I would definitely read the book first. Also, you could read it in 2-3 days tops, so if you started soon, you could still catch it in theaters.
Weell i've got a couple other books ahead of it on my list so as soon as I finish the other ones i'll start reading it. I wish they had a dollar cinema around here that played movies after their initial runs. Then I would definately go see it in the theaters but like Deceks said, there are very few movies I would pay good money to see in the theaters.
I am sorry, but it is fiction and should not be taken seriously. However, it does involve a melding of history and fiction, and the melding is done very skillfully. James Michener did the same thing. If I have a problem with the book it was that Brown explained in the front of the book those parts that were fact, but failed to list those parts that were fiction. In short, he failed to distinguish between the two, as Michener did.
I just saw the movie and thought it was really good. I'm a Catholic and did not find it offencive. I'm also a history buff as well and enjoyed those aspects.
I'll see it the same as most of the other movies I watch. When Blockbuster or Hollywood Video send me either $.99 or rent one get one free coupons in the mail. As for all of the controversy surrounding the movie, my opinion nothing more than one of the best marketing strategies there is. Pick a controversial topic to do a movie on and let the church and the media market it for you.
I saw the movie last night and enjoyed it. Tigerfan23, I didn't see any commentary about the french in the movie... martin, movies cost $7.50 in BR. Although the movie does a pretty good job of following the book, there were a few things that were a bit different. I think I actually prefer the ending of the movie, because it made more sense. I won't talk about why because it might take something away from it for those who haven't read it or seen it. This is the first time I've ever watched a movie that was based off a book I've read. I found that the book explained things much better and added depth to what the movie presented, which makes sense since the movie didn't have a narrator and all explainations must be done by the characters or the situation. The movie obviously tried to tone down the book a be and bit more PC about the situation. They made Langdon's colleague appear to have a bit of bias against the church and decreased the value of the "facts" he presented by having Landgon argue some of his points and emphasis that they are possabilities instead of the simple truth. In the movie, Langdon also has a different view on god/jesus than I felt was presented in the book. Even still, it was all done in good taste and didn't take away too much from the book.
I guess you could construe Teabing's comments about the French as commentary. There were only a few, but they were funny.
i finally read the book and then watched the movie immediately afterwards. i liked the beginning of the book, but eventually i wanted to drive nails into my eyeballs because the auther is such a goofass. but i toughed it out and i sorta wish i hadnt. there is a porn movie called the da vinci load. i think overall it was better.
