Comments on: Da Vinci Code

By: Dr. Mrs. Wilson

Dr. Mrs. Wilson — Thu, 25 May 2006 15:27:42 +0000

Feminists are taking it somewhat seriously, which is no surprise — see http://hercode.org/ for one example. They say the book is fiction, but they are using it to springboard discussions of inequality in religion, and seem to implicitly take a lot of the historical stuff as fact. From the submitted stories, it’s clear that many of the women writing in are taking The Da Vinci Code as much more than fiction. Sad.

By: Keir

Keir — Mon, 22 May 2006 00:43:57 +0000

John, you’ll be so disappointed. I saw the movie and I really wouldn’t call that a mullet. So sad.

Otherwise the movie was pretty decent. I don’t know if it was better or worse than the book. It goes both ways. It seemed like the movie was trying to appease some of the pissed off Catholics by providing some opposing viewpoints that weren’t in the book. That was kind of amusing, but I’m sure they will still be pissed off.

The main good thing about the movie is that it went much faster when it came to the horribly obvious answer to the second cryptex. The characters were still pretty dense about it though.

The thing I really liked about the book that there wasn’t much of in the movie was all of the fascinating, if inaccurate, explainations of the origins of things. I should have written them all down when I read the book so I could look them up later. The ones I remember are Friday the 13th, the word “horny”, and bunny ears.

By: Keir

Keir — Thu, 18 May 2006 19:25:55 +0000

That’s what I thought.

By: John

John — Thu, 18 May 2006 15:54:49 +0000

Heh. That was my not-so-subtle dig at the plagiarism allegations.

By: Keir

Keir — Wed, 17 May 2006 03:47:25 +0000

Um… some of that sounded awfully familiar. Must be some weird form of blog deja vu or something.

Oooo… I just discovered another Da Vinci secret! Mullet backwards is tellum or ‘tell um’ ( tell ‘em). The question is what is he trying to tell us with this mullet? Hopefully the movie will reveal all.