Vatican will call for boycott of “Angels and Demons”
The Telegraph reports that prequel to Dan Brown’s preposterous The Da Vinci Code looks set to be subject to a boycott by the Vatican.
Angels and Demons stars Tom Hanks, once again playing Harvard professor Robert Langdon. His mission this time is to save the Vatican from being destroyed by a canister of anti-matter.
Which raises the obvious question: why?
Strangely enough, I almost find myself on the side of the Vatican here (almost!!), but for entirely different reasons. There are many puzzling mysteries in the Universe, but one of the greatest must surely be how people like Dan Brown, Colin Wilson, and Graham Hancock can make so much money peddling such palpable nonsense!!!
Love your final question! Better just to kick out all the Catholics and have the beautiful buildings used for a proper purpose, such as showcasing the arts (including a lot of art that’s already in there, of course).
Actually, I’ve read both these books and, yes, Brown is no writer of purple prose, but I think he’s criticised a bit too much. I’ve read equally improbably thrillers (and seen them on TV). While I can find faults, is he worse than a lot of others? I did find myself wanting to read on, which means he did something right (as far as I was concerned, anyway). Angels and Demons is, I guess, more formulaic than The Da Vinci Code, with a race against time in time-honoured fashion (I won’t spoil it for any who want to see or read it).
I do hope that some day an enterprising film-maker gets round to creating (maybe a cartoon) version of the rididulously over the top pulp novel ‘Vatican Bloodbath’ by a guy called Tommy Udo – think of ‘Tankgirl’ but with about 10 times the gratuitous and pointless violence and 2 dimensional characters.
If the Vatican can get so upset over a mildly amusing conspiracy thriller like Da Vinci Code they’d have an absolute thrombie over that one!
The vatican being destroyed – if only. Anti-matter in a can – if only!
If Christ and the Anti-Christ were ever to meet, would they both disappear for ever? Just a thought. By the way – how do you get italics when posting a comment on a website? I didn`t even realize that it was possible!!
If you want an exciting, well written novel about the Illuminati, may I suggest “The Illuminatus Trilogy” by Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea.
Not only is it a rollicking adventure through time, space and BS (either belief system or bull shit, depending on your frame of reference) it’s also funnier than even the unintentional comedy in Dan Brown’s feeble adventures about “the famous man ran after the scary conspiracy bloke”.
Plus, read it in a certain way and you can become a Pope, and seven-sixteenths of the way towards illumination. Of a sort.
I can`t really comment on “Angels and Demons” (no italics yet I`m afraid!!), but those of us who used to watch The Discovery Channel back in the good old days, besides knowing all that there is to know about sharks – and a bit more, have heard all this nonsense about The Templars/Holy Grail/Priory of Sion ad nauseam. It was exposed years ago as an enormous hoax, and the only mystery really is how Dan Brown managed to get away with rehashing the work of Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln as his own. People WANT to believe in these esoteric mysteries, partly as a result of the decline in religious belief, but that doesn`t make any of it true, or even remotely believable (a bit like religion then!!!).
Surely you don’t have to believe all the nonsense to enjoy a novel, the whole point is that it is fiction. I thought Angels and Demons was ok, so it was a far fetched and unlikely story as was the Davici Code, but so what?
I can’t quite work out what the Vatican are upset about this time, maybe I need to read the link.
OK I read the link “Usually we would read the script, but this time just the name Dan Brown was enough” Nothing at all goes on in these people’s heads does it, nothing.
As I said, I can`t really pass judgment on “Angels and Demons”, so if people say it`s a good story that`s all well and good. The problem with the Da Vinci Code was (a) blatant plagiarism (which Brown got away with for some obscure reason), and (b) the fact (which was quite obvious at the time) that people were actually taking this nonsense seriously!! As I said, hours of air-time had already been devoted to writers like Wilson and Hancock, who were peddling a proven hoax as Gospel, and then along comes Tony Robinson and resurrects the same myths again!!!
Might I suggest that in the mind of the scientificically religious (few and far between), and of course Hollywood, God may be responsible for ‘good’ normal matter and the Devil ‘bad’ anti-matter.
Also Barriejohn; I have found that on websites that don’t give provision for italics, writing comments first in word, using italics where needed, before then copying and pasting onto the site sometimes works…
Barrie – just above the box where you write your comments there is a list of xhtml tags you can use. You want the i or em tag. Learn how to use them here.
Thanks for that information Monitor – I now realize why so many of the messages I receive appear to be gibberish!! However, I must admit that when I looked at Dave Raggett`s article my eyes just glazed over – I always thought that ENGLISH was the language of the net!!!
I picked up my copy of Da Vinci Code (Yes, I do have one) and looked at the back cover. It says “Fiction” on it, in big black letters. He got away with rehashing stuff from Leigh and Bagent because the information comes from a common source (and is all complete bollocks).
He is a dreadful writer, but DVC is a good yarn and I’m sure criticisms of his work make him cry all the way to the bank. If he can piss off the Vatican on the way, more power to him!.
Regarding why the Vatican may boycott, look in the book itself. I don’t know what their actual reasons might be, but there’s a passage in the book that says the reason the vatican can’t let out that there’s a bomb under the cathedral and that an external enemy (the illuminati) is contesting the vatican’s power, is because of perception. The book says “if people see a power that is equal to or greater than, then they may question the churches worth and validity.” This isn’t an actual quote from the book, but it’s to that effect.
Perhaps in real life the Vatican doesn’t want anything portraying it as something powerless, or something that can be contested (i.e. faith and religion could be questioned, or the backbone of it’s power could be hit hard. All of your comments here have said in some way or form that so many people believe a lot of this stuff to be real, so it could sway a lot of fence-sitters from religion by believing it all to be a scam (which after 1600 years of murder, rape, torture, and tax collection, I truly believe it was/is to this very day). That would be the crusades for those of you who don’t know your history. 🙂
So perhaps the vatican simply feels threatened by this movie for the perception it will give many. I for one have read extensively on the vatican, and the truth is, they are the keepers of the Rothschild fortune, and are likened to the phrase “All roads lead to Rome.” If you follow the money trail of this planet, through the central banks on up, you will eventually end up at the vatican’s doorstep. There is a dark history of corruption and deceit within the vatican. There is nothing holy about it in ANY way. I don’t care for the illuminati stuff, but from a financial viewpoint, well, look into it, and your eyes will open.
As for the religious people here, I’m sorry, I don’t mean to offend, but I just know too much about the history of the Vatican and it’s rulers, what they’ve done, and what they’re planning to believe that god would ever consider going NEAR that place!
If you want a good start towards what I’m talking about, watch “the empire of the ring”. There’s a reason why the pope visits so many countries, and it’s not to say hi and praise god. There is business to be done. Read….
I’ll just answer the why since its actually addressed in the book. The main character Robert Langdon is an atheist, if not a particularly strident one. He wants to save the vatican to preserve the thousands of works of art there. Entirely sensible given that he is supposed to be a professor of art history.
As for Browns writing. I’ve read all his books. An easy way to pass a long train journey but he isn’t going to win any awards. Its worth having him around though, just for the way he gets the catholic church all wound up.
Now thats quality entertainment.