Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Visit these great anti-Madonna sites:

Madonna Blows Chunks: An Anti-Madonna Blog / Site (NEW!)

Madonna Blows Chunks: An Anti-Madonna Site (site closed as of May 2017)

madonnasuxx's Anti Madonna Site (Internet Archive)

Help us keep ads off our board!



Add us to your bookmarks!
(works in FireFox and Internet Explorer)
Please read the Discussion Board Rules before joining the board!
New Madonna haters: Come introduce yourself!
Board Help & Updates

Stop Forum Spam

  Full List of Emoticons
Avatars
Thread Indexes:

One Stop Index Thread | Persons | Subjects A - L | Subjects M - Z | Aisha's Lawsuit

Life Universe Everything Forum Index

Barf-inducing Madonna links or news -


Flea on Twitter: @fleadip / Link to Flea's Twitter Page | Follow admin Melissa on Twitter @melissatreglia


BREAKING & IMPORTANT MADONNA-RELATED NEWS:

See the "Shout Box" Section at the bottom of the discussion board's main page for the latest anti- Madonna news and links

Welcome to The Anti-Madonna Discussion Board. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Dan Brown / Da Vinci Code; - also: Angels and Demons sequel
Topic Started: May 17 2006, 03:54 AM (382 Views)
Ironshadow
#1 mandona hater

crap book= crap movie- but it really would be funny if the target audience- atheists- didn't give it the support it needs. :laugh:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mihoshi Marie
Member Avatar
to whom it may concern
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It would be funny.

Even though I am Catholic, I find the theory that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had children intriguing. I am so tired of the media acting like this book and film are the first time this 'theory' has even been mentioned. It's not original.

A lot of people - athiests and believers - are going to see the film just to piss the fundies off. That is stupid. Let's all go see a mediocre film we wouldn't see otherwise just to piss off a bunch of Christians!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Garden variety critics don't like the film, either. I've seen many negative reviews of it.

Remember when that other movie came out years ago.. what was it called, "The Last Temptation of Christ?" - I remember that was controversial back then. It eventually blew over, as I expect this will.

I'm offended by Tom Hanks' hair style in this movie. :laugh:

Tom Hanks in Da Vinci movie:
Posted Image
IS Hosted

Posted Image
IS Host

Wasn't the Nicolas Cage movie National Treasure released before the Da Vinci Code book? :confused:

There are many, many errors in the Brown book / movie, but it's being passed off as fact, (even though the book is classified as fiction).

The Brown book/movie subtly attacks the deity of Jesus and the infallibility of the Bible, hiding behind the guise of, "Aw shucks, it's only a work of fiction, get over it."

I dare Brown to write a simliar book, but only using Islam as the religion 'o' choice to debunk via fiction.

Brown mixes a lot of errors with a little truth in his Da Vinci story, the result being that a lot of people who read the book and/or who see the movie will actually believe that the errors and fictional aspects are truth.

I don't understand the habit of skeptics attacking Christianity by way of the Roman Catholic Church (which Brown has done).

Christianity does not rise or fall on Roman Catholicism - plenty of Protestants and Baptists can defend Christianity and the true Gospels on their own; they don't have to rely on RCC "tradition" or any of that.

It's like fine, rip on the Roman Catholic Church, but how are you going to respond to all the Protestants and Baptists who can capably refute your criticisms, without appeal to "Tradition," or the papacy, or "Church authority?" :laugh:

Here are some reviews (I actually agree with some of the French reviewers):

`Da Vinci Code' Draws Boos and Yawns From Europe's Film Critics

Excerpts:
  • French critics hooted in print, too. "The most eagerly awaited film since the birth of Jesus'' looks like a "low-budget dud,'' wrote Liberation's Philippe Azoury and Didier Peron, mocking Tom Hanks's ``bowl haircut,'' actor Jean Reno's "appalllllllling'' shirts and Ron Howard's directing.

    "Humor is desperately lacking in this pseudo-quest for the Holy Grail,'' wrote Le Figaro's Marie-Noelle Tranchant. She said the actress Audrey Tautou, who plays the cryptologist Sophie Neveu, "has a hard time believing she is the great-granddaughter of Jesus Christ. So do we.''

    .... More than one European critic complained that Brown's intricate plot was hard to follow on the big screen.

    "The author's insistence on packing a maximum of truths, half-truths and conspiracy theories into every page of the book translates into complete information overkill in the film,'' Tobias Kniebe wrote in Germany's Sueddeutsche Zeitung.

    "The characters lecture, make connections and draw conclusions at break-neck speed.''

    An Italian reviewer questioned the movie's French-Riviera unveiling.

    "It was a gross mistake to bring the film to the festival,'' Corriere della Sera's Tullio Kezich wrote. "The verdict on `The Da Vinci Code' was pronounced at Cannes. France is not the land of the guillotine for nothing.''

    .... [John Walsh, writing in London's the Independent:] "If only it had been enough for 43 million people in the world to buy the book and digest its atrociously written pile of old rope in the privacy of their own homes,'' wrote Walsh.

    Instead, sites mentioned would soon be deluged with "lowing herds of imbecilic visitors'' and shops would overflow with ``Silas-the-homicidal-monk dolls.''

    The damage didn't stop there. "It's the way the Code leaves its tainting fingerprints on so many lovely things -- most notably Leonardo da Vinci,'' sighed Walsh. Today, the Italian Renaissance master is ``merely a bit-part player in a tawdry farrago of hazy symbols and threadbare conspiracy.''
Review: 'Da Vinci Code' an unholy mess

Excerpts:
  • "The Da Vinci Code'' is the sort of thriller in which -- during moments of extreme peril -- the hero says things like, "I have to get to a library, fast!''

    That's because it's a thriller with a lot of explaining to do, which it does, endlessly, while we wait for an actual movie to break out.

    It's difficult to imagine a more faithful rendering of Dan Brown's biblical whopper -- published in 2003, and over 40 million served!

    -- but with all its explanatory digressions about the founding of the Priory of Sion, the recognition of the Knights Templar at the Council of Troyes and, of course, the cryptographic tour de force that is the Fibonacci sequence, the book may be unfilmable.

    At least in any way that's likely to interest an audience not composed entirely of homicidal, jet-setting Catholic bishops, self-flagellating albino monks and people who have innocently remarked that they would gladly pay to watch Ian McKellen recite the phone book. In "The Da Vinci Code,'' that's pretty much what he does.
'Da Vinci Code' Box Office Prospects Slide After Poor Reviews

:wth: This is weird:
Russian Muslims Demand Banning “Da Vinci Code” Movie, Novel

I know that Muslims regard Jesus as one prophet among many, but I don't see what they get out of trying to ban the movie. Hmm, if Roman Catholic peaceful protests and boycotts can't stop the film, I bet angry Muslims can :laugh:
----------------------
A few links refuting the claims made in Brown's book and film (which are in my current sig line):

The Da Vinci Code Debunked

The Da Vinci Code: A Quest For Answers - (see also: list of links on the right side of page)

Jesus and DaVinci
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ironshadow
#1 mandona hater

buying into, or even considering, the Dan Brown Code is the same as denying the Salvation. It's retching, overwhelming twaddle of such staggering stupidity that it's hard to believe even atheists would pay money for it.

It is on the same level as the holocaust denials (and from the same source), and has only gotten widespread attention due to the people who think that Christianity-bashing will save them from the muslims.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maddyhater
Member Avatar
Duranie Madonna Hater
[ *  *  * ]
my attitude about all this religious crap is this, none of us know for sure what's true and what isn't. None of us have been dead, met and/or saw any higher being, then came back to life in order to let everyone know what the real scoop is. Religion is basically what YOU believe in as an individual, most of it stems from how you were raised, or in the case of Madonna... what religious cult wants to take your sleazy money badly enough to kiss your behind!




MH
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Ironshadow
May 19 2006, 03:03 AM
buying into, or even considering, the Dan Brown Code is the same as denying the Salvation. It's retching, overwhelming twaddle of such staggering stupidity that it's hard to believe even atheists would pay money for it.

It is on the same level as the holocaust denials (and from the same source), and has only gotten widespread attention due to the people who think that Christianity-bashing will save them from the muslims.
I've no doubt that some critics of Christianity are gleeful over the Brown book and film, but I have actually heard that some Non Christian people, such as art historians who are Non Christian, have ripped Brown's book to pieces for its inaccuracies.

Even some of the Non Christian academians are shocked at how shoddy Brown's research is, how many mistakes he made - not just in regards to art work, but in historical details.

Brown even got some dates wrong in the book.

Are albinos planning on boycotting the Da Vinci Code film? :ask: :laugh:

-Brown has a serial killin' albino priest or monk or whatever in the story.
maddy hater
 
]None of us have been dead, met and/or saw any higher being, then came back to life in order to let everyone know what the real scoop is.
You don't have to do that personally to know the truth.

From the traditional Christian perspective, that's what the eye witness accounts in the Gospels are all about - the apostles (Luke on behalf of the apostle Peter) who knew and walked with Jesus described the one who died and who was resurrected, Jesus of Nazareth.

The apostles testified to this, that they had seen the risen Christ. The apostles were not the only ones who saw the risen Christ, either.

The apostles had nothing to gain from pronouncing this information, as all of them were either jailed or killed because of it, and they knew such a violent outcome could be a possibility.

All of the New Testament was written by 90 - 95 AD, which was during the generation of those who had actually seen and knew Jesus, so if any of it had been untrue, the critics of Christianity back then could have easily stopped the whole movement by saying their claims were false.

The Pharisees couldn't rely on the "let's show folks the dead body of Jesus" routine (since there was no dead body to display - had there been one, they most certainly would've produced it), or "let's say the apostles stole the body," since the body of Jesus was placed in a tomb guarded by - I've read anywhere from 4 to 19 Roman guards.

The penalty for Roman guards falling asleep on the job was death. I also don't know how likely it is that all 4-, 12-, or 19 would have fallen asleep at the same time.

Then you have the problem of, how does a man who was savagely scourged, beaten, and crucified have the physical strength to push aside a very heavy rock that was blocking his tomb?

I've read that the rock may have weighed anywhere from 1 ton to 2 tons.

Jesus and his crucifixon were also mentioned in Non Christian sources around, I believe, the 1st and 2nd centuries. (As far as the dates are concerned, I'd have to double check on that.)

Here's one page summarizing it all....
Facts About The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

There are some Christians who have died and have come back to life to say they went to heaven, met with relatives who had gone on before and so on.
-----------------
:laugh: Another stellar review:
'Da Vinci' falls flat on screen

Excerpt:
  • "The Da Vinci Code" is a book that probably shouldn't have been filmed. Reading long passages of exposition is one thing. Having the central characters discuss all the theories, controversies and the meat of the book slows the movie to a crawl.

    "The Da Vinci Code" doesn't translate well from novel to screen, and the climax in the film, after a series of "revelations," falls flat.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ironshadow
#1 mandona hater

maddyhater
May 19 2006, 10:00 AM
my attitude about all this religious crap is this, none of us know for sure what's true and what isn't. None of us have been dead, met and/or saw any higher being, then came back to life in order to let everyone know what the real scoop is. Religion is basically what YOU believe in as an individual, most of it stems from how you were raised-



Speak for yourself. :laugh:

History is not an opinion. Things that happened, whether five minutes ago or five thousand years ago, are not subject to belief.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
maddyhater
Member Avatar
Duranie Madonna Hater
[ *  *  * ]
let's face it, most of the American views from when our country started were based on Christian principles brought here with Columbus. The American Indians don't believe in someone called Jesus, they have their own belief system, their own stories being told down from generation to generation. They wrote very little down, the elders passed down history verbally.

I"m intelligent enough to make up my own mind about what I do and don't believe, I don't let someone preach to me about what I should think, do, or say. God gave us all brains *I could insert the jokes about "he thought they said trains and wanted a slow one", but I won't, dang, I guess I just did!* It's too bad there are so many that don't know how to use what they've been given.

The good thing about living in the US is that we are allowed to think and believe whatever we want, we are allowed to have differences of opinion, and speak out about what we think it right or wrong. Punishing someone for being a different color, different religion, different race, or who they choose to love is not our right. Only God can judge us in the end, and he will. Until then, I will live my life as I choose, and not let others influence me. There is no preacher alive or dead that has the right to tell me how to live.



MH
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ironshadow
#1 mandona hater

There is no one, dead or alive, who can speak for me, either.

Most Native Americans- my ancestors-are Christian. By choice.

There are Christian Arabs.

There are Christian Chinese.

Christianity isn't ''going away'', no matter who attacks it. We're entitled to stand up to attackers like Dan Brown and companies that produce lies, slander, and worse- because it's not only our right, it's our CHOICE.

People who support Dan Brown don't realise they're not supporting any kind of a choice- they are supporting an attack. No one is trying to- or cares to- convert them- but they'd better be prepared for the consequences of attacking an individual, because that's what it amounts to, and that's what they're going to get.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

I'll have to answer maddy hater's second post in the thread at a later time.
Ironshadow
 
crap book= crap movie- but it really would be funny if the target audience- atheists- didn't give it the support it needs
Unfortunately, some Christians have been attending the movie. Some of them say they view it as an opportunity to evangelize.

I've seen some self-professing Christians interviewed by Christian news shows right after they've walked out of the Da Vinci movie, and some of them have been suckered by the movie's claims.

They believe that the claims made in the movie could be true.

If these people spent more time learning about the historic roots of Christianity and the origins of the Bible, they'd realize that Brown's book and movie are bunk.

Years and years ago, I began reading up on a lot of these issues, about the transmission of and preservation of the Bible, about the Gnostic texts, and how nominal, liberal Christians were trying to re-define who Christ is and trying to explain away the New Testament as it currently is.

So the claims that Brown has made are nothing new - he's simply repeating many of the things I had read of before.

It bothers me that so many Christians have not heard these things before, they act as though Brown's claims are new.

As such, some of them are not prepared for a book or movie such as this, and they therefore can be manipulated to reject their faith or have doubts.

If those Christians had been paying attention long before Brown's book/movie came out (e.g., trends in Jesus / biblical scholarship), they would have known in advance that the book/movie are not credible.

Anyhow, rather than reply to Maddy Hater's 2nd post at this time, for now, I wanted to post this info - and there are a few other stories about the X-Men movie knocking the Da Vinci Code film out of the number one box office spot. :clap:

Hugh Jackman is in this X-men movie (as he was in the previous two), and I've had a crush on him for a few years now. This gives me another reason to love him. :luv: :laugh:

And for what it's worth, I'd rather see Hugh Jackman as Wolverine than some dude as an albino monk or Tom Hanks with a weird hair cut. :roll:

'X-Men' annihilates 'Da Vinci' at box office
  • May 29, 2006

    LOS ANGELES--The final film in the "X-Men" superhero trilogy blew past last weekend's box office champ, "The Da Vinci Code," to post the fourth-highest all-time opening in North America, according to studio estimates issued Sunday.

    "X-Men: The Last Stand" sold about 107 million dollars worth of tickets in the three-day period from Friday to Sunday, dwarfing "Da Vinci's" 77-million dollar opening a week ago, said tracking firm Exhibitor Relations Co.
Mutants use X-factor to break Da Vinci's hold on box office
  • X Men: The Last Stand was directed by Brett Ratner, best known for the Rush Hour films, and it won positive reviews at its recent Cannes Film Festival debut — unlike The Da Vinci Code, which was widely derided by critics.

    Rolling Stone was typical of the press in describing the Vatican conspiracy thriller — adapted from the bestselling Dan Brown novel — as a “ dreary, droning, dull-witted adaptation”.

    .... According to historical data, only three movies have enjoyed bigger openings than X-Men in a three-day period: Spider-Man in 2002 ($114.8 million); Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith in 2005 ($108.4 million); and Shrek 2 in 2004 ($108 million).

    However, X-Men — made by 20th Century Fox, part of News Corporation, parent company of The Times — broke the record for the biggest Memorial Day opening.
'X-Men 3' tops weekend movie box office, 'Da Vinci Code' second
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Back in its day (late 1970s), Sophie's Choice was apparently the anti-Semitic book (later made into a movie) equivalent to the recent anti-Christian book The Da Vinci Code.

~Both claiming to "tell the truth," both claiming that each group (Jews/Sophie's Choice and Christians/DaVinci Code) are ignorant of their own past, they have it all wrong, history has been distorted, blah blah, and etc. etc.

Also, both works are fiction, but both authors are each presenting their books as factual, based- on- truth, giving the misleading impression to any one who reads their books that they are Non-fiction.

Jews Without Memory
- Sophie’s Choice and the Ideology of Liberal Anti-Judaism

(A Critique of Sophie's Choice)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Ironshadow, Hollywood types are at it again:

> James Cameron Finds Jesus?
> Scholars Criticize New Jesus Documentary
> Director's Titanic find: 'Christ's coffin'

This is supposed to appear on some cable channel, the Discovery Channel I think, or one of those other educational channels on cable TV. It's called "The Burial Cave of Jesus."

1- why do we never (or rarely) see mainstream, wide- released movies questioning the origins of other faiths?

Hollywood seems fixated on discounting only Christianity. Not Buddhism, Hinduism, or Islam. Just Christianity.

2- why is it when archaeologists find items supporting the biblical narratives and the origins of Christianity that the liberal scholars find some reason to dismiss it, but the moment someone thinks he's found evidence of Jesus' tomb, all the sudden skepticism is tossed aside?

There was an ossuary found a few years ago, one that dated from around the time of Christ, inscribed with the phrase, "James, brother of Jesus."

The liberal scholars and theologians said that particular ossuary wasn't any kind of evidence at all, and that it was probably some other James and some other Jesus and not the James and Jesus of the New Testament.

Now Cameron finds some ossuaries that mention some of these names on them, so the leftists and doubters are jumping up and down in glee saying that 'Jesus' tomb has been found.'

Oh... I bet you a million dollars that Cameron is going to explain in the movie (or in the interviews for the movie) that he's not "attacking" the Christian faith with this movie, it's just "another way" of viewing Christianity. :rolleyes2:

The Apostle Paul said in the New Testament if Christ was not resurrected then your faith is in vain (i.e., Christianity is bogus, and there's no point in being one).

But no, it's not attacking Christianity for these guys to keep vomiting up these kinds of books and movies where they say that either -
Jesus didn't die on the cross
or
He wasn't resurrected
:rolleyes2:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ironshadow
#1 mandona hater

The James ossuary was proven to be a forgery by a notorious antiquities dealer and forger. Forgery is commonplace in the field of artifacts and many museums have fakes sitting in them, as well as thousands of wealthy people who think they've got a piece of king arthur's scabbard or such other crap in their armoire.

This particular sh!t was debunked years ago by archeologists as having nothing to do with Jesus.

These two tw@ts- Titanic Boy and the other queef- are strictly out to scoop up all the cash that will be thrown at them by excited leftists.

I guess Titanic Boy hasn't had any hits for a while.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Hollywood Does It Again: "Angels & Demons" Flick Changes Muslim Villain to "Danish" Villain
  • Over the years, I've written about the many movies in which Hollywood changes the villain or the terrorist in the original script or novel from a Muslim to something else out of politically correct deference to Islam, the religion of whiners (and ultimately, murderers).

    Now, Hollywood continues in this tradition. This week, "Angels & Demons"--the controversial second installment of Dan Brown's already controversial "The Da Vinci Code"--opens in theaters. My review will be posted at Midnight/early Thursday Morning (stay tuned).

    But I'm already learning that the movie has been "disinfected" by Islamopanderers (Director Ron Howard) not wanting to upset our dear friends in the "Religion of Peace," who might do something "peaceful" if the movie had stayed true to the book.

    Reader Michelle writes:

    Well, Debbie, Hollywood has chickened out again.

    I read the book last year, and the Hassassin was muslim.
    I just checked the cast list in IMDB, and the Hassassin is now Danish.

    They mustn't offend, now, must they?
    Barf.


    Double Barf.

    For readers who think Michelle typoed, using the word, "Hassassin," she actually didn't. You see the word, "assassin," comes from the Arabic word, "Hashashin" [hashish user] because Muslim assassins smoked hashish before they murdered.

    But don't worry. They won't use the word Muslim or "assassin" or "hashish" in the same sentence because that would be wrong. Instead, Director Ron "Opie" "Richie Cunningham" Howard will vilify the Catholics because that would be . . .oh so right. Right?

    Howard admitted he took "a lot more creative license" with this adaptation of a Brown thriller, changing both the ending and an assassin, who is Muslim in the book...

    One theater trailer, however, claims the church "ordered a brutal massacre" to silence scientists, and another focuses on the "war"
    between science and religion, a key theme explored in the book.


    And if you look at the credits, the "Assassin" character isn't played by an Ahmed Baba Ganouche or a Mohammed Tabbouli. Nope. It's played by some dude named Nicolaj Lie Kaas. Yup, just like reader Michelle said, a Scandinavian name. Because everyone knows that those blond Scandinavians are the original Middle Eastern assassins who introduced us to the marvels of hashish and khat.

    Alhamdillullah [praise allah] for Hollywood and Ron Howard. And where's Pottsie and Ralph Malph (or is that "Mouth"?) when you need them to inject a little sanity?
Reader comment from that page (I agree with it):
  • You can ridicule Jews or make fun of Christians in Hollywood movies but criticism of Islam is off-limits. Liberals don't want their heads cut off so they play it safe. Creative license means whitewashing Islam's bloody history out of the picture.

    Posted by: NormanF
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Learn More · Register for Free
« Previous Topic · Global Outlook · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Disclaimer: The contents of the posts contained herein are the sole property of their respective users and do not necessarily reflect the forum's views as a whole.
All content Copyright © 2005-2018 The Anti-Madonna Discussion Board, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved.