(This is not to steal Sean’s thunder from his article below, but in addition to the subject he has brought up.)
After working for a number of years for a marketing and propaganda department before getting completely fed up with the lies and audience manipulation that goes on, it doesn’t surprise me that all of this media hype is happening immediately before the opening of a new Hollywood film. While I am more than aware that the Xian paranoia and persecution complex has kicked in about something that questions their indoctrinated and cherished beliefs, I also smell Hollywood marketing propaganda at work. The controversy, no matter how contrived is bringing much attention to Dan Brown’s book , along with Sony Pictures. Many other books have been written that question bible historicity, and some are chosen to be hyped up by the media while most are ignored by the media circus crews. Similar to all the publicity of The Passion of the Christ, once the movie is out, and profits are made off of xians and non-xians alike, DaVinci Code will become another film at the video rental store.
What do you think? Is this just media hype promoted by Sony and movie makers or do Xians really have their panties in a knot about this?
SYDNEY, Australia - An Australian church group has launched a Web site and a series of cinema advertisements challenging theories in the blockbuster book “The Da Vinci Code” to coincide with the release of the movie version.
The $38,000 campaign by Anglican Sydney Media urges viewers of the film and readers of Dan Brown’s novel to seek the truth about Jesus Christ.
“Our concern is that ‘The Da Vinci Code’ will mislead people about the truth,” said Bishop Robert Forsyth, the chairman of the group, which promotes the Sydney diocese of the Anglican church in the media.
“We are not afraid of the film. We are not seeking to discourage people from seeing it,” he said Sunday. “But we are well aware of the power popular films have in filling the information void about Jesus.”
Among other disputed claims, “The Da Vinci Code” contends that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had descendants.
The film version of “The Da Vinci Code,” starring Tom Hanks, is due to open worldwide May 17-19.
I think the xians, well at least the conmen that are milking the herd, are a bit scared. Sure there have been many publications that show the bible is a politically agreed upon selection of stories, but none of them this popular. I’ve heard about xians denouncing their faith after reading brown (sorry no link).
I’ve heard about xians denouncing their faith after reading brown
G Sissick - This is one of the stories that I haven’t paid too much attention to until now, though I do know that Brown’s book was controversial before the making of the film. But now it’s really out there because of Hollywood and I think each side is doing its part to increase interest DaVinci Code and either the churchies are stupid enough to draw more media attention to it by boycotting, creating websites against it, etc…or the media is using the churchies as tools as free advertising for the upcoming motion picture…or both.
What do you think? Is this just media hype promoted by Sony and movie makers or do Xians really have their panties in a knot about this?
Both. It’s a snake that eats its own tail. As the promotion of the movie intensifies, its influence on the zeitgeist becomes more pervasive, and those who find this fact disturbing will react — then the media and those behind the film will seize on their hysteria and feed it back into the loop.
We have seen this time and again with Last Temptation of Christ, The Passion of the Christ (with moderate Christians and secularists on the other side that time going “Eeww… Sicky snuff movie!”), and now this.
In fact, I remember a piece of crap little Jean-Luc Godard movie called Hail Mary that got a much bigger arthouse run in the States than it ever would have had the Vatican not condemned it.
Every time any group that wants to suppress a Hollywood movie freaks out about it, that movie will gain more attention.
I don’t know. Most christians are casual christians and aren’t going to get upset if a book implies that some things about their religion aren’t true. Hell, most of them probably don’t know what the official stance of the religion is in order to be upset about it. Many of these people read the book and liked it, and won’t be upset. I’m sure that a few wackos are trying to make themselves a better place in the afterlife by making a website and fighting the lord’s fight, but Hollywood is probably the largest driving factor. I think Sean is right with his snake comment.
Right, Delta. When I said “and those who find this fact disturbing will react — then the media and those behind the film will seize on their hysteria and feed it back into the loop” — I didn’t mean moderates but those who always drive the wedge issues home… The overly invested and excitable types. Those who are too bunged up and silly to know when to shut up and just ignore something. The RCC was dumb to announce a boycott of this. They should have learned by now that it doesn’t work.
Jeebus FN Cripes! Its a work of fiction. Calm down and eat some popcorn. When anybody gets in your face about this MOVIE, its just a work of fiction not a documentary!
Another important film in the canon is Monty Python’s Life of Brian. It was voted the top comedy film of all time. It got the full christian backlash, culminating in a debate on TV between a C of E bishop and John Cleese and Michael Palin, who won hands down.
It was the ‘Mohammed cartoons’ of its day. It highlighted the bathos of christianity. The film is funny, ultra cerebral, and its satirical claws cut deeply into the intellectual vacuity of religion.
“Romani eunt domum!”
“E’s not the Messiah, e’s a very naughty boy!”
You’re right Deacon, he is a very naughty boy. Top film.
I’m interested in seeing the reviews when this film comes out. I wonder if they can make a book that sucked that much ass into a decent film. I almost found it shocking how bad it was, considering its popularity. I suppose I shouldn’t have.
Regarding the marketing, I have to agree with Sean. Also like the ouroboros analogy. You’d think these idiots would know by now not to feed the controversy machine. Maybe they should put up a sign.
We have referred to Life of Brian on this site more times than I can count. It belongs on a bookshelf alongside any other serious discussion of Christianity — it’s that significant.
It got the full christian backlash, culminating in a debate on TV between a C of E bishop and John Cleese and Michael Palin, who won hands down.
$20 goes to the person who can find that thing. Would very much like to see that (or even just hear it)…
Right, Delta. When I said “and those who find this fact disturbing will react — then the media and those behind the film will seize on their hysteria and feed it back into the loop” — I didn’t mean moderates but those who always drive the wedge issues home… The overly invested and excitable types. Those who are too bunged up and silly to know when to shut up and just ignore something. The RCC was dumb to announce a boycott of this. They should have learned by now that it doesn’t work.
And, this just shows how brainwashed these people are that they cannot even realize that they are helping to promote these films for Hollywood and they fall for it every time. One thing you learn in mass media communications class is how to manipulate the opposition to advertise FOR you and save your marketing department some money.
All too often certain groups are so stupid as to take the bait. The marketing department has anticipated the reaction and set up the plan accordingly…and in such a timely manner…escalating it a bit more and more as the time for the film or event to open. It’s got everyone’s attention. They don’t care if it is good or bad publicity…they just want publicity…period. Where would the profits be for Psycho Mel Gibson’s film if the churchies hadn’t given it all that promotion and backing? I wasn’t going to go see it, and still haven’t seen it. And I don’t believe for a minute that the Passion was made out of the goodness of Hollywood’s heart. They KNEW that xians would flock to see a bloody Jeebus. Mel might have given SOME to charity to look good, but he has kept much of the profits for himself.
Another important film in the canon is Monty Python’s Life of Brian.
This film has withstood the test of time. It is still popular today. I have it on VHS and DVD…each of my kids have their copies…It is a classic . . .a perfect work of religious satire.
Well, this is purely anecdotal, but in my very small VERY catholic town, the book has been so popular here at the library that I have had a perpetual waiting list ever since we first got our copies 2 years ago.
All of the church-y ladies have read it. Some of them have gone and bought their own copies to pass around to family members. It was the subject of the local book club, which is comprised primarily of catholic women, several of them “hard-core” catholics.
All of the response that I heard to it has been positive. Brown’s book is FICTION, folks. Whether or not you believe that there is evidence for some of the stuff in the book to be true is quite irrelevant. It is FICTION. Some people who have read it have expressed their chagrin at the ideas raised, but so far, I haven’t heard one sanctimonious outcry against the book.
From my vantage point, I see the new “outcry” against the book as a piece of hype from marketers. Of course, there will always be the brainless ones, too, who jump on anything someone says is un-xtian without having any real knowledge about it whatsoever.
Just my 2-cents.
Bob, another sketch you’d want to see if you get the original is a “Not the Nine-o-clock news” sketch starring Rowan Atkinson (of Mr Bean fame) which has a devout Monty Python fan complaining to a bishop about a film “Life of Jesus Christ” which is a blasphemous attack on ‘Our Lord Python’. It cites as holy writ the ‘dead parrot sketch’.
“It is an ex-parrot!”
Audrey,
We understand that most Christians are not loony fundies who fly off the handle whenever someone says something against Xianity. Those people do exist in significant numbers, however, and that’s where the outcry is coming from; a very vocal minority spoiling the fun for everyone.
“All of the church-y ladies have read it.”
Reading such an naughty, forbidden book must have been very exciting for those church-y ladies. I wonder if they mentioned it in their confessions? Everyone gets sucked in by controversy, don’t they?
“Whether or not you believe that there is evidence for some of the stuff in the book to be true is quite irrelevant.”
There isn’t. Brown was taken in by a hoax. Almost everything in his book that he claims to be true is bullshit. You’re right; it’s FICTION with no evidence backing its claims. The Bible, though, is also FICTION with no evidence backing its claims.
Bob,
I’m pretty sure that Cleese & Palin v. Bishop battle is in the special features on the DVD as part of a making of documentary. I recently bought the MP DVD set in England, so maybe it’s not on the American versions (assuming you’re American of course). This is just a vague recollection so I may be wrong about this, but I could use that $20.
Adam,
“We understand that most Christians are not loony fundies who fly off the handle whenever someone says something against Xianity. Those people do exist in significant numbers, however, and that’s where the outcry is coming from; a very vocal minority spoiling the fun for everyone.”
Please don’t misunderstand me and think I’m making some kind of defensory stand for xtians. That would make me quite the hypocrite, now wouldn’t it?
I do believe, in this case, that insipid vocal minority is the key here. There always seems to be THAT brand of xtian around who is just waiting to hew and cry about whatever their pastor tells them to that week. You know… the sheeple.
“Almost everything in his book that he claims to be true is bullshit. You’re right; it’s FICTION with no evidence backing its claims. The Bible, though, is also FICTION with no evidence backing its claims.”
I’ve not read anything where Brown says ANY of it is true. He keeps maintaining that it is purely fiction. Of course, it could be that he keeps saying that because he’s been slapped with a lawsuit (or two) and he is trying to defend his work.
As for the bible being fiction, you and I agree on that as well. The reason I mentioned the catholic ladies being nonplussed by the book, was because, after knowing THEIR reaction, I was surprised to see the fundies going on a rampage. (I know, I know… I shouldn’t be surprised at anything they do anymore. However, I figured if anyone would get up in arms about it, it would be the little old ladies in town.)
I was truly surprised that the church-y ladies seemed to like the book so much. They talk about it at coffee. They have little debates over it. I think something about it intrigues them. It’s kind of refreshing to hear some of their talk because, before, I felt they were rather staunch and unwielding about their catholicism. Maybe it is the “forbidden factor,” as you mention. Maybe it is titillating to them on some level. Whatever it is, though, I think it is obviously attached to their deep-rooted feelings about their faith. To me, it isn’t so attractive. I’m not “into” the xtian thing, so it’s just another book, eh?
We watched Life of Brian again — this part is great:
Brian: You are all individuals!
Crowd: YES, YES, WE ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS!
Brian: You are all different!
Crowd: YES, WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT!
Lone Voice: I’m not.
Person next to him: SHH!
Sorry Audrey,
It seems I read a little too much into your original comment.
“I’ve not read anything where Brown says ANY of it is true.”
This may have changed since I read the piece of populist crap in question, but at the beginning of the book, Brown made some pretty hefty truth claims about the Priory of Sion and its membership. He maintained that the story itself is fiction (obviously), but many of the historical events he talks about in the book were based on good historical evidence. He was wrong. I’m not sure if he continues to claim any of this, however, but he definitely has in the past.
Stardust,
lol! Ah, the memories. I’m going to have to go and watch it again now.
Looks like it got a lukewarm reception at Cannes.