# The Da Vinci Code. Shall we discuss? (Spoilers) **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 20, 2006, 7:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512 "2006-05-20T07:48:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![av8rmike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/edb3f5/32.png) [@av8rmike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/av8rmike)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2006, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/61 "2006-05-28T17:12:24Z")
I went to see the movie last night, despite only being about 100 pages into the book. Yeah, yeah, I know it’s been out what, 4 years now? I’m always behind the times. Still, why didn’t someone tell me the movie was just a combination of _Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade_ and _Dogma_? Now there were two movies that told a better story and were infinitely more enjoyable. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2006, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/62 "2006-05-28T19:06:38Z")
> [@av8rmike](#): > > Still, why didn’t someone tell me the movie was just a combination of _Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade_ and _Dogma_? Now there were two movies that told a better story and were infinitely more enjoyable. Nah, if you crossed those two, the result would have a sense of humor and a lighter touch. ---
**Author:** ![Rachael\_Rage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/71c47a/32.png) [@Rachael\_Rage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rachael_Rage)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2006, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/63 "2006-05-28T21:50:22Z")
> [@Civil Guy](#): > > Okay - as I said, I missed some things. Someone else moved it then; several people, that is, some time or other. They moved it either as part of the modern construction at the Louvre, or they moved it mysteriously knowing the right place to put it. The ones who provided the clue as to where it now rests either knew where it is or were mysteriously inspired to use the right words. All as may be, the question still remains. Does it hint anywhere whether the sarcophagus is still accessible, or will it take another 1,000 years to be able to get to it? It’d be a fun point to mention, next time I hear anyone talk about visiting Paris. I haven’t seen the movie and I read the book a couple of years ago, but I don’t recall any discussion of this. IIRC, Langdon (along with the reader, unless the reader noticed THE BLATANT FORESHADOWING) only discovers the resting place of MM in the last paragraph or two of the book. There’s no discussion of digging up the remains. I think the grandma says earlier that they’re not terribly concerned about getting the truth out any more, or something. Can’t remember the specifics of that. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2006, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/64 "2006-05-29T05:09:02Z")
The other thing I couldn’t shake during the film: Surely the Louvre has cameras in it? Presumably all over the place, so, y’know, people don’t just wander off with the expensive Works of Art? Since Silus takes his hood off (presumably revealing himself to the security cameras), then it should take all of 30 seconds for the Gendarmes/DGSE to look at the camera footage, look at Langdon, and say “Nope, not the same person. Sorry to have troubled you, _Monsieur_, can we offer you a lift back to your hotel?” > [@Scuba\_Ben](#): > > Big issue with the whole premise of the story: If we allow for the sake of the story that the Priory protects the secret of MM’s descendents, then even if they demonstrated clear and irrefutable evidence that Sophie (or anybody else) is the direct descendent of MM and Yesu ben Yosef, about two-thirds of the world would respond: AND SO? Various forms of oppression would not suddenly stop just because a key tenet of the RCC was suddenly conclusively disproved. Totally agree with you there. As you say, so what if Jesus and Mary Magdalene had kids? Doesn’t change His teachings or Message one iota. My fiancee (a lapsed Catholic) points out that the Catholic Church has “issues” with women for a variety of quasi-medieval reasons, but ultimately there’s a missing 30-odd years of Jesus’ life from the Scriptures, so she’d be surprised if He _didn’t_ have kids (plural), given the way things worked back then… ---
**Author:** ![sjc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e5b9ba/32.png) [@sjc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sjc)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2006, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/65 "2006-05-29T06:32:38Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > We are not talking about “the Christian community.” We are talking about **ARIUS** , a specific individual. His beliefs were NOT consistent with those of the Christian community. That is EXACTLY why they were denounced as heretical at the Council of Nicea! I’m not sure this is exactly as you say. You say that Arius’ beliefs were “NOT consistent with those of the Christian community”. Now, I may be wrong but I believe that Arius had a fair number of followers. That being the case, I would say that his beliefs were not consistent with a particular _segment_ of the Christian community (which may well have been the majority, but wasn’t the whole Christian community). I don’t think you can unambiguously infer the beliefs of the broader Christian community based on what was decided on at the council of Nicea. The Council was called by Constantine (I believe he had a hand in running it too) and I believe the discussion and voting was by priests and Bishops. They may have influenced and been influenced by their parishoners, but they weren’t necessarily of one mind on everything. ---
**Author:** ![Antonius\_Block](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Antonius\_Block](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antonius_Block)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2006, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/66 "2006-05-29T10:08:49Z")
> [@DMark](#): > > I only wondered why they changed the ending and didn’t include the “brother” being alive as well. The “brother” in the book is a horribly undeveloped character, even by Dan Brown’s standards. The great[sup]n[/sup]-grandson of Jesus apparently doesn’t even warrant a **name** , ferChrissake. The ending of the book reads like something written by a High School student on a 30-minute deadline. I can’t imagine that his absence from the movie is any great loss. > [@Martini Enfield](#): > > Surely the Louvre has cameras in it? Presumably all over the place, so, y’know, people don’t just wander off with the expensive Works of Art? In the book, it’s explained that since it wouldn’t be cost-effective to have hundreds of people monitoring _all_ of the camera feeds, large museums nowadays take the _only other available option_(!), i.e to have **none** of the cameras be real. So, there’s not even an archived video stream (which pretty much every first-world Quik-E-Mart deems worthwhile), or a motion-detected live feed from _La Grande Galerie_: **all** of the cameras are fakes, period. The idea is that any criminal who pulls a painting off the wall will be trapped inside the gate that descends. _[Note to self: when next attempting to steal from Louvre, use a remote-controlled robot (or easily-manipulated human partner) to pull paintings from the wall, then pass them to me through the bars, at which point I escape, Silas-like, while Les Keystone Kops assume that all miscreants are trapped behind bars]_[sup]\*[/sup]. That Dan Brown’s a genius, I tells ya! [sup]_[/sup]_[if painting is too thick to pass through bars (e.g. Mona Lisa, painted on wood), break window in Men’s bathroom and lower artwork via rope to waiting truck. Be sure to remove any GPS “dot” first. Les Keystone Kops will be flummoxed.]\* ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2006, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/67 "2006-05-29T11:19:04Z")
> [@Antonius Block](#): > > In the book, it’s explained that since it wouldn’t be cost-effective to have hundreds of people monitoring _all_ of the camera feeds, large museums nowadays take the _only other available option_(!), i.e to have **none** of the cameras be real. So, there’s not even an archived video stream (which pretty much every first-world Quik-E-Mart deems worthwhile), or a motion-detected live feed from _La Grande Galerie_: **all** of the cameras are fakes, period. The idea is that any criminal who pulls a painting off the wall will be trapped inside the gate that descends. You know, the more I hear this sort of thing, the gladder I am that I haven’t read the book… ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2006, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/68 "2006-05-29T12:55:28Z")
> [@sjc](#): > > I’m not sure this is exactly as you say. You say that Arius’ beliefs were “NOT consistent with those of the Christian community”. Now, I may be wrong but I believe that Arius had a fair number of followers. That being the case, I would say that his beliefs were not consistent with a particular _segment_ of the Christian community (which may well have been the majority, but wasn’t the whole Christian community). Put it this way. At the Council of Nicea, only Secundus and Theonas (out of 300+) bishops supported the stance of Arius. His beliefs weren’t just inconsistent with “a particular segment” of the Christian community. Rather, they were rejected by the overwhelming majority thereof. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2006, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/69 "2006-05-29T19:42:10Z")
> [@Scuba\_Ben](#): > > Small nitpick first: In the opening sequence in the Lourve, the curator makes a classic Bad Movie mistake: He’s running away from someone stalking him (Silus, in this case), and _he keeps looking behind him_. This is a sure way to get killed. Plus, Silus is later shown to have a self-inflicted leg wound, so logically the curator ought to be able to outrun Silus. For an extreme example of nobody outrunning the slow killer, see _I Know What You Did Last Summer_. > > Medium nitpick: Silus shoots the curator in the gut, and then leaves. The curator then has several minutes to (1) leave extensive cryptic messages in his own blood; (2) get undressed, and leave a cryptic symbol on his own chest; and (3) at the moment of his death, position himself just right to invoke the Da Vinci symbolism. Rock-bottom minimum, that much work would take five minutes for a healthy person, and the curator is shown to be hurting **bad**. He certainly had enough time to find a telephone, call the police or the DGSE, and leave a _clear and detailed_ message about the circumstances of his own murder. (But then, where would our story be?) > > Big issue with the whole premise of the story: If we allow for the sake of the story that the Priory protects the secret of MM’s descendents, then even if they demonstrated clear and irrefutable evidence that Sophie (or anybody else) is the direct descendent of MM and Yesu ben Yosef, about two-thirds of the world would respond: AND SO? Various forms of oppression would not suddenly stop just because a key tenet of the RCC was suddenly conclusively disproved. I was going to post just these, but that’s okay, I got a few more: Robert Langdon, succesful and internationally famous professor of “symbology” is vaguely implicated in the murder of a man he’d never met, and had no reason to want dead. He’s told, by a third party, that the lead inspector thinks he’s the murderer, so he immediately agrees to run from the cops, engage in an extremely dangerous, high speed chase through crowded Paris streets, flee the country illegally, and a dozen other acts. Instead of, y’know, working with the police to clear his name. Because you know how hard it is to get a fair shake from the French penal system. Oh, and the whole frame up was arranged by Opus Dei, who apparently picked Langdon’s name out of a hat when looking for someone to pin the murders on, because there’s no other logical reason for them to have implicated this particular person. Opus Dei, globe spanning murderous conspiracy, employs as their chief assassin, an albino who runs around modern France dressed like a 15th century monk. _And nobody notices!_ That’s aside from the numerous physical deficencies that would make an albino almost entirely unsuited to being an assassin, such as extremely poor eyesight and a frail constitution. Sophie was raised by the leader of the Priory of Sion, educated in obscure history and theology, and trained in puzzle-solving and cryptology, and grows up to be a cryptologist for one of the premere police forces in the world. And throughout the entire movie, she can’t figure out one single goddamned thing on her own. Everything has to be explained to her by dashing professor of symbology Robert Langdon. The best thing that could have been done with this story is the removal of the main character. He’s basically a Mary Sue: a character who has no place in the narrative, but is instrumental to solving the crisis by being better at everything than the people who are supposed to be good at this stuff. He knows more history than the historians, more theology than the theologians, more cryptography than the cryptologist, more police work than the police. Cut him out, let the other characters do the jobs they’re supposed to be good at, and the incredulity factor of this movie drops by about 75%. Ian McKellan really did steal the show, but he also participated in the stupidest Villain Reveal ever. Why the hell does he end up pointing a gun at Tom Hanks? _He and Hanks are already working towards the same goal!_ Together, even! They’re dashing across Europe, solving riddles and dodging cops and assassins, and right when they’re about to figure it out, he pulls a gun out and says, “Now, solve the riddle or I kill you!” Hey, jackass! He was going to solve the riddle anyway! What’s with the gun? Also, it turns out that Jews are pagans, and the I.M. Pei was a Knight Templar. Not the stupidest movie I’ve ever seen, but definetly in the top ten. A shame, because I really like almost everyone involved in the film. I can only imagine that they were hampered by an extremely stupid novel, but I can’t say for sure, as I’ve never read it. And after this film, I can say with some confidence that I never will. ---
**Author:** ![Fir\_na\_tine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Fir\_na\_tine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fir_na_tine)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2006, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512/70 "2006-07-14T14:10:56Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Not the stupidest movie I’ve ever seen, but definetly in the top ten. A shame, because I really like almost everyone involved in the film. I can only imagine that they were hampered by an extremely stupid novel, but I can’t say for sure, as I’ve never read it. And after this film, I can say with some confidence that I never will. Overall, I enjoyed the book. Miller’s quote on the film is a great summary. There’s $17. I’ll never get back. :smack: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-da-vinci-code-shall-we-discuss-spoilers/357512.md?page=3)