We're planning to go to the 10:30 showing. Get a baby sitter, go out to dinner, then get into the theater when all the kiddies are tucked into bed. Now THAT's the way to enjoy a movie!
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The book sucked; at least the film has good actors.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you (my word, again !).
My mom and brother read the book and LOVED it. I read it because of their insistent gushing, and I just didn't like it. Interestingly enough, it has nothing to do with the "controversial" details of the plot, I thought the writing was dull (And I hate the ending).
So, I've been saying "Maybe Tom Hanks can save it!" Since I've been told that I don't have a choice if I'm going or not.
I agree with you (my word, again !).
My mom and brother read the book and LOVED it. I read it because of their insistent gushing, and I just didn't like it. Interestingly enough, it has nothing to do with the "controversial" details of the plot, I thought the writing was dull (And I hate the ending).
So, I've been saying "Maybe Tom Hanks can save it!" Since I've been told that I don't have a choice if I'm going or not.
Lisser> I started reading yesterday, and i'm on page 46 or something like that. It's really great so far. I want to finish it next week, so I can go and see the movie :)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]LongLostMercury wrote: [/QUOTENAME]i read the book cover to cover in six days. its really good! i promise.
but why is the media making fun of Tom Hanks's hairdo for the movie? i think his hair is brilliant![/QUOTE]
I read it in 2 and a bit,couldnt put the thing down.I preferred angels and demons though.
CANT FECKIN WAIT FOR THE FILM.should be real good.
but why is the media making fun of Tom Hanks's hairdo for the movie? i think his hair is brilliant![/QUOTE]
I read it in 2 and a bit,couldnt put the thing down.I preferred angels and demons though.
CANT FECKIN WAIT FOR THE FILM.should be real good.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Lisser> I started reading yesterday, and i'm on page 46 or something like that. It's really great so far. I want to finish it next week, so I can go and see the movie :)
[/QUOTE]
So the book is pretty good then? I didn't get time to pick it up today. I'll grab it tomorrow. Thanks!
[/QUOTE]
So the book is pretty good then? I didn't get time to pick it up today. I'll grab it tomorrow. Thanks!
I haven't read the book at all :(
yeah, i think the press are excited about it, everytime i turn the tv on its da vinci code this da vinci code that, bleeding christ ya cant move for the da vinci code
The story is ok (though the ending is a Deus Ex Machina if ever there was one, which is pathetic), but the style is horrible; Brown suffers of a syndrom not uncommon to intellectual authors who suffer from chronic uncertainty about their qualities: he tries to prove how much he knows in every sentence, leading to excessive detail of unimportant issues. This affects the flow of the text in a very bad way, leading to an inconsistent and haphazard style.
I have to admit that Thomas Quinn has a point...there is an overload of information in a lot of it, but I still managed to read the book in five days over Christmas break last year, and I loved it. They actually started filming that movie when I was in France, so I've seen most of the places mentioned in the book and are featured in the movie (Saint Sulpice, The Louvre, etc.), so I can't wait to go and say, "I've been there in real life!".
Me and some friends are going to see it next week. Our theatre has already stated selling tickets for it this weekend, so we are sure it's going to sell out, so we're waiting until Wednesday of next week.
I just hope I don't run into Christian protesters outside of the theatre....They are making the movie bigger by screaming about how "untrue" it is. Everyone knows that, except for the idiots, it says right on the front cover it's a novel, and therefore a work of fiction. But Brown does make everything sound convincing. Judaism survived "Passion of the Christ", Christianity will survive "The DaVinci Code".
Me and some friends are going to see it next week. Our theatre has already stated selling tickets for it this weekend, so we are sure it's going to sell out, so we're waiting until Wednesday of next week.
I just hope I don't run into Christian protesters outside of the theatre....They are making the movie bigger by screaming about how "untrue" it is. Everyone knows that, except for the idiots, it says right on the front cover it's a novel, and therefore a work of fiction. But Brown does make everything sound convincing. Judaism survived "Passion of the Christ", Christianity will survive "The DaVinci Code".
From what I heard, there are some major Christian groups that plan to NOT protest, at least around here (I don't know if this is nation-wide or not). They've decided not to add to anyone's interest, as protests would just generate attention and free publicity for the movie (and book), like you already said.
If you do meet anyone exercising their rights in a manner undesierable to you, just smile and wave.
If you do meet anyone exercising their rights in a manner undesierable to you, just smile and wave.
That's my current plan. I do that every time I see the planned parenthood protesters downtown.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson">Thomas Quinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The story is ok (though the ending is a Deus Ex Machina if ever there was one, which is pathetic), but the style is horrible; Brown suffers of a syndrom not uncommon to intellectual authors who suffer from chronic uncertainty about their qualities: he tries to prove how much he knows in every sentence, leading to excessive detail of unimportant issues. This affects the flow of the text in a very bad way, leading to an inconsistent and haphazard style.[/QUOTE]
AMEN CASPIE!!!
AMEN CASPIE!!!
The movie has gotten bad reviews.
Goes to proove once again that Ron Howard is the poor man's Steven Spielberg.
Goes to proove once again that Ron Howard is the poor man's Steven Spielberg.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The movie has gotten bad reviews.
Goes to proove once again that Ron Howard is the poor man's Steven Spielberg.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't necessarily mean anything. Critics watching a movie have a totally different set of criteria for a good film than the average person. Besides, 45 Million people read the book in the US alone, so you are gauranteed to have that many see it, and they are estimiating 55 million more on top of that just going to the movie. Plus you'll get the people who just want to see what all of the fuss is about...the bigger deal the church makes of this, the more people will stop and think, "You know, I should go and see this, just to see what all the fuss is about."
Goes to proove once again that Ron Howard is the poor man's Steven Spielberg.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't necessarily mean anything. Critics watching a movie have a totally different set of criteria for a good film than the average person. Besides, 45 Million people read the book in the US alone, so you are gauranteed to have that many see it, and they are estimiating 55 million more on top of that just going to the movie. Plus you'll get the people who just want to see what all of the fuss is about...the bigger deal the church makes of this, the more people will stop and think, "You know, I should go and see this, just to see what all the fuss is about."