Da Vinci Silliness

I see Mr Eugenidies is commenting on the latest Da Vinci nonsense.

Roman Catholics in the Indian city of Mumbai (Bombay) have received Muslim support in protests against the release of the movie, The Da Vinci Code.

Film censors have cleared the movie for release in India on 19 May.

An umbrella organisation of Islamic clerics in Mumbai have labelled the film as “blasphemous” because it spreads “lies” about Jesus Christ.

Here we go again… I guess now that the Mohammed cartoons row has died down and that the fake ones have been exposed for what they were, Islamic clerics are desperate for another opportunity to shout, scream and stamp their feet in an attempt to bow the world to their wishes. Riding on the back of the Catholic church is a bit odd, but never mind, it’s a convenient tool for a bit of rioting and flag burning, so what the heck, eh?

This has nothing to do with free expression or religious freedom. What we have here is a bunch of extremist fruit-cakes attempting to force their religious beliefs on others.

“If the government doesn’t do anything, we will try our own ways of stopping the film from being shown,” he said. “We are prepared for violent protests in India if needed.”

This, of course, is all the more reason to resist; vigorously.

Meanwhile, another fruit-cake, Joseph Dias, intends to starve himself to death in protest:

A Roman Catholic activist, Joseph Dias, began a hunger strike on Tuesday which he said would be continued until the film is banned.

Sigh… Two things will happen as a consequence of Mr Dias starving himself to death:

  • Nothing. People will see the film anyway – even if it is banned, if they want to see it, they will.
  • Mr Dias will have voluntarily removed himself from the gene pool.

So, go ahead, die if that’s what you want. Just remember though, according to the religion you believe in so passionately; so passionately that you are prepared to commit suicide over it; suicide is a mortal sin.

As is usual with stories such as this and previously with the Satanic Verses and Jerry Springer, the Opera, when religious groups get their knickers in a knot and start to demand that a film, book or play is banned, they simply increase demand – as Alfred Molina points out.

“You think that religious leaders would know by now that when you say ‘don’t see that film’, it just makes everyone want to,”

In other words; thanks for the free publicity, chaps. The Satanic Verses was a dreadful, virtually unreadable novel, yet sold millions. Jerry Springer, the Opera is puerile and tasteless, yet people watched it on the television and go to see it at the theatre. Ask yourself why? Because religious extremists wanted them banned and that is the quickest way to get people out to watch the play, or film or buy the book – that’s why I bought the Satanic Verses. I wouldn’t have wasted my money otherwise. As a consequence of the controversy, an airport thriller that is otherwise unremarkable and the equally unremarkable film it spawned will earn undeserved notoriety and will earn their respective creators millions. The film will be a box office hit and the DVDs will sell like the proverbial hot cakes. They still don’t get it. But, then, I guess that with their heads being so far up their sanctimonious arses, they never will. :dry:

Disclaimer

Opus Dei wanted a disclaimer at the beginning of the film to reassure the ignorant public that this was a work of fiction and not the “truth”. One has to wonder at such silliness. The film’s director declined.

“It’s not theology or history,” he told the Los Angeles Times. “Spy thrillers don’t start off with disclaimers.”

People going to the cinema or buying the DVD are well aware that this is fiction and no one has claimed otherwise. So why get all concerned about people believing that it is real? The premise is, after all, pretty far fetched:

A mythical first century prophet (if he ever existed) is not killed, marries and moves to France where he has a family and that bloodline carries on today. Naturally this is fiction. The “truth” is much more mundane. A mythical first century prophet (if he ever existed) is executed and dies. He is buried and three days later comes back to life before physically ascending to the heavens having not been recognised by his erstwile followers. Of course the novel and film are fiction and of course the Catholic bible that was translated by St Jerome in the fourth century against the background of the politics of the time is the real truth… No one in their right mind could believe otherwise.

Um… perhaps Opus Dei has a point… :whistle:

2 Comments

  1. Spot on. I do think that the Catholics threatening violence in the States should be condemned as roundly as you condemn the muslims but otherwise I agree completely.

    Christ Church Brighton (the bunch of wacky evangelicals I confront every week with religion’s absurdities) are loving the publicity of the Da Vinci Code and are trying to get recruits out of it.

  2. I can see what’s confused the religious zealots, the fact that Dan Brown has mentioned real people and real places, real sects and organisations. However, it is so obviously a work of fiction. So in future, if someone has a character in a film called Jonathan, am I therefore to complain and picket and ask that the film be dropped because it offends my sensibilities? Oh come on please!!!! These people need to grow up as they’ve been selling the greatest fiction ever for 2,000 years!

Comments are closed.