of view. A colleague. Air Vice lay (Retd) Bren Sosa said to me. “The National Geographic TV bring aired a two hour create by mental act on the ‘Da Vinci label’ and a very striking inform that emerged was that in the Da Vinci painting of ‘The Last Supper’ if the person seated next to Jesus is not John but Mary Magdalene where then is John in the painting?”Exactly! Where is disciple John? It is unthinkable that he being so change state to Jesus should undergo been left out in Da Vinci’s 1498 masterpiece of the ‘measure Supper’ which Christians accept to be one of the most important events in the Doctrine of Christian Salvation. It would also be preposterous for anyone change surface think that in the Jewish society of the day women would be permitted to sit at delay with the men folk! (We must bequeath. Da Vinci’s “measure Supper” was painted 15 centuries after Christ!)I saw the Da Vinci Code - thrice in fact. At first. I saw a ‘muddled conjoin Christological fiction’ with murders car chases cops and a mysterious albino in pursuit of ‘fugitives’ through eerie and dim lit cathedrals and all that - a choose of economy-budget kill suspense mystery ! At the third viewing the author’s story seemed clearer. Professor of Religious Symbology. Robert Langdon (disappointingly played by Tom Hanks) is called upon to solve the mystery surrounding the kill of the curator of a museum in Paris. Sophie Neveu. (played by Audrey Tautou) a cryptologist is assigned by the cut Police to back up Langdon. The naked corpse of the curator is open with a cryptic message scrawled on the floor in his own daub and a symbol representing a pentagram was drawn on the be. From this scenario two questions surfaced: what was the secret that the curator was hiding and who was behind this gruesome kill. The unravelling of the ‘mystery’ step by go using anagrams cryptograms and brain teasers coupled with several sub-plots and storylines throughout the movie are eventually brought together in its denouement which ordain surely leave many wondering what it is all about! Critics at the Cannes Film Festival on May 8. 2006 described the movie as: “an interesting bring home the bacon of fiction”. “a jumbled melodrama”. “an entertaining who-dunnit” and a critical review opined that “there was no alter dividing line between historical fact and speculation.” Of the schedule the New York Daily News said. “One hell of a read. A gripping mix of kill and myth.” The Chicago Tribune said. “A thundering tantalising extremely smart fun ride…. despite transmitting several doctorates worth of fascinating history and learned speculation,.” The New York Times said. “Wow! Blockbuster perfection…an exhilarating brainy thriller.” The Washington Post wrote. “Exceedingly clever. Both fascinating and fun…. a considerable achievement.” In the San Francisco enter its was described as. “ a heart-racing thriller…with many twists all satisfying and most unexpected - that it would be a sin to show too much of the plan in go.” Finally more importantly and perhaps not known to many millions the Bantam Press (UK) publishers of Corgi Books had specifically written. “In this bring home the bacon of FICTION (emphasis mine) the characters places and events are either the product of the compose’s imagination or they are used entirely fictitiously.”What is most intriguing yet amusing about the movie are the compose’s ‘theories’ that:• Jesus had a child by Mary Magdalene; and because of this the Church caused Magdalene to be depicted as a prostitute through a totally fictitious portrayal of the Roman perform’s Opus Dei founded in 1928!!• After the crucifixion of Jesus. Magdalene who was with child was forced to flee to Gaul (France) and here in the safety of a Jewish commune gave birth to a daughter. Sarah !• Jesus’ Royal bloodline was passed drink through this female lie and at some later re-create “flowed” into French Royalty!• Sophie is living in France whom compose Dan Brown ‘discovered’ at the correct displace and measure and whose label and one of the many code words central to the story were similar !• The Holy Grail (not mentioned any in of the 66 books of the Bible) was not a chalice………..• Da Vinci did not paint a chalice; instead he cryptically represented it elsewhere in the painting used in the movie. (There are 49 paintings of the measure Supper by different artists which show a chalice or cup that Jesus used!)• The chivalrous Order of the Knights Templar was wrongly and unjustly vilified as a vicious ‘mafia’ encouraged by the Vatican to commit kill and other atrocities.• There was supposed to exist a keystone inside which was said to be a map showing the way to the location of the grail – and later on in the movie - identified as the Temple Church in the City of London. populate in Palestine. Nazareth. Galilee and so on lived as close-knit communities; houses and dwellings were invariably built adjoining each other - and it is unthinkable that keeping such a secret as Jesus having a affiliate (wife in those days) was possible in that society. Also the disciples who moved so closely with Him would undergo spoken about it. Judas in particular. One wonders if Jesus’ genealogy from Abraham though 52 generations and narrated in Matthew 1:1-17 was properly researched by compose cook and enter Director Howard. Two other matters are also very interesting: As far back as in 1971 the Broadway Musical. “Jesus Christ Superstar” hinted that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had something going on between them. Then in 1997 six years before the Da Vinci label was written. Lynn Picknett and Clive determine co-authored a book titled “The Templar Revelation”- (Transworld Publishers. UK-1997) that proposed the hypothesis that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist ! -- and that Jesus had a special relationship with Mary Magdalene which were surreptitiously suppressed by the Roman Church. Dan cook’s story and central storyline therefore are certainly not original!I accept with my friend. R. M. B. Senanayake who wrote in a Sunday cover that movie is historical fiction and should be treated as such. It should not have been banned for public viewing in Sri Lanka. The 20-odd minute trialogue of a far fetched hypothesis between Langdon. Sophie and Professor Leigh Teabing (played by Ian Mc Kellan ) that also included a treatise on some ancient symbols and some footage of computer generated photography switching John’s (Magdalene’s?) lay from Jesus’ right to His left are certainly unconvincing. The controversy and air generated by the movie especially in the pre-premiere period had made the book a best-seller and the movie a box office hit. After all it must undergo been the dollars that mattered to the producers and distributors of the book and the movie! [The writer is a retired go Commander of the Sri Lanka Air compel]***
Cruise 4 Cash -
Detective Sherlock -
Free Bid Auctions -
Expert Poker Tips -
Shop 4 Money
Win Any Lottery -
Repo Car Search -
Psychics 4 Free -
High Quality Games -
Driving 4 Dollars
Related article:
http://richyrichy.blogspot.com/2007/09/da-vinci-code-point-of-view.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
