DaVinci Code Movie

Although I will be doing a complete review for beliefnet.com, I can note my initial thoughts on the movie. I saw it in Culver City this afternoon. The movie is a mixed bag. The first thirty minutes are convoluted and moves from scene to scene like an MTV video, making it hard to settle in.

Although I will be doing a complete review for beliefnet.com, I can note my initial thoughts on the movie. I saw it in Culver City this afternoon. The movie is a mixed bag. The first thirty minutes are convoluted and moves from scene to scene like an MTV video, making it hard to settle in. I almost went to sleep after a while in this section. Once the two key characters (Langdon and Sophie) get to Teabing’s house, things pick up. Ian McKellen plays a Teabing rather on the wacky edge. This gives the movie very much a fictional feel. But many of the famous and controversial messages are there. Next to nothing about Gnostic gospels. Only the two texts the novel claims is relevant to Jesus being married, texts I treat in detail in BREAKING THE DAVINCI CODE. As for the other messages in the movie, they are there: vague appeals to the divine feminine, issues tied to this angle and sexuality, claims the church has hid things and misled, and that Jesus’ divinity was a later development (but not said quite as emphatically as in the book). I will not spoil the end, but there is a discourse on faith there that I will let those who choose to go assess.