Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Flee the City: Da Vinci Code Debate Scheduled for 7 P.M.


If the blinding white heat of Da Vinci Code hype has not yet forced your eyes to roll 180 degrees in your head before cascading down your cheeks in gooey streams, you are likely one of the hardcore fans who will get a kick out of tonight’s Da Vinci Code Debate at the New York Hilton. Organizers have touted this as the global Code event to end all Code events, if only because the hotel will implode from a spectacular burst of the debaters’ deeply ingrained self-loathing.
And if I were a betting man, I would place “Chosen People Ministries” president Mitch Glaser (who has been warming up to this for a while) at the flashpoint:

Because of Dan Brown’s fictional thriller, Christian history is in the news like never before. There are people in the world angry and protesting opinions and statements raised in The Da Vinci Code and then there are people who see the book and movie as an amazing opportunity.

“There is one thing all our debate speakers agree upon,” said Mitch Glaser. “Some of the issues raised in The Da Vinci Code book and movie will allow people usually not interested in biblical issues to perhaps open a Bible to learn more.” …

Some of the big questions The Da Vinci Code Debate in New York will answer include:

* Are there hidden messages in Da Vinci’s art?
* Was Jesus a prophet, living God or the Messiah himself?
* Is The Da Vinci Code really fiction or mostly fact?
* Do the so-called secret Gnostic “gospels” help us understand Jesus?
* Did Jesus really marry Mary Magdalene and have a secret family?
* Were women stripped of their early spiritual power in the Church?
* What is the remaining relevance of The Da Vinci Code today?

In other news, evacuations in Midtown should start around noon, so try and have your work done and take all of your valuables with you upon leaving the office. I have been hoarding bottled water for a few months now, so e-mail me if you want in on the stash. The Reeler is, first and foremost, a humanitarian operation.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon