Posted on 05/17/2006 5:54:17 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
May 17, 2006
If the Da Vinci Code was already feeding the flames of controversy with its challenge to the basic tenets of Christianity, actor Ian McKellen managed to throw a refinery tank's worth of gasoline on the fire on this morning's Today show, asserting that the Bible should carry a disclaimer saying that it is "fiction."
Matt Lauer, on his second day "On The Road With The Code," was in Cannes for the film festival, where the Code will have its debut. It has already been screened to some critics, who have given it decidedly mixed reviews.
As I reported here yesterday, NBC reporter Melissa Stark timidly dipped a toe in the sea of controversy when yesterday she interviewed Code director Ron Howard, asking how he reacted to the controversy the movie has created . . . for the Church! Sounding more like the Delphic oracle than a Hollywood director, Howard offered up some ambiguous prose about it being healthy thing for people to engage their beliefs.
Lauer took the bull of controversy more directly by the horns when he interviewed the cast and director Howard today. Said Lauer:
"There have been calls from some religious groups, they wanted a disclaimer at the beginning of this movie saying it is fiction because one of the themes in the book really knocks Christianity right on its ear, if Christ survived the crucifixion, he did not die for our sins and therefore was not resurrected. What I'm saying is, people wanted this to say 'fiction, fiction, fiction'. How would you all have felt if there was a disclaimer at the beginning of the movie? Would it have been okay with you?"
There was a pause, and then famed British actor Ian McKellen [Gandalf of Lord of the Rings], piped up:
"Well, I've often thought the Bible should have a disclaimer in the front saying this is fiction. I mean, walking on water, it takes an act of faith. And I have faith in this movie. Not that it's true, not that it's factual, but that it's a jolly good story. And I think audiences are clever enough and bright enough to separate out fact and fiction, and discuss the thing after they've seen it."
With the camera focused on McKellen, one could hear a distinctly nervous laugh in the background, seeming to come from either actor Tom Hanks or director Howard. McKellen's stunning bit of blasphemy is likely to test the adage that all publicity is good publicity.
Finkelstein, recently a guest on the Lars Larson Show, lives in the liberal haven of Ithaca, NY, where he hosts the award-winning public-access TV show 'Right Angle'. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
We attend the movies about every 2 years or so. Last movie we saw was "The Passion of the Christ", and, before that, it was "Black Hawk Down". We plan to see "Flight 93".
So go see Flight 93 THIS week if you plan to see it. Boost the box office of a competing film. That'll sink TDVC even lower in the relative rankings. Keep the films you support in the top 10. Doesn't mean you should go to see it several times but if you already plan to see it, go now. And if you like what you see, encourage your friends to go (word of mouth).
So speaks Gandalf the Gay.
oh, eventually I will buy it in the bargain bin.......it may take years before I cave though, and certainly not during Lent. ;)
Also, he's not saying the movie is true, so he's right on that as well.
He will have a chance to try to his wit when he dies.
Yup, I've never seen actors and directors with a movie coming out doing press on talk shows before. Must be a conspiracy.
Nonsense, Leni Reifenstahl (sp?) wouldn't have let these propaganda pikers anywhere near a lens--on either side. I do not agree with the content of "Triumph of the Will" but as propaganda, it is a benchmark these snobs fall far short of.
Won't we all?
Never put a questionmark where God has already placed a period.
Ian's just cranky 'cauyse the Bible still has Leviticus in it! He's been known to tear out that book of the Bible when he finds it in hotels...
It'll drop it all the way down to number one.
Seriously, a lot a people seemed confused about Jesus' mission on earth. He did not come to earth "to see what it was like to be human". He would not have needed to go through the joys of marriage, parenthood, children, etc. Remember, Jesus (according to mainstream Christian belief) IS God. He would not have needed to live among His own creation to "see what it was like". He would not have been tempted by His own creation.
The reason He came to earth was to live a perfect life so as to be the Passover Lamb so He could die for the sins of His people. The temptations by Satan were not important in that Jesus was tempted, but that they revealed to Satan that Jesus was God.
He also did not live a perfect life "to show us it could be done". No one but Christ was capable of living such a life. It was necessary for Him to live a perfect life in order to be the perfect, sinless sacrificial lamb.
"God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might bcome the righteousness of God". (2 Corinthians 5:21.)
He just looked good in the robes. hollywood types don't know how to keep their mouth shut....
If the bible needs a disclaimer, so does this piece of trash film.
Yep. He did look good as Gandalf. Be nice if he was as good as Gandalf. But actors are hollow shells in a way. One reason they make such lousy heros.
Gandalf has turned into Saruman.
Well said!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.