Da Vinci - the movie

Jump to Comments

Twenty or thirty years ago, my father-in-law was renowned for his treasure hunts.  He ran a Bible study group and each summer there was a treasure hunt.  My father-in-law came up with a series of clues (in poetic form) that took took particpants across the Northern Irish countryside in search of answers.  Prizes for the winners.

The Da Vinci Code sees Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu (Tom Hanks and Audrey Tatou) on a treasure hunt.  Instead of following the rhyming clues of my father-in-law through the Glens of Antrim, they are following a series of cryptic clues through Paris, London and Scotland.

The Da Vinci Code (movie) feels a bit like a giant treasure hunt.

Of course the difference with my father-in-law’s puzzles is that this treasure hunt is built around a conspiracy theory: namely that Christianity as we know it, is a great big fraud.  Jesus was a wonderful man, but real truth about him has been suppressed by power hungry and ruthless figures in the church.

Pauline and I went to see the film this afternoon.  Being a Monday afternoon, the theatre was sparsely populated.  However, over the weekend, there was huge demand for the film.  Some of the sessions were sold out an hour ahead of the screening: some of the people who missed their preferred time chose to wait 2-3 hours for the next screening.

The early reviews by the critics have been fairly scathing.  I think it’s the job of critics to be hard on what they review.  In the case of Da Vinci, I suspect that they have been extra harsh in response to all of the excessive hype about the movie.  There has been such a fuss both on the part of Sony Pictures in promoting the film, and on the part of the film’s opponents.  Secular critics look at the film and they wonder what all the fuss is about.  They find the film boring and wooden and wonder why everyone makes such a big deal of it.  The problem with that will be if secular people dismiss the (legitimate) concerns of Christians because they seem to be so esoteric and peripheral.

I don’t think the film is as bad as they have made out.  Mind you, it is long, people who have not read the book will find it hard to piece it all together, and the plot is unconvincing - sometimes the pursuers take an excessively long time to do what they need to do, and sometimes they manage to have relevant information in the blink of an eye.  And at times it really does seem like a treasure hunt as the heroes move from one clue to the next.

And what of the religious conspiracy?  Interestingly, the film makes some changes to the book.  The discussion on the nature of Jesus and the composition of the New Testament is dealt with very quickly: and Robert Langdon’s role changes as he seeks to argue with some of Teabing’s theories.  Teabing believes that the revelation of the true grail story would bring an end to centuries of oppression (the church is the culprit): at least be understands that truth matters - even though he does not know the truth.  Langdon, on the other hand, seems to want to hold on to his childhood belief in Jesus (he prayed to him when he fell into a well as a boy), but becomes convinced of Teabing’s theory by the end.  Does truth matter to Langdon?  In reality he seems to think that truth is what you make it.  And when faced with the question of whether Jesus was just a man, or more, he suggests that perhaps human is divine.

The movie tagline is "Seek the Truth."  Sad then that the book and film choose to ignore the most reliable witnesses.  The real truth is every tongue will one day confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.  And the evidence is plentiful - as Dr Luke and his fellow gospel writers tell us.

0 Comments

Filed under Film