Dennis Quaide!!! OMG, he would have been perfect! Although, I have to say that Tom did a nice job of buffing up for the movie :)
I really liked the movie too. The book had a lot too it, and this was a great interpretation.
What really makes me mad is that a lot of the reviewers are calling all of this fiction, when a lot of it (The Witches Hammer, Goddess worship suppression, the unincluded books of the Bible etc.) are historical fact. I think that's what makes it so interesting. I went back and did a lot of research to try to separate the fact from the fiction, and it gets really tricky because history was written not only from a purely male perspective in most cases but also reflected the political climate at the time it was either written or re-translated. Did you know that Thou shall not suffer a witch was dileberately mis-translated? It actually said Thou shall not suffer a poisoner.
Anyway, I'm rambling. I'm glad that you liked it. Things that make you think and question may be called heresy, but I call them interesting :D
What really REALLY got me hooked up in the book and made me love it was the historical background of it - I mean, all Dan Brown books have the same - and quite simple - formula: a intelectual genius who we usually fall in love with before finding out he is the vilain, and who uses a somewhat marked man to do his dirty work, and Langdon (or that girl from Digital Fortress) discovering it all up.
But with The Da Vinci Code, the historical background was groundbreaking! The world as I know it turned upside-down! I had heard about Illuminatti before, for example, but had never heard all that about Mary Madaglene(sp?). And that was what made the book for me one of the best I read last year.
Sure, there is fiction mixed with historical facts, and I think we have some side effects because of that: the church hates the book/movie because of the historical facts, and the media tries to counter that by selling it as fiction as to NOT enrage the church, which is probably why some critics are calling it fiction.
The book also made me curious about all that - what's history and what's fictional - but I have had little time to research on it. A friend lent me a book, but I still haven't read it. And with so much books on the subject, I'm not sure which ones are the best.
And yes, Dennis Quaid IS Langdon. XD But I did like Tom Hanks, he is after all an amazing actor and did his job, but he doesn't look physically as Langdon, and that's not his fault! ;)
I really liked the movie too. The book had a lot too it, and this was a great interpretation.
What really makes me mad is that a lot of the reviewers are calling all of this fiction, when a lot of it (The Witches Hammer, Goddess worship suppression, the unincluded books of the Bible etc.) are historical fact. I think that's what makes it so interesting. I went back and did a lot of research to try to separate the fact from the fiction, and it gets really tricky because history was written not only from a purely male perspective in most cases but also reflected the political climate at the time it was either written or re-translated. Did you know that Thou shall not suffer a witch was dileberately mis-translated? It actually said Thou shall not suffer a poisoner.
Anyway, I'm rambling. I'm glad that you liked it. Things that make you think and question may be called heresy, but I call them interesting :D
Reply
But with The Da Vinci Code, the historical background was groundbreaking! The world as I know it turned upside-down! I had heard about Illuminatti before, for example, but had never heard all that about Mary Madaglene(sp?). And that was what made the book for me one of the best I read last year.
Sure, there is fiction mixed with historical facts, and I think we have some side effects because of that: the church hates the book/movie because of the historical facts, and the media tries to counter that by selling it as fiction as to NOT enrage the church, which is probably why some critics are calling it fiction.
The book also made me curious about all that - what's history and what's fictional - but I have had little time to research on it. A friend lent me a book, but I still haven't read it. And with so much books on the subject, I'm not sure which ones are the best.
And yes, Dennis Quaid IS Langdon. XD But I did like Tom Hanks, he is after all an amazing actor and did his job, but he doesn't look physically as Langdon, and that's not his fault! ;)
Reply
Leave a comment