The Da Vinci gamble (Hint: They are thinking about "softening" the movie.)

[MelissaB]

The Da Vinci gamble

'Code' flick poses big risk for Sony

By JOE NEUMAIER
DAILY NEWS FEATURE WRITER



Take a best-selling novel, throw in Tom Hanks and director Ron Howard and you have a Hollywood blockbuster, right?

Probably.

But because the novel is "The Da Vinci Code," the path to box-office success is far more complicated.

In May 2006, Sony Pictures will release the big-screen version of Dan Brown's mega-best-seller. Since it was published in 2003, "Da Vinci" has captivated readers - and exasperated Christians - with its core contention: That Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene, and the Church conspired to keep women out of power.

The movie, now being filmed by Howard, could alienate some audiences if it sticks to that plot. So the studio reportedly has been conferring with Catholic experts on how to soften the story - a tactic that could backfire with both secular and devout moviegoers.


More: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/story/336876p-287743c.html

[Fire Walk With Me]

1. They could say Christ had WMD. Hell, it worked for Bush.

[TheDebbieDee]

3. That's sick, Peak! It's funny as hell but sick!

:rofl:

[madeline_con]

2. "... could alienate some audiences ..."

"Passion of the Christ" did that. So what?

Catholic experts being consulted on their nemesis theory. Gifted!

Hanks and Howard are about to lose a fan here.

[glitch]

4. Hanks should bail.

The story needs edgier presentation anyway, like something from the folks who did Stigmata.

[madeline_con]

6. Is he supposed to be Leonardo in it?

I can't see it....

[SpiralHawk]

12. Forest Gump as Da Vinci protagonist?

Say it ain't so.

[Cleita]

5. Can't give women any more power than they have taken.

It's not Christian! Yeah, we know whom they might offend.

[madeline_con]

7. Catholics and Templars have been arch enemies for ages...

so they consult them about how to present the story. :eyes:

[cliss]

16. You said it.

The book itself was a staggering success - I think Dan Brown sold 90 million copies worldwide. And he also got more than he bargained for: the Catholic church was bristling after the book came out.

I thought that was great. So now they're asking the church to help soften the movie? Yawn, stretch....zzzzz.....wake me when the movie's over.....

[Daphne08]

8. I don't think the film will alienate reasonable Christians,

and I put myself in that category.

I read the book and didn't have a problem with the premise of the story. It's a work of fiction.

Besides, it really wouldn't bother me if Jesus had been married and had been a parent. In fact, it seems quite likely since most holy men of that day were encouraged to marry.

In my opinion, that shouldn't diminish Jesus and his message in any way, but then, I'm a liberal pacifist Christian. :P

[MelissaB]

19. I read this book with a book club full of women from a local church.

The meeting was held at the pastor's house because it was his wife's night to host. None of these women had a problem with the marriage storyline.

[kweerwolf]

9. And this surprises anyone?

Ron Howard has sanitized movies in the past. He was criticized for eliminating any mention of John Nash's well-known bisexuality in "A Beautiful Mind" to make it more palatable to mainstream audiences. Looks like that trend continues with him caving in to pressure from the Catholic Church on "The Da Vinci Code."

What would Andy and Aunt Bea say if he knew Opie traded his balls for not rocking the boat with movies that might otherwise make people think?

[natrat]

10. scared wimps

money money money
skanky ass little bean counters running around worrying about offending some entirely offensive portion of the populace

[YellowRubberDuckie]

11. People keep forgetting that that book was a work of FICTION.

Dammit, I really hate the fundies.
Duckie

[papau]

20. I agree - I enjoyed the Book - but the "trust me - this part is true" was

funny as I have been to just about all the locations in the book - some many times - and knew that his descriptions were either totally off - or at least puffed up a bit - and what little I know of the history that he covers does not match what he is saying.

Still I liked the book - and indeed I'd be pleased to find out that there was a line to the current day from Jesus and Mary - we could use the DNA in the DNA pool.

[Codeine]

13. Stupid trashy novel anyway. n/t

[MelissaB]

15. Trashy?

[Missy M]

14. The best way to counter that tactic is to let them know ahead...

of time you won't go to see the movie.

[immoderate]

17. Maybe if they put these guys in it....

--IMM

[LeftyDarthBrodie]

18. Ron Howard, the most overrated director currently working

in Hollywood, makes me thankful I read the book before he made the movie. I had a feeling this was going to happen and although I didn't much care for the book I will probably skip the movie now.

[Ilsa]

21. Oh great. Another milque toast formula movie from Hollywood.

It has to be edgy or it won't work, IMO. If it doesn't get poeple to talking, then what is the point? It will turn into another long chase scene/murder mystery. And I can't see Ton Hanks playing the protagonist at all.

[wli]

22. better to keep it intact

But also better if Brown backed off the claims of fact.

[Dover]

23. They already softened it by using Hanks. Love the guy, but he's miscast

in this role. Wish they would take a chance on a relative unknown...someone a little less 'likable', with an edge and a sense of mystery about him. Love Hanks...but he's just not right for the part.

Making this highly political thriller politically correct is a death wish. You don't neuter a prize winning bull.

[Dover]

24. Did Mel Gibson compromise in order to be politically correct?

No, quite the contrary. Yes, he did alienate me and many other movie goers with that decision (I never have seen The Passion of Christ nor do I plan to rent it), but he was true to his own vision and plenty of people DID go see it.

Apparently enough people were interested in The Da Vinci Code to read it to make it a best seller for a long time. So what are they worried about? It they want to avoid controversy, they should sell the story rights. It was its controversial perspective that made the book interesting.

[MelissaB]

26. I agree. I read it to see what the controversy was about. n/t

[DanCa]

25. Frack it all to hell

It's okay for them to show mutilated pictures of my god but it's not okay for to write a book of fiction and put it on the big screen.
Some people have a whacky sense of values

[Dover]

27. Controversy and hype worked well for Mel. So why not use that formula

in promoting this one? Controversy was at a fever pitch prior to the release of Passion. Stir the pot.

Of course it's not lost on the author of the article:

All of this hue and cry, however, may only make audiences more curious, says box-office analyst Paul Degarabedian.


"Obviously, this film is in good hands with Ron Howard and Tom Hanks," says Degarabedian. "But anytime a movie delves into religious-based subjects, it risks alienating part of the audience.


"But controversy often results in big box office. People may want to see what the fuss is about. All this talk that's gone on already may translate into buzz."

[Rainscents]

28. I agree... I would go and see, what all the fuss is all about!

Matter of fact, last night, I rented "Cracking The DA VINCI CODE" on DVD and it was well done. You can see on the photo of "Last Supper" there is women sitting next to Jesus.

I was very surprise to find out, Catholic Church changed the bible in 1964. They added Mary Madeline as prostitute in the new version. If they had done this, who know what else they did to change Bible wording through out the history.