Animation Source Forums

Fact or Fiction... The idea must have originated from something, and of course there is plenty of fact in that and the movie itself. But then again, a movie isn't the same thing as the book. So more things get switched and built on. It's a mystery for now... Till someone prooves something.

We can all sit at our computers all day and argue this topic for a hundred more pages, and I don't think we'll still ever agree on anything.

Ok im going to say it's true for many reassons, like on the radio when the movie came out, on coast to coast they were interviewing the 3 experts on the DC and everything they said proves that it is all fact if you do not beleve me i'll give you a link and you can listen for yourself.


http://www.coasttocoastam.com


But did anyone watch the 6 hour documentry? that also says its a fact but the movie in theaters now is well most of it is fiction because they had to change around a few things to make it a movie where people wouldn't leave, like they had to make it entertaning, because I would have feel asleep if they made it all fact.

I watched the documenty and holy crap is it ever boring but I still watched it and it says and proves that DC is a fact, same with lots of churches aswell.

There have been many huge fusses with so many churchs because if this movie and because what they tought was wrong this whole time so they had so many problems with this movie that they said don't see this movie because of a number of things.

the book is fiction the new movie is basicly fiction, but the documentry on the other hand is fact, so watch the documentry and see the truth.

Ive read the book twice, ive watched everything on the History channel during the Da vinci de coded week. I know for fact that this book is pure fiction. There may be a dozen clues that point toward this being possible, but its not real.
Out of the whole novel, only one thing in the book was true. There was a blood line called the Merovingian.

Im sorry to say it, but you are really uneducated if you didn't know this was fake. Plus, even if this was real, how would Dan Brown be the only person who knew it?
Without even looking up the facts, simple logic could tell you this book was purely for entertainment rather than based on fact.

It is complete and utter fiction! For the people who believe it rather than the Bible, here's what I figure. Why believe someone now rather than some people way back when? They're no different from one another! It's common sence.

Yea, What makes Dan Brown so special? How would he even know where the Holy Gail was anyway?

It's a good book. I enjoyed reading it but im seriously going to have to call you paronoid if you believe this is real.

Yes. And also, Eclipsed, when we were talking about this awhile back online, (MSN) you told me that the guy who did the paintings for the movie took the paintings infront of a court and pointed out the clues in the paintings. I just had to laugh at that. Leonardo Da Vinci was that painter. He lived in the 1700's. He died several hundred years ago.
Also, yes those clues are in the paintings but their meanings are not to the location of the holy grail or anything like that.

I still stand by my original comment on this. The only thing fact about this book is the bloodline called the Merovingian did exist. But it was not the bloodline of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

I said the painter by mistake, it was someone else who showd the clues and all the proof that it was not fiction, but some just don't watch the news, oh well, personaly I don't give a [censored] im not in the mood to be arguing with something that, you can not proove that is fake and nether I can proove that it is true.

So if you say its fiction, how do you really know? and do not feed me any of that bible crap, because so much of it is lies.

Edited by Nick. Watch your mouth, please. We all know what you meant, so it's no use blanking some of it out.

What are you, an ancient Egyptian? You think everything written is true?
And you're not even spelling it right. It's Gnostic, from the Greek work "gnosis," which means "to know." Although if "naustic" derives from "nausea," then I'm for that spelling. This stuff makes me gag.
The only thing Dan Brown proved was that P.T. Barnum was dead on. There's a sucker born every minute.

Acctually, what's in the bible today, is not what was in the bible a couple hundred years ago. So much of it has been changed when it was translated to english. We may not have known what a certain word ment, so we made and educated guess.

Like: Thou Shalt <blank> your brother.

We weren't sure what the word ment so we guessed it as best we could and got: Thou Shalt Kill your brother.

This is just ment to be an example of what im talking about.

That's not a very accurate example by way of placement, but I concede that some words are difficult to translate. For example, when the Bible talks about Behemoth, the word is of uncertain translation. People have, based on the context and description of the animal, varyingly identified it as an elephant, a hippopotamus, or a relic dinosaur (specifically a sauropod). Other examples include the identity of, for example, gemstones: there is a stone called "adamant stone" mentioned in the text which could be a diamond or some other gem high up on the scale. What is important, though, we know from that in the passage which is clear. And with time, we have managed to fill in the gaps.