the Non-India-livin' ppl who're reading this thread!
Thought it wud b silly to mention it, coz most ppl know that the movie hasn't been released in India as yet!
So...anyone?

Well I have read the book and seen the movie.

My opinion is that the Movie was good. But if you compare it with the book you will be disappionted. So the advice is to not have too much expectations. I tried that and I came out happy with the movie. Ron Howard did a decent job. But the since the story is going to be bigger than any of the performances I think any dramatization is never going to match up.

So there you are ,, hope it helps.

[Fun Kay]

thanx!

Btw...ABS LOVE ur signature...



REALITY IS THAT WHICH, WHEN YOU STOP BELIEVING IN IT,DOESN'T GO AWAY.



there's another one on the forum...can't remember who's it is tho'...it goes....



Taking girls out and doing things?? Naaaah
Prefer taking them in and undoing things...



It's kinda cute!!

[Reality]

thanx!
Btw...ABS LOVE ur signature...

REALITY IS THAT WHICH, WHEN YOU STOP BELIEVING IN IT,DOESN'T GO AWAY.

Thanks

[CtrlAltDel]

...Taking girls out and doing things?? Naaaah
Prefer taking them in and undoing things...

thats smack's!

[CtrlAltDel]

btw, the films out in india on June 2nd! start 'Q'ing up for tickets guys and see it first day itself, incase some lunatics ask for its ban again!

[CtrlAltDel]

came across this recently:

The Gospel According To Quentin

The credits set the tone for the film: classic, Cecil B DeMille titles: bright, gaudy, gold, larger than life; epic credits. The first credit is characteristically the directorial one, and it is this that at first shocks us and then explains the director’s vision, the scope of his universe. 'The First Film By Quentin Tarantino', it screams, in massive serif letters. While this momentarily confuses us, having lived through his last four/five (varies by degree of purism) films, most fans of the director will comprehend the ironic overstatement immediately.

Quentin’s is a parallel universe: a world where Mr. Blonde, Sidewinder, The DiVAS and Fox Force Five can, and do, coexist separated merely by the confines of space and time. Considering this, we realise that he is making a statement of chronological accuracy: set more than two thousand years ago, this film predates all his previous efforts. Brilliance thus begins in the very first frame of film.

We open on The Last Supper, where, amid bread and wine and an enviable selection of main courses, the disciples are impassioned in debate. The topic under discussion is that of The Madonna being heralded “as a Virgin”, and what it ‘really means’. Evidently, conspiracy theories have been around for a while, and winks and nudges are exchanged across the table. Jesus (Steve Buscemi), for whom this ribaldry is an obviously awkward subject, decides to proceed with the momentous evening by breaking the ridiculously priced bread into small pieces and passing it around the table. The disciples graciously accept the pieces of loaf. All but one, that is.

“I don’t believe in sharing.” The camera moves towards one of the younger acolytes, bearded straggily and clad in long, flowing, orange robes. This is Judas, played masterfully by Tim Roth. His story – of betraying Jesus, lured by dreams of buying his own state-of-the-art chariot, a thundering Roman vehicle called a Chopperus, is told instantly, in quick, non-linear cuts, interspersed with shots of a sack of golden coins, the sestertii scattering onto him in super slow motion as thrown to him by the Romans.

The several-voiced, multiple-thread narrative of The Book lends itself perfectly to Tarantino’s typical back-and-forth shuttling through various levels of flashbacked past and present. The Nativity scene is a stunning work of anime, chronicling the arduous travels of the Three Wise Men, played, in their subsequent live-action avatars, by David Carradine, Samuel L Jackson, and Lucy Liu [who, the illustrations elaborate, became a Wise Man after a successful coup, and is open to most critiques except those questioning her ascent to ‘Man’ status despite being a woman]. In fact, her role among the three is particularly vital, as, being the woman, she turns out to be the only one who remembers the date and drags the other two to Macy’s in order to shop for the Savior’s birth. Jackson carries the most cryptic of gifts, the mysterious Myrrh, in a black briefcase, and it is enigmatically not shown – only opened off-camera, greeted by appropriate oohs and aahs, casting a divinely strange glow across witnessing faces.

Pam Grier plays Mother Mary, in a startling bit of miscasting. Apparently, while Tarantino plodded through The Book and wrote the screenplay, he envisioned her throughout. Later, while realising that Mary wasn’t supposed to be black and, as a result, didn’t entirely complement Robert Forster (Joseph), he decided to ignore his initial oversight, convinced she was ideal for the role. She plays a strong, determined character, a firm mother with affection largely visible only between the lines, a Mary displaying stoic conviction and belief in her son. Stirring.

Harvey Keitel rejuvenates the role of John The Baptist, a severe taskmaster who mentors Jesus in order to prepare him for the ordeal that eventually awaits him. There is a scene, before the storming of the Temple, where John yells at the indecisive Disciples, and Jesus winces. On hearing that there is no need for aggression, The Baptist patiently elaborates on their task being single-mindedly crucial, and apologises inimitably, in a manner that makes the Messiah automatically take back his complaint: “If I have been curt, My Lord, I apologise,” begins his inspiring speech. He details the inevitable need for violence immediately ahead of them – this is superbly humane, speaking of ‘the greater good’ that will be served by mercilessly bludgeoning the evil usurpers of The Lord’s Temple. He finishes with a heartwarming smile, and suggests that the Lord pluck some fish and loaves, for they are famished.

The compelling catastrophe is a particular favourite of the auteur director, and Quentin has previously displayed his fondness for tremendous scale. The Storming Of The Marketplace is, therefore, a visually chaotic work of cinematic poetry, with thwacking staffs and a surreal, mighty Buscemi, dragging grubby vendors by their long, unkempt beards. When the violence of the clash becomes overwhelming, the filmmaker shifts to black and white, imparting an ‘apocalyptic dream-like’ quality to the sequence. Tables are shattered, gold is spilled; sandal-crushed vegetables and wine litter the floors, remarkably resembling splattered brain and intestines spread in blood. There is a poignant moment when one of the Wise Men, in a queerly timed reappearance, walks in and witnesses the carnage. He takes a deep breath and stands back and waxes profound: “This is some repugnant waste.” Unforgettable cinema.

Mary Magdalene (Uma Thurman) follows Jesus around with great, visibly heartfelt devotion. After her salvation from sin, she is now clad in modest attire, covered head to toe in a yellow robe. Uma has compelling, powerful eyes, and Tarantino makes excellent use of these as he constantly zooms right in, once even to reflect a resting, exhausted Messiah prostrate within them. Most of her finest moments on screen are wordless, and particularly memorable is the emotive shot where she explains the fate of The Savior to Grier. As The Virgin looks on inquiringly, Thurman simply traces the shape of a cross in the air – Quentin helps us by following her fingers with dotted, white lines – and smiles a bitter, wry smile.

Jesus, captured by the Romans, is taken to see Pontius Pilate. Here is where the director takes us on a breathtaking rollercoaster ride of a single-take long camera shot, one that moves through the streets, catches up with The Messiah, moves to shoulder level as he walks nonchalantly along, loiters momentarily on Satan walking by – tempting Jesus with a bushel of evidently delicious red apples, pans around slowly to capture the jeering expressions of the onlookers, before pulling majestically upward to reveal the procession entering the gates of Pilate’s palace.

In what has now become a trademark cameo, Quentin steps in front of the camera, this time to play Pontius Pilate. His Emperor is one with churlish arrogance, and a royal lack of humility, something the director seems comfortable portraying. He insouciantly snarls: “Do you see a sign here saying ‘Blaspheming Judean Storage’?” as the beaten Jesus staggers forth, and disgustedly strides off to wash his now-bloodied hands. Reluctant, and apathetic, at first, to dole out justice to the seemingly insignificant Buscemi, he is later aptly malevolent when deciding in favour of the awful punishment.

And then there is the torture. The violent, sickening, emotionally draining torture of watching Jesus battered by the ruthless Roman guards. Particular attention is given to two soldiers, the brothers Vagueus. Gripping cinema is created as the younger brother Flaxenus (played to sinister supremacy by Michael Madsen), having whipped and bled the Messiah without reprieve, pulls the thorny crown onto Jesus’ head. Here, as we turn away from the screen, collectively flinching, the camera does the same, and succinctly slides away, hiding the gruesomeness we all know. What this technique essentially does, of course, is just conjure up the scene inside our heads with an alarming attention to graphic detail impossible to show on screen. Yet the director cannot be faulted for trying to shield us from trauma, in his own way.

Tarantino films are, beyond being stylistic orgies of cinematography and soundtrack, primarily composed of pure dialogue. Of violent people in lethal, frightening professions we eventually identify with, and even, begrudgingly, like, owing to realism, the commonplace coarseness, the conversations that we can visualise ourselves participating in. Here, too, as the older brother Vincentus (John Travolta) puts the Crucifix together, he complains at the ridiculous price of timber. The comments bring his existential humanity into perspective for the audience, as he shakes his head at a five-sestertii 2x4. As he nails the cross, sweating and tired, half splattered with The Messiah’s blood, he concedes that it is really fine wood. However – five sestertii? The brothers laugh as they pile on the pulverised, near-dead Jesus onto the carved wood and Flaxenus throws us another gem of cinematic dialogue as he phrases it with deadly accuracy: “This is no ordinary execution, my brother. This is Pulp Crucifixion.”

The final scene is presented to a weary wreck of an audience – shocked, overwhelmed, humbled. In the darkened theatre, having undergone a life-altering cinematic experience, you sit surrounded by sobs. Even though some of these are from film-school students coming to terms with their years at UCLA having been rather pointless, the feeling you get is one of overpowering sincerity. Jesus hangs on the cross. The sky thunders furiously, the storm drowning out all sound. Even the huddled masses by the base of the cross have begun to disperse, for night has fallen, and the rain is hard. Blood from the lifeless Messiah’s body is scrubbed away, as are onlooking tears.

There is an extreme close up of a crying Uma Thurman, mouthing words as she sobs forcefully into the squall. The downpour does not let us hear her words, but the camera lingers on her impassioned lips as she repetitively chants the prayer of a true believer, unwilling to accept the fate reality has forced onto her. The words become increasingly clearer as we move into slow motion, and are drilled into our brain as she incessantly goes on.

Wiggle. Your. Big. Toe. Wiggle Your Big Toe. Wiggle Your Big Toe. She continues to will him, ad infinitum. The camera ultimately closes in on the Toe in question, hanging lifelessly, lashed by rain. As the rhythm of Mary’s unheard chant has been drilled into our collective consciousness by effective, manic repetition, we feel ourselves willing the appendage into motion as well. The shot remains static for three glorious minutes, as music from an old spaghetti western builds magnificently to a crescendo.

Then an incandescent white screen is suddenly thrust onto us, momentarily blinding the audience, accompanied by a particularly resounding clap of echoing thunder. Then all is silence; all is utter darkness.

The movie is over. And cinema will never be the same again.

[CtrlAltDel]

came across this recently:

The Gospel According To Quentin

The credits set the tone for the film: classic, Cecil B DeMille titles: bright, gaudy, gold, larger than life; epic credits. The first credit is characteristically the directorial one, and it is this that at first shocks us and then explains the director’s vision, the scope of his universe. 'The First Film By Quentin Tarantino', it screams, in massive serif letters. While this momentarily confuses us, having lived through his last four/five (varies by degree of purism) films, most fans of the director will comprehend the ironic overstatement immediately.

Quentin’s is a parallel universe: a world where Mr. Blonde, Sidewinder, The DiVAS and Fox Force Five can, and do, coexist separated merely by the confines of space and time. Considering this, we realise that he is making a statement of chronological accuracy: set more than two thousand years ago, this film predates all his previous efforts. Brilliance thus begins in the very first frame of film.

We open on The Last Supper, where, amid bread and wine and an enviable selection of main courses, the disciples are impassioned in debate. The topic under discussion is that of The Madonna being heralded “as a Virgin”, and what it ‘really means’. Evidently, conspiracy theories have been around for a while, and winks and nudges are exchanged across the table. Jesus (Steve Buscemi), for whom this ribaldry is an obviously awkward subject, decides to proceed with the momentous evening by breaking the ridiculously priced bread into small pieces and passing it around the table. The disciples graciously accept the pieces of loaf. All but one, that is.

“I don’t believe in sharing.” The camera moves towards one of the younger acolytes, bearded straggily and clad in long, flowing, orange robes. This is Judas, played masterfully by Tim Roth. His story – of betraying Jesus, lured by dreams of buying his own state-of-the-art chariot, a thundering Roman vehicle called a Chopperus, is told instantly, in quick, non-linear cuts, interspersed with shots of a sack of golden coins, the sestertii scattering onto him in super slow motion as thrown to him by the Romans.

The several-voiced, multiple-thread narrative of The Book lends itself perfectly to Tarantino’s typical back-and-forth shuttling through various levels of flashbacked past and present. The Nativity scene is a stunning work of anime, chronicling the arduous travels of the Three Wise Men, played, in their subsequent live-action avatars, by David Carradine, Samuel L Jackson, and Lucy Liu [who, the illustrations elaborate, became a Wise Man after a successful coup, and is open to most critiques except those questioning her ascent to ‘Man’ status despite being a woman]. In fact, her role among the three is particularly vital, as, being the woman, she turns out to be the only one who remembers the date and drags the other two to Macy’s in order to shop for the Savior’s birth. Jackson carries the most cryptic of gifts, the mysterious Myrrh, in a black briefcase, and it is enigmatically not shown – only opened off-camera, greeted by appropriate oohs and aahs, casting a divinely strange glow across witnessing faces.

Pam Grier plays Mother Mary, in a startling bit of miscasting. Apparently, while Tarantino plodded through The Book and wrote the screenplay, he envisioned her throughout. Later, while realising that Mary wasn’t supposed to be black and, as a result, didn’t entirely complement Robert Forster (Joseph), he decided to ignore his initial oversight, convinced she was ideal for the role. She plays a strong, determined character, a firm mother with affection largely visible only between the lines, a Mary displaying stoic conviction and belief in her son. Stirring.

Harvey Keitel rejuvenates the role of John The Baptist, a severe taskmaster who mentors Jesus in order to prepare him for the ordeal that eventually awaits him. There is a scene, before the storming of the Temple, where John yells at the indecisive Disciples, and Jesus winces. On hearing that there is no need for aggression, The Baptist patiently elaborates on their task being single-mindedly crucial, and apologises inimitably, in a manner that makes the Messiah automatically take back his complaint: “If I have been curt, My Lord, I apologise,” begins his inspiring speech. He details the inevitable need for violence immediately ahead of them – this is superbly humane, speaking of ‘the greater good’ that will be served by mercilessly bludgeoning the evil usurpers of The Lord’s Temple. He finishes with a heartwarming smile, and suggests that the Lord pluck some fish and loaves, for they are famished.

The compelling catastrophe is a particular favourite of the auteur director, and Quentin has previously displayed his fondness for tremendous scale. The Storming Of The Marketplace is, therefore, a visually chaotic work of cinematic poetry, with thwacking staffs and a surreal, mighty Buscemi, dragging grubby vendors by their long, unkempt beards. When the violence of the clash becomes overwhelming, the filmmaker shifts to black and white, imparting an ‘apocalyptic dream-like’ quality to the sequence. Tables are shattered, gold is spilled; sandal-crushed vegetables and wine litter the floors, remarkably resembling splattered brain and intestines spread in blood. There is a poignant moment when one of the Wise Men, in a queerly timed reappearance, walks in and witnesses the carnage. He takes a deep breath and stands back and waxes profound: “This is some repugnant waste.” Unforgettable cinema.

Mary Magdalene (Uma Thurman) follows Jesus around with great, visibly heartfelt devotion. After her salvation from sin, she is now clad in modest attire, covered head to toe in a yellow robe. Uma has compelling, powerful eyes, and Tarantino makes excellent use of these as he constantly zooms right in, once even to reflect a resting, exhausted Messiah prostrate within them. Most of her finest moments on screen are wordless, and particularly memorable is the emotive shot where she explains the fate of The Savior to Grier. As The Virgin looks on inquiringly, Thurman simply traces the shape of a cross in the air – Quentin helps us by following her fingers with dotted, white lines – and smiles a bitter, wry smile.

Jesus, captured by the Romans, is taken to see Pontius Pilate. Here is where the director takes us on a breathtaking rollercoaster ride of a single-take long camera shot, one that moves through the streets, catches up with The Messiah, moves to shoulder level as he walks nonchalantly along, loiters momentarily on Satan walking by – tempting Jesus with a bushel of evidently delicious red apples, pans around slowly to capture the jeering expressions of the onlookers, before pulling majestically upward to reveal the procession entering the gates of Pilate’s palace.

In what has now become a trademark cameo, Quentin steps in front of the camera, this time to play Pontius Pilate. His Emperor is one with churlish arrogance, and a royal lack of humility, something the director seems comfortable portraying. He insouciantly snarls: “Do you see a sign here saying ‘Blaspheming Judean Storage’?” as the beaten Jesus staggers forth, and disgustedly strides off to wash his now-bloodied hands. Reluctant, and apathetic, at first, to dole out justice to the seemingly insignificant Buscemi, he is later aptly malevolent when deciding in favour of the awful punishment.

And then there is the torture. The violent, sickening, emotionally draining torture of watching Jesus battered by the ruthless Roman guards. Particular attention is given to two soldiers, the brothers Vagueus. Gripping cinema is created as the younger brother Flaxenus (played to sinister supremacy by Michael Madsen), having whipped and bled the Messiah without reprieve, pulls the thorny crown onto Jesus’ head. Here, as we turn away from the screen, collectively flinching, the camera does the same, and succinctly slides away, hiding the gruesomeness we all know. What this technique essentially does, of course, is just conjure up the scene inside our heads with an alarming attention to graphic detail impossible to show on screen. Yet the director cannot be faulted for trying to shield us from trauma, in his own way.

Tarantino films are, beyond being stylistic orgies of cinematography and soundtrack, primarily composed of pure dialogue. Of violent people in lethal, frightening professions we eventually identify with, and even, begrudgingly, like, owing to realism, the commonplace coarseness, the conversations that we can visualise ourselves participating in. Here, too, as the older brother Vincentus (John Travolta) puts the Crucifix together, he complains at the ridiculous price of timber. The comments bring his existential humanity into perspective for the audience, as he shakes his head at a five-sestertii 2x4. As he nails the cross, sweating and tired, half splattered with The Messiah’s blood, he concedes that it is really fine wood. However – five sestertii? The brothers laugh as they pile on the pulverised, near-dead Jesus onto the carved wood and Flaxenus throws us another gem of cinematic dialogue as he phrases it with deadly accuracy: “This is no ordinary execution, my brother. This is Pulp Crucifixion.”

The final scene is presented to a weary wreck of an audience – shocked, overwhelmed, humbled. In the darkened theatre, having undergone a life-altering cinematic experience, you sit surrounded by sobs. Even though some of these are from film-school students coming to terms with their years at UCLA having been rather pointless, the feeling you get is one of overpowering sincerity. Jesus hangs on the cross. The sky thunders furiously, the storm drowning out all sound. Even the huddled masses by the base of the cross have begun to disperse, for night has fallen, and the rain is hard. Blood from the lifeless Messiah’s body is scrubbed away, as are onlooking tears.

There is an extreme close up of a crying Uma Thurman, mouthing words as she sobs forcefully into the squall. The downpour does not let us hear her words, but the camera lingers on her impassioned lips as she repetitively chants the prayer of a true believer, unwilling to accept the fate reality has forced onto her. The words become increasingly clearer as we move into slow motion, and are drilled into our brain as she incessantly goes on.

Wiggle. Your. Big. Toe. Wiggle Your Big Toe. Wiggle Your Big Toe. She continues to will him, ad infinitum. The camera ultimately closes in on the Toe in question, hanging lifelessly, lashed by rain. As the rhythm of Mary’s unheard chant has been drilled into our collective consciousness by effective, manic repetition, we feel ourselves willing the appendage into motion as well. The shot remains static for three glorious minutes, as music from an old spaghetti western builds magnificently to a crescendo.

Then an incandescent white screen is suddenly thrust onto us, momentarily blinding the audience, accompanied by a particularly resounding clap of echoing thunder. Then all is silence; all is utter darkness.

The movie is over. And cinema will never be the same again.

[Fun Kay]

Man...intense!!



And i can imagine the furore that THIS would create!

[Reporting HP]

Vatican Newspaper Reviews 'Da Vinci'



VATICAN CITY (AP) - "The Da Vinci Code" film was "much ado about nothing' and the fuss surrounding it was nothing more than a clever marketing strategy to increase sales at the box office, the Vatican newspaper wrote in a review published Tuesday.



In fact, after a catchy beginning, the film version of Dan Brown's novel is a dull watch and has little to recommend it, L'Osservatore Romano said.



The film and book have angered church leaders worldwide with their premise that Jesus married and fathered children and also because the conservative Catholic movement, Opus Dei, is depicted as a murderous cult.



While some religious leaders have called for a boycott of the film, Opus Dei has resisted a boycott, saying instead that the film provides an opportunity to generate interest in Christianity.



The ensuing publicity "is probably the most gigantic marketing strategy of a book and a film seen in the last few decades," the newspaper said in its review, which was published under the headline "Much ado about nothing."



Its first few minutes are marked by "allegories and suggestive symbols of a third-rate neo-medievalism ... and Opus Dei is introduced as a shrewd ghost," the newspaper states.



"After this engaging beginning that does not last longer than 12 minutes, another 140 minutes await us before the end."







This is a link to the article reproduced here

[The Jackal]

I found the Da Vinci Code too similar to one of Robert Ludlums book:Gemini Contenders.



Vittorio Fontini-Cristi is the eldest son of a wealthy Italian industrialist. His father's involvement in the hiding of a vault containing powerful religious documents leads to Vittorio's becoming enmeshed in events he doesn't fully understand. With World War II as a backdrop, he is hunted by many who want the vault's contents and protected by some who believe he will lead them to the vault as his life is transformed. He is never to escape this legacy, and before he dies, must pass it on to his twin sons--the Geminis who have both become involved in wars of their own. One son is career army with a Vietnam background, the other a peace loving war protester. They must cast aside their mutual dislike to once and for all solve the mystery that has always been part of their heritage.



At the end of the book,a document is found in the vault and it says that Jesus was never crucified,but a look alike was placed on the cross(I think thats the gist,its been over a year since I read it).Anyway Dan Brown once said that he is inspired by Robert Ludlum......Its an exellent novel.

[mango]

Mango...if you think a free-for-all and seamless system exists in the US, you're blissfully ignorant. Where do the americans get all the ratings for their movies from? Why should a group of people choose who can see a movie and who can't?

And I don't think I really would need to list out the various bans on books and movies that have been passed or called for in the US. You just need to google it and you'll see the results.

Mind you that censorship does exist in all societies, though the look and feel might be different from place to place.

fine enough. to an extent, the MPAA does censor movies by releasing a rating system (G to NC17) however, we're discussing to the level which a person is villified/harassed when they claim a certain viewpoint. of course, an unpopular viewpoint will be responded to with an equally offensive rebuttal, but we're addressing if the government is proactively discouraging the citizens from watching/listening this media. i have heard of no instances, in current day, where literature or videos (besides child porn and other illegal activities) are banned in the united states. all i'm saying is that i prefer the openness of western society. i only hope that people can overcome their prejudices and learn to think critically as to the validity of their own beliefs before jumping to conclusions and trying to ban it from public consumption.