b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 4991260 (Thread)

# I went for a gander at the Da Vinci Code film set at Lincoln Cathedral today.

I felt a bit naughty as I haven't read it, but the set looks stunning. For more photos, please click here with all your might.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:38, archived)
# *gasp*
You mean religion is fake?

/horror scream face
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:40, archived)
# I couldn't possibly comment.
All I know is that Lincoln does a good impression of Westminster when it wants to.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:41, archived)
# I
love the creative film making process. Film in Lincoln for fifty notes and a bottle of scotch? Film in Westminster for five thousand notes and bottle of bollinger.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:43, archived)
# Haha!
FLIM LINCOLN!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:46, archived)
# Spoiler-posting maggot! ;)
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:41, archived)
# WTF DO YOU MEAN VADER IS LUKE'S DAD???!!

(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:45, archived)
# Bruce willis is dead?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:47, archived)
# edward norton talks to himself?

(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:48, archived)
# the cripple did it?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:50, archived)
# they stop the train with their knickers?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:53, archived)
# HAHAHAHAHA!

WINNER!


(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:54, archived)
# I don't get this one...
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:59, archived)
# It's The Railway Children
they stop a train at the end by waving their red knickers on sticks
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:01, archived)
# this is great
now I don't have to see or read any of these books or films and I can dedicate more of my time to watching my Family Guy DVDs again and again and again and again
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:04, archived)
#
Oh Stewie, when will you learn?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:07, archived)
# R2D2 COULD FLY
AND NOW HE CAN'T?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:48, archived)
# neo was... uh... when trinity did the...
ah fuck it, i lost interest after the first one
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:49, archived)
# haha
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# Dorothy
was only dreaming?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:49, archived)
# It sinks!?


(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:51, archived)
# we win the second world war?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:54, archived)
# JESUS DEAD?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:57, archived)
# BEN CAN RUN?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:59, archived)
# The bearded one gets PUT ON A CROSS?!?!?!!!!!111one!!one!eleven!!!1
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:49, archived)
# arrrrg
you've ruined teh bible for me!!!1111

was just getting in to it as well. leviticus is a fucking stormer
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# Just wait till Revelation.
It has every disaster/weird beast imaginable.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:00, archived)
# OMFG
you ruined it form me!
*runs away and cries*
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:48, archived)
# That woman
at the end of the crying game is really a bloke!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:49, archived)
# Nah,
she just had very small tits and a clit the size of a thumb ;)
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:50, archived)
# would

(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:51, archived)
# Did!*





*may not be 100% true
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:54, archived)
# Oh noes!
*stops fwapping*
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:52, archived)
# Good work
:)
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:41, archived)
# Cheers m'dear. :)
Or do you mean the set guys? They're so fab and so talented!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:42, archived)
# I love backroom boys (fnaar)
but appreciated your photos more
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:48, archived)
# Ah, well, thank you.
Then my work here is done. :)
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:51, archived)
# Don't bother reading it
That book sucks so hard, I lost me eyebrows reading it.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:42, archived)
# I must admit, I am vaguely intrigued now.
But I try not to read books that are hyped up beyond all recognition.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:43, archived)
# I liked it
as airport-chewing-gum fiction. But I really don't get how it has become such a huge deal.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:48, archived)
# I've read Famous Five and Hardy Boy books
that had better dialogue and characterisation.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:51, archived)
# Yay! I've started a debate!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:52, archived)
# I think everyone should join in . . .

and make it a . . .


(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# An orgy?
What, Dave? Make it a what?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# mass debate!

Hahahaha!


(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:58, archived)
# Ahhh... hahaha!
I was close, no? :P
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:58, archived)
# Pfft!
That's clever because we're debating DaVinci Code, which is about the church. Like a debate about mass.





What?





Oh.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:03, archived)
# teh punnage makes me weep
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:12, archived)
# A what?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:59, archived)
# Well yeah
but it doesn't exactly pretend to be Dostoyfuckingevsky
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:53, archived)
# You do
AICMFP
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# Well okay
but can we at least see Crime and Punishment done as a decent movie before they rush off to make a DaVinci Cocking Code movie?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:57, archived)
# The Beeb did it quite well
with Ian McDiarmid

IMDb
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:00, archived)
# I always get him mixed up with Ian McShane
But now that I think about it...
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:08, archived)
# WOO!
send them to AICN.com, you'll be an internet star.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:43, archived)
# This^^^
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:45, archived)
# More than I am already, darrrhlling?!!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:46, archived)
# *gasp*
you mean the movie is fake~
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:44, archived)
# they're all up in arms here because of Roslin Chappel being in the film
and they think it'll fall down if they film it too hard or point too many cameras at it or some such thing.

I don't care because the book was PAP and God has forsaken me
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:45, archived)
# is that
Rosslyn? It does not matter, they can film anywhere,. Rosslyn is small enough to be re-constructed. Besides, Rosslyn has whored itself to the media in the past and cavorts naked for the documentaries about knights templar and the holy grail. Sheer hypocrisy if they denied filming. And anyway, Lincoln cathedral has nothing to do with Brown's book. As I said, they can film anywhere. Nobody will be watching it for the correct religious settings. After all, they'll hardly be swanning around the basillica with their film cameras will they?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# is my spelling especially bad today
or is everyone just picking on me more?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:01, archived)
# thats fab, nice scoop!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:45, archived)
# ooh
they are making a film? Good. I really can't comprehend why people slag this book off, it is ingeniously written. Cleverly constructed and above all a fantastic modern mystery thriller. Just because the American Bible bashing mid west are up in arms is no reason to jump on the Da Vinci bashing bandwagon. Here's a fact for you. It's fiction, it claims to be nothing else.
Film will be a blockbuster I expect. I can't wait to download it ;)
If Clive Cussler can say of it ".....one of the best mysteries I have ever read..." then I'll not take too much worth from illiterate b3tans slagging off a book because they dislike the subject matter.

EDIT:/ The prequel, Angels and Demons is an even
better read.

Edit:/ Not the prequel but rather the story written previously in the adventures of the main character.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:45, archived)
# My boyfriend has been on at me to get Audrey Tautou's autograph.
But I'm damned if I'm driving 25 miles to wait for hours to get a scrawled name and a fake smile.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:47, archived)
# I think people are kinda getting worked up over it.
the catholic church understandbly doesnt want them on their land. As for the book, well whats wrong with fun fiction?

*eats head*
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:49, archived)
# I have no problem with the content of the book, fictional or other wise, I hate God as much as the next man
but the fact remains that the book is dull at best, poorly written, slow, predictable, self indulgent, based almost exactly on another, better, book, over rated pop-fiction.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:52, archived)
# you can't really compare
it to Foucaults Pendulum.
Which is ace.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# ^^^This
.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:58, archived)
# Then don't
Books are written for the sake of the story. You are muddying the waters by comparing it to another story. Who asked you to do that?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:59, archived)
# the water is very clear
one is shite
the other isn't.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:04, archived)
# I tend to
find Foucault condescending and a little insulting at times. Besides, the only people who read him usually are grad students because they have to, and pompous 'literati' who need to be able to drop his name into conversations at cocktail parties. I just launch into them with Goethe and tell them to get to fuck.
As I said already, it's a moot point. It's all subjective. I happen to like varied writings. I particularly loved the first and second chronicles of Thomas Covenant the unbeliever and I've had some ding dong fights with tolkien nazis on those two subjects.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:17, archived)
# tee-hee!
Not Foucault's "Pendulum", Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum".

See how great punctuation is?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:29, archived)
# ahh. If only
I were better read.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:39, archived)
# You launch into them with Goethe?

I don't understand how anyone who knows Goethe
could be a fan of Dan Brown. Just because
pompous fucks like Eco doesn't make it bad.
Personally, I prefer Arturo Perez-Reverte over
Eco, lighter style and better dialog and great irony.
But Dan Brown gives me the shuddering heebie-jeebies...
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:30, archived)
# I was misled.
I'm afraid I can't comment on Eco as I have never read any of it. I was referring to a guy called Michel Foucault who was a pompous, condescending twat.
Horses for courses. I read anything and everything I can get my hands on, what I like is what appeals to me at the time. Some adults like Harry Potter, yet I for one could never comprehend reading children's stories stolen from classical mythology.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:43, archived)
# I find there are times
when that's exactly what I want to read.

But mostly I read it 'cos everyone was talking about it and I hate not having an opinion on stuff when everyone else does.

Mmmm... the sound of my own voice...
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:56, archived)
# Uhhhm, nope.
I don't give a toss about the so-called 'contraversy' - it's been done before, and better.

No, it's just a really, really badly-written book. Dialogue sucks. Characterisation sucks. This Harvard professor (or whatever he is) gets stumped by Da Vinci's backwards writing? Give me a break.

And the characters! You can hear Dan Brown plotting them out
"Hero, well he had to be American, I mean, of course"
"And a French chick who, being French will be spunky and sexy as everyone knows all French chicks are"
"French guy - he's a dick"
"English guy - gay"



Just really annoyed me.

rant off
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 16:55, archived)
# It's all
subjective I suppose. I found it well written. I write myself and have read countless ( worthless really, ) books about creative structure. It does what it says on the cover and is exactly what it purports to be. If it claimed to be litererary genius I would have a differing opinion. I'ts a modern day whodunnit and cleverly set up IMO.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:03, archived)
# the point is different people like different things
for example, some people liked Hitler. This book is a lot like Adolf Hitler. The people who like it are ultimately wrong.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:06, archived)
# ^This
High and mighty? Me?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:10, archived)
# But Hitler was
right about many things, he just did not have a sane enough mind to implement them. We would avoid mass over-population and disease if people would just accept that Eugenics is a natural form of evolution.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:12, archived)
# And with that
it is now officially beer o'clock
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:15, archived)
#
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:19, archived)
# uhm
you are being sarcastic?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:00, archived)
# ANGELS AND DEMONS
IS NOT THE FUCKING PREQUEL! GAH! It was wrote BEFORE DA VINCI CODE!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:01, archived)
# writted
*hides*
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:02, archived)
# My grammar am better well than your grammar.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:03, archived)
# Erm and
your point is? Are you aware of the meaning of the term prequel?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:09, archived)
# Yeah, I'm wondering that too now...
Could prequel mean it is written after the first book but set before it? Or is a prequel just the opposite of a sequel?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:12, archived)
# It does not matter
when it is written. The story timeline means that it is set befire the Da Vinci code and therefore a prequel.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:14, archived)
# No it is not.
A prequel is released after. If George Lucas made episode 1 before any others, you couldn't call it a prequel.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:17, archived)
# FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:19, archived)
# I tell you what, Rik,
I FUCKING FEEL LIKE IT! Any one fancy starting a fight club?
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:21, archived)
# Yeah if
you like. I've been out of the ring a while but I can still knock the fuck out of people.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:23, archived)
# *gets jockstrap*
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:25, archived)
# Don't think you
will need one. Oh and I forgive your arrogance. You are a Stockport lad and it's acceptable. I myself am not too far away and born in the heart of Salford.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:28, archived)
# Sorry
I hold my hands up. My dictionary is telling me you are right. That's an oversight on my part. I was fully aware of the chronology of Brown's work. I have read it all.
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:22, archived)
# I am not one to gloat.
Thank you for this very CAPSLOCKY discussion ;)
(, Wed 10 Aug 2005, 17:23, archived)