Within this month, novelist Dan Brown’s fiction-thriller movie The Da Vinci Code will be shown nationwide, a movie that demonizes the divinity of the Christ as having allegedly married Mary Magdalene; having borne children with her who are supposedly living in
Archbishop Angelo Amato, the number two official in the Vatican doctrinal office, which was headed by Pope Benedict until his election last year, addressing a Catholic conference in
He added: “Instead, if they are directed against the Church and Christians, they remain unpunished.” Amato suggested that Catholics around the world should launch organized protests against the The Da Vinci Code film just as some had done in 1988 to protest against Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ. http://www.sabcnews.com/world/europe/0,2172,126503,00.html]
We cannot remain naïve and complacent about the possible harmful effects it would have on the average Catholic moviegoer.
More than their usual intrusion in the realm of politics like the latest pastoral letters of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the
15 comments:
remember the muhammed cartoons?
and by the way, it's fiction. it's something based on a novel. remember rushdie's the satanic verses? or go back 400 years--rabelais' pantagruel? or that thomas mann novel about joseph?
the point is, the novel--and filmmaking--as an art form isn't to be judged based on anybody's sense of morality. it's beyond--or outside it. that's the same reason nobody would file a lawsuit against it. yeah, people can protest, but sue? no. suing da vinci code's producers in fact doesn't hold water.
if you'd look at all those strings of "controversial" films in the past 100 years--from clouzot's le corbeau, to that japanese film ai no corrida, to scorsese's last temptation (and even to a small extent mel gibson's corny film The Passion)--what protests accomplish is explode a film's popularity. and i have this gut feeling the producers are kunwari lang "nag-a-aray-arayan" to appear they're afraid of the backlash--but the truth is they're probably huddling inside a small room and giving one another high-fives. because backlash, in the modern sense, doesn't plug holes. all these protests, it's fanning the flames of global curiosity.
by the way, i've read all of dan brown's novels. they're nothing deep, nothing cerebral; they're just a good ride. just good entertainment. nothing to lose sleep over. =p
just my two cents.
...if protesting is free publicity, Sony will certainly be paying for it. check out "Rejecting the Da Vinci" on previous posting.
… I’ve read the book, totally enjoyed it and saw nothing that eroded my faith a cubit. I think that the church’s hysterical reaction to it is way overboard given that the life of Christ as we know it has no historical basis. And yet we believe. Let us leave it at that. I don’t want the church meddling in what happens in the bedroom and in the books I enjoy.
And don’t lecture me, because we say the Rosary every night not out of compliance but as an act of private faith.
Like you, I also read the book. Unlike you, however, I wish the Filipino Catholics to stand up to defend the honor of the God-Man, that most singular Personage in all of history, the holy founder of Christianity, whom we call Our Lord Jesus Christ. If that sounds like lecturing, then please accept my apology.
The theme of the movie “The Da Vinci Code” is that Jesus Christ was not God, but only human, making an unabashed attack on the Catholic Church itself and its traditional beliefs. The movie depicts Jesus Christ as having married Mary Magdalene and that the Holy Grail—traditionally known as the chalice where the Host and the Wine were transformed into the Body and Blood of the Christ during the Last Supper—was actually Magdalene. This is outrightly blasphemous and it’s Christ, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, being blasphemed, not a prophet.
As faithful Catholics, we should be concerned about the scandalous and sacrilegious manner in which Our Lord Jesus Christ, St. Mary Magdalene and the Catholic Church are portrayed in the book and in the movie.
While apologists for the book or movie pass it off as mere fiction, we cannot remain naïve and complacent about the possible harmful effects it would have on the average Catholic reader or moviegoer. False conclusions based on shoddy fictional premises can and often do deceive many of those of weak faith to accept and believe as true what they would normally take for as ridiculous or nonsense.
To dispute those who claim protesting only generates publicity, we argue that the promoters of these productions fear the negative publicity generated by these protests since it translates to poor ticket sales at the box office. Please check out “Rejecting The Da Vinci Code” [previous posting].
… the point is, the novel--and filmmaking--as an art form isn’t to be judged based on anybody's sense of morality. it's beyond--or outside it. that's the same reason nobody would file a lawsuit against it. yeah, people can protest, but sue? no. suing da vinci code's producers in fact doesn't hold water.
if you’d look at all those strings of “controversial” films in the past 100 years--from clouzot's le corbeau, to that japanese film ai no corrida, to scorsese's last temptation (and even to a small extent mel gibson’s corny film The Passion)--what protests accomplish is explode a film's popularity. and i have this gut feeling the producers are “kunwari lang nag-a-aray-arayan” to appear they’re afraid of the backlash--but the truth is they're probably huddling inside a small room and giving one another high-fives. because backlash, in the modern sense, doesn’t plug holes. all these protests, it’s fanning the flames of global curiosity.
by the way, i’ve read all of dan brown’s novels. they’re nothing deep, nothing cerebral; they’re just a good ride. just good entertainment. nothing to lose sleep over.
just my two cents.
Blasphemy! That is the word that the filmmakers fear. It is the only word that sufficiently describes the offense given to Christians in what they perceive as a brutal “insensitivity to religious beliefs.” It is the only word that addresses the central issue of how the massive promotion of a work can be seen as both insulting and offending to God, Himself.
So what if Jesus Christ was indeed married to Mary Magdalene.? That just makes Him, perhaps, more of a man but certainly, NOT ONE IOTA less of a God.
Had such ludicrous conspiracy theories been written about Islam, Judaism or any other religion, there would be lawsuits and protests galore. Catholics let their enemies kick them in the groin too much. It's time to wake up, stand up and defend our religion and our Church.
uhmmm. if there's anything the past many decades of filmmaking (and literature) show us, it's that the blasphemy card is very effective in generating huge interest--even from the professed believers.
the blasphemy card draws people, not repel them. and besides, these producers are not naive; they know what ticks and what doesn't. this so-called backlash from the religious, do you really believe it's something the producers didn't expect? are you really convinced that the producers do not actually exploit the backlash to generate an even more massive interest? i used to work for advertising, and sometimes we used tricks similar to this.
well, i understand where you're coming from as a devout believer. go ahead, boycott it. but im talking about human nature. and i hope you'll remember me after you've seen the box office figures a month from now. because im pretty sure it would greatly exceed the book's sales figures. =p
… Is the world ready for the Truth yet? Did you ever stop to think what the True Messiah (me) would say about worshipping false names, false images, and dogma?
If you, Seven Star Hand, really believe that you are the "True Messiah", then you are not living in the world of reality.
The absolute Truth has been handed down to us 2000 years ago, but man does not want to accept Truth and makes his own, thinking he can be like God. The serpent tricked Adam into believing he can be like God. So beware of your claim, lest you should die tomorrow and meet your Creator.
i believe i had posted a comment here. i have no beef against you if you "censored" it. but the very "act" of "censorship" (or "moderation" as blogger calls it) is okay only if the comment is totally trash talk. this is amusing. =p
if an "intelligent challenge" to your post is deleted, you end up "shaping" the discussion here to your own line of thinking. then the whole becomes tantamount to "propaganda." i dont know about you, but if you're out for "truth", i dont see the point of not allowing a dissenting idea. at the end of the day, it seems you're stooping down to the level of the very thing you're attacking.
but what the heck, this is your blog. when in rome, do as the romans do, as they say.
...if an "intelligent challenge" to your post is deleted, you end up "shaping" the discussion here to your own line of thinking. then the whole becomes tantamount to "propaganda." i dont know about you, but if you're out for "truth", i dont see the point of not allowing a dissenting idea. at the end of the day, it seems you're stooping down to the level of the very thing you're attacking.
...the deleted portion was re-posted separetely, if you will please observe before crying "foul".
Post a Comment