-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Beyond the Da Vinci Code on The History Channel tonight
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
- Status
Socreges said:
It's on at 10pm on the West Coast at least on my feed:
http://www.historychannel.com/globa...wCode=THC&timezone=4&View=Weekly&fromTime=21&
DonasaurusRex
Online Ho Champ
The history channel is just everything A&E, TLC, and Discovery Channel used to be and more, best channel on cable imo.
I apologize. Apparently the channel that I get is 'History Television' (in Canada) and it shares a great deal of the material.ManaByte said:
And the program tonight is 'The Real Da Vinci Code' and not 'Beyond...'. Strange.
Oh yeah, I'm talking about the British show "Real Da Vinci Code" too. Dunno if it's the same one on in the US, but the Real Da Vinci Code is awesome. I expected it to be a shameless TLC/A&E style "investigation" designed to ride the coattails of the books success while not making any conclusions one way or the other to be as marketable as possible. The kind where breathless believers get 20 minutes of poor CG to illustrate their claims with no critical examination of their tales except for a 10 second blurb from some token skeptic.
Luckily "The Real Da Vinci Code" is the opposite of that puff-piece crap they have on TLC nowadays.
If this one hosted by Tony Robinson isn't the one you guys in the US are seeing I hope it's as good.
Luckily "The Real Da Vinci Code" is the opposite of that puff-piece crap they have on TLC nowadays.
If this one hosted by Tony Robinson isn't the one you guys in the US are seeing I hope it's as good.
Manabanana
Member
calder said:Oh yeah, I'm talking about the British show "Real Da Vinci Code" too. Dunno if it's the same one on in the US, but the Real Da Vinci Code is awesome. I expected it to be a shameless TLC/A&E style "investigation" designed to ride the coattails of the books success while not making any conclusions one way or the other to be as marketable as possible. The kind where breathless believers get 20 minutes of poor CG to illustrate their claims with no critical examination of their tales except for a 10 second blurb from some token skeptic.
Luckily "The Real Da Vinci Code" is the opposite of that puff-piece crap they have on TLC nowadays.
If this one hosted by Tony Robinson isn't the one you guys in the US are seeing I hope it's as good.
I don't have much to add except that I really liked that show. I went into it thinking Brown was a twat and came out thinking he was a complete twat.
Tommie Hu$tle
Member
Socreges said:
If you are interested in reading the book I suggest going with Angels and Demons first.
Everyone should watch this before reading the book. Hell, it should be packed in with the book for all the idiots in the general public who read the book as fact.
The History Channel documentary was pretty good. It didn't so much bash it, but it went point for point through what the book describes and has one side explaining why that is that way with another side explaining the historical evidence that either backs it up or shoots it down completely.
The History Channel documentary was pretty good. It didn't so much bash it, but it went point for point through what the book describes and has one side explaining why that is that way with another side explaining the historical evidence that either backs it up or shoots it down completely.
Agent Icebeezy
Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
I need to see this
john tv said:Whats the bottom line, for people who live in countries that'll never show this program?
Basically the core idea The Da Vinci Code is based on some things that do have some evidence to back it up, while larger parts of the story are contradicted by real historical evidence and fact.
For example, the meeting Constantine called where Brown says the gnostic gospels where destroyed and what books were allowed to be in the Bible wasn't actually for that purpose. The Bible as it exists today actually wasn't "finalized" and together until a couple hundred years after Constantine's gathering. Also, there was never any debate over the books of the Bible at the gathering and no scrolls were destroyed.
soundwave05
Member
The Gnostic gospels were largely destroyed, I believe. I don't think that happened at the Council of Nicea though. True there was largely no "canonized" version of the Bible for hundreds of years, although that point by the History Channel would probably upset some as well. The Vatican held onto the Dead Sea Scrolls for an awfully long time before finally releasing ... makes you wonder exactly what they were hiding and how much of the actual scrolls they released.
Council of Nicea might not have caused the burning of books directly, but it did indirectly. The Nicene creed wasn't really enforced until Emperor Theosidius Council of Constantinople in 381. It was at this point that other forms of christian beliefs were persecuted and put out.
But to go back to Nicea, its important to understand that a lot of the bishops who signed on didn't agree with it but did it simply to keep the support of Constantine.
But to go back to Nicea, its important to understand that a lot of the bishops who signed on didn't agree with it but did it simply to keep the support of Constantine.
soundwave05
Member
Yeah Constantine I don't think really gave a crap what the bishops agreed on, as long as they agreed on something.
He needed to use the religion to unify the Roman Empire which was beginning to crumble, and having one centeral religion (the word "Catholic" means universal) was a way to stabilize Rome. Or so he thought.
He needed to use the religion to unify the Roman Empire which was beginning to crumble, and having one centeral religion (the word "Catholic" means universal) was a way to stabilize Rome. Or so he thought.
Manabanana
Member
john tv said:Whats the bottom line, for people who live in countries that'll never show this program?
The priory of scion was completely fake. Da Vinci was never a part of it because it never existed. That was my favorite part, at least.
When I read the Da Vinci Code I was surprised at how poorly written it was (I think Brown's style is just terrible and his plotting awful) but since I had already read Holy Blood, Holy Grail and seen a few old documentaries about Rennes-le-Chateau and the grail-as-a-bloodline myth most of the books twists were pretty obvious to me.
What really annoyed me though was reading interviews (and the forward to the book) where Dan Brown claims, over and over, that he only made up the characters and that the codes, secret societies, and all the 'historical' background in his novel is all actual known fact. Either he's an author who fell in love with his own unlikely fiction (like crime novelist Patricia Cornwell who convinced herself she figured out who Jack the Ripper was on pretty dodgy evidence) or else he's a self-promoting liar who is trying to drum up sales by deliberately blurring the line between his fiction and historical reality.
Nothing wrong with trying to sell your book, but I think the way he both ignores evidence that contradicts his theory (which he basically just got from HB,HG and a few other out-there pseudohistorical theories) and gets so much basic history wrong that to present it as fact to fans of his books is disingenious at best and pretty much dishonest. There are dozens of websites from art historians to biblical scholars and others who point out constant, and very simple, errors in Brown's book if anyone is interested in googling and can't catch either of the TV shows being discussed.
What really annoyed me though was reading interviews (and the forward to the book) where Dan Brown claims, over and over, that he only made up the characters and that the codes, secret societies, and all the 'historical' background in his novel is all actual known fact. Either he's an author who fell in love with his own unlikely fiction (like crime novelist Patricia Cornwell who convinced herself she figured out who Jack the Ripper was on pretty dodgy evidence) or else he's a self-promoting liar who is trying to drum up sales by deliberately blurring the line between his fiction and historical reality.
Nothing wrong with trying to sell your book, but I think the way he both ignores evidence that contradicts his theory (which he basically just got from HB,HG and a few other out-there pseudohistorical theories) and gets so much basic history wrong that to present it as fact to fans of his books is disingenious at best and pretty much dishonest. There are dozens of websites from art historians to biblical scholars and others who point out constant, and very simple, errors in Brown's book if anyone is interested in googling and can't catch either of the TV shows being discussed.
Thing that annoyed me about the Tony Robinson documentary (havent seen this new one) is that it ignored more/all of the more interesting little 'facts'
Especially the extra hand in The Last Supper, the Pagan/christian propaganda war (Tarot cards, the symbolism behind the pentacle etc) Personally i kinda figured all the major stuff in the book was fiction but was interested to know about that minor stuff.
Especially the extra hand in The Last Supper, the Pagan/christian propaganda war (Tarot cards, the symbolism behind the pentacle etc) Personally i kinda figured all the major stuff in the book was fiction but was interested to know about that minor stuff.
i just finished reading the da vinci code...so i know im late but wow i really liked the book. i like angels and demons better but this one was awesome as well.
now i know its fiction and sometimes its blurry about what is real or not so im going to ask a few questions.
is the priory a real group or no? the document that was founded apparently detailing past members real or no?
also is there any site i can go to learn more about the holy grail lores? ill admit b4 reading this book i never even knew what the holy grail was except for when it was referenced in sports at times. im not christian so maybe that had to do with it...i dont know or maybe cause im dumb but i had never heard of it b4 or any of the theories related to it.
btw i was also recommended "the rule of 4" by the same friend who told me about the da vinci code....how is that book?
now i know its fiction and sometimes its blurry about what is real or not so im going to ask a few questions.
is the priory a real group or no? the document that was founded apparently detailing past members real or no?
also is there any site i can go to learn more about the holy grail lores? ill admit b4 reading this book i never even knew what the holy grail was except for when it was referenced in sports at times. im not christian so maybe that had to do with it...i dont know or maybe cause im dumb but i had never heard of it b4 or any of the theories related to it.
btw i was also recommended "the rule of 4" by the same friend who told me about the da vinci code....how is that book?
- Status