Roger Ebert, Rolling Stone, Peter Chattaway open fire on "Da Vinci"

It’s National “How Ridiculous is The Da Vinci Code” Day, it seems.

SECOND UPDATE:

David Poland thinks that the bad reviews have been too kind!

* * * * *

UPDATE:

A.N. Wilson and Christopher Tookey in The Telegraph, linked by Amy Welborn:

* * * * *

Peter T. Chattaway: The press kit for the movie is contradicting both the book and the film on historical matters.

Peter Travers (Rolling Stone):

There’s no code to decipher. Da Vinci is a dud — a dreary, droning, dull-witted adaptation of Dan Brown’s religioso detective story that sold 50 million copies worldwide. Conservative elements in the Catholic Church are all worked up over a plot that questions Christ’s divinity and posits a Vatican conspiracy to cover up Jesus Christ’s alleged marriage to Mary Magdalene and to drive all things feminine from the church. Here’s the sure way to quiet the protesters: Have them see the movie. They will fall into a stupor in minutes.

I know it bored me breathless.

 

And then he says:

As the movie gets swallowed up in its own stilted verbosity, I kept thinking that it would work better as one of those audiobooks. Just don’t listen to it while driving. You might get drowsy and hit a tree.

And then,

Roger Ebert:

Dan Brown’s novel is utterly preposterous; Ron Howard‘s movie is preposterously entertaining. Both contain accusations against the Catholic Church and its order of Opus Dei that would be scandalous if anyone of sound mind could possibly entertain them. I know there are people who believe Brown’s fantasies about the Holy Grail, the descendants of Jesus, the Knights Templar, Opus Dei and the true story of Mary Magdalene. This has the advantage of distracting them from the theory that the Pentagon was not hit by an airplane.

 

Watch this space: More to come!