The Truth About the Holy Grail | The Da Vinci Code (Tom Hanks, Ian McKellen)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 апр 2023
- Professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) and Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) visit Robert's old friend Leigh (Ian McKellen) in hopes of obtaining more knowledge about the holy grail.
Watch The Da Vinci Code Now: AAN.SonyPictures.com/TheDaVinc...
Dan Brown's international bestseller comes alive in the film The Da Vinci Code, directed by Ron Howard with a screenplay by Akiva Goldsman. Join symbologist Robert Langdon (Academy Award® winner Tom Hanks, 1993 Best Actor, Philadelphia, and 1994 Best Actor, Forrest Gump) and cryptologist Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) in their heart-racing quest to solve a bizarre murder mystery that will take them from France to England - and behind the veil of a mysterious ancient society, where they discover a secret protected since the time of Christ. With first-rate performances by Sir Ian McKellen, Alfred Molina and Jean Reno, critics are calling The Da Vinci Code "involving"* and "intriguing,"* "a first rate thriller."**
#TheDaVinciCode #TomHanks #PaulBettany #CrimeCity #CrimeMovie #HDClips 
Кино
Anyone else love Ian McKellen’s voice?
He does have a very comforting voice.
He is a simply outstanding actor.
Just hearing him made me consider the possibility that Jesus had a bloodline since he came from David anyway
I mean...everyone. That's one of the reasons he's a famous actor.
He could read the yellow pages and I would enjoy it
When I read the book I read this in his voice.
“Witness the greatest cover-up in human history” - chills & goosebumps
I always thought the existence of E.Ts and the cover up will be bigger
Sounds like the start of a bug documentary
What if it's like Prometheus and Jesus was an alien sent down to teach us and we killed him. @@snowman7469
@@snowman7469 ET’s I have a feeling, want nothing to do with us. I don’t think they’re even interested in conquest. Anything that’s advanced enough to come this far into the universe is smart enough to know they don’t have to waste resources on a war, they need only sit by and will do their job for them.
@@snowman7469 Nah that would just confirm one thing, but this conspiracy about christ as they said in the movie, would turn the very foundations western civilization is founded on to dust.
I love this scene. True or not, I love to simply listen, the theories, the history, philosophies, the possibilities, and secrets of the past.
I love the fact that they manage to do the ONE thing that freaks the CHurch out...... The one thing that made them demonize this movie... they make the public say the 2 most dangerous words - WHAT IF?
Read the secret doctrine of Jesus Christ.
This was taken exactly from that book.
Secret doctrine of Christ?
@@wolfofhell7548 Secret doctrine of Jesus by H. Spencer Lewis.
@@wolfofhell7548 If you haven't read it I would recommend it.
Certainly an interesting read.
I love how offended he got when she called Mary "the prostitute". You can feel the anger he has for this woman he doesn't even know being slandered thousands of years later
You can understand it though given how high his character clearly holds Mary Magdalene up as the very ideal of his belief in the sacred feminine. It doesn't set well at all with him given his ideology that the church unfairly and falsely blackened her name and part in Jesus ministry by lowing a high status woman who he believes was Jesus's wife to being a mere prostitute. Saying Mary was a prostitute to him was basically like someone saying to a Christian that Jesus was a false messiah.
Slander someone by calling them a prostitute? That is very offensive to actual prostitues, sir.
@@ProfessorPrel okay? They shouldn't be proud of their jobs anyways 🤷🏻♂️
@@ProfessorPrelthe story is actual more complexe than that remember this is fiction.
She is a saint in the church, smeared by who?
"Robert, will you fight fair?"
Such a golden chemistry between these two
Easy way to make your plot exposition scene feel epic, cast Ian McKellen and have him narrate it.
Ian McKellen, Morgan Freeman, Gene Hackman. Top three worthy Narrators of human history.
Charles Dance
Old British guys sound educated and authoritative. This would not work with a Filipino accent. 😂
Before you blast me I’m Filipino. Now if I was giving boxing advice then it would be flipped.
Sir David Attenborough.
Sir Ian McKellen absolutely dominates this scene. What a powerhouse!
Ian is such a good actor. I love the bit where when the woman mentions that Mary was a prostitute and you see his character get visibly upset.
Yes, Ian is a fantastic actor, unfortunately Richard Harris didn’t think so, hence why Ian refused the role of Dumbledore when he was approached to replace Harris when he died,
Look up Helena of Adiabene. She wasn’t in the brothel by choice.
When you know that Judas Iscariot is Judas of Galilee head of the Sicarii you recognize the name games played by Saul of Tarsus.
He gives characters the most common names in Judea at the time; Miriam, Yeshua and Judah. Simon is really popular in that time period as well.
James is Jacob and also a very common name.
Look up when Parables were thought to first appear in literature. And then look up how prominently they feature in the Dead Sea Scrolls, then come back and tell me how the dates of the Dead Sea scrolls commonly agreed upon make sense with the dating of parables.
I’m with him. I remember someone explaining the book to me before I read it,wanted to know what all the fuss was about. Raised Catholic & attended catholic HS & college. Of course we took Theology classes. The church was known for its role of keeping women down. No surprise there.
@@samanthab1923 kept everyone dumb, down and economically depressed.
It was an extension of the Roman system of controls, that’s why they opposed translating the Bible for over 1500 years.
Five hundred years ago 99% of people were totally illiterate, within 500 years of the King James translation, illiteracy in the English speaking world is virtually nonexistent.
Which brings me to the Arian Christians and the Goths. Gothic was a language made into a written form by the Arian Bishop Wulfila who did so to translate the Bible into the native language of the goths. Arianism was exterminated by the Roman Catholics for this, even though the gothic translation predates the vulgate, meaning that the Arians were putting the Bible into their people’s native languages before the official Roman Latin version was even commissioned in the first place. So the Romans, as seems to be the only way they ever knew, would slaughter anyone who disobeyed what they wanted done, using their power and influence to gather armies of the same people they largely oppressed to kill those who were seeking to liberate them.
@@samanthab1923 I left the church after I read this book.
*Mary of Magdala was a dignified woman, independent and had a wealth of her own, to her name. I couldn't say for certain that she was Jesus's wife, but it's clear that she was one of the most, if not THE most, trusted and truest disciples (apostles) of Christ. She was a woman ahead of her time. She deserved, and still deserves, more respect and even reverence.*
Apparently so, then the Gnostic published her book in the 400AD.
Completely agree. But if Jesus wasn't divine as they seem to be saying, then Mary, the disciples and the Grail aren't important in the grand scheme of things at all.
there is an Arte tv doc about her. She is really the mother of the Christian faith.
@@spex76 Not true, if we managed to get actual proof Jesus was a living man then it absolutely destroys the church, the illusion of Christs divinity would be shattered.
@@appocalypsechild Then why would Mary of Magdala be so revered? It would destroy the Church If Christ wasn't divine. But if Christ isn't God, then Mary is not important, just like the other followers of Jesus aren't important. They are all raised up simply because of who Jesus is
I love this scene, it always gives me goosebumps just the idea of all actually being true. And Sir Ian's voice is so unique
It’s not true though. Most of what he said is complete bullshit made up for the movie
i think Lawrence Gardner makes a good case. He believes the only way to prove whats true or false would be to travel back in time and record the actual words spoken and events. if it wasn't for the bloody, money and power hungry history of a "lets pretend were catholic" church, some people would not be so curious. Was a " self serving, ,female surpressing desease invented in order to offer a cure" ?
@@chrisastin184 You might want to read the Bible:
Matthew 12:46-50
46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”
48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
@@yew2oob954 ok your point? The Bible has been translated so many times you don't know what it originally said. That doesn't change the fact that they get simple history wrong in the movie to fit their narrative.
@@chrisastin184 My point...you claim they get something wrong historically...so clearly YOU are claiming that YOU know what the Bible originally said. My point is that your entire belief system is false so this movie may get some things wrong about something that is COMPLETELY wrong.
I remember being shook to the core reading this book when I was younger. So happy I experienced both the book and the movie.
Ian McKellen would have been a great history teacher
This scene gives me chills every time
Yeeeah😮
😂
It NEVER gave you chills.
You people really need to stop bullsh###ing
This one and the end where Langdon goes down The Rose Line! Also, in Angels & Demons when the explosion occurs.
I remember reading this book for the first time, getting to this part where the Last Supper painting is explained. I froze, put the book down, hopped online, looked at the painting and By God! How did I miss all that? Brilliant stuff.
You mean the cup. A priest in our church told about that and told a story about it.
The tale goes that when Da Vinci finished the fresco, all of his students admired how the cup/holy grail was well painted. Da Vinci upon hearing this decided to remove it for the reason that the painting should focus on Jesus's glory at the time of the last supper. Whether this is true or not I cannot tell but still fascinating.
One problem, the Holly Grail isn't a cup it's actually a metal plate or dish that the cup sat on.
It's a well accepted editorial error.
It's because the event Leonardo Da Vinci is chronicling in his Last Supper takes place after the meal has concluded. In the painting, Jesus has just announced to the Twelve Apostles that one of them will betray Him.
Not really brilliant. There is no chalice because it is the end of the meal. The disciples in the painting are reacting to what Jesus has just said, that one of them would betray him. There is no Mary Magdalene in the painting -- the one who he says is Mary Magdalene is John the Evangelist.
@@davidvarley1812run that by me again?
Never in my life have I had more goosebumps, teary eyes and full undivided attention than watching this scene for the first time
Thats because it actually makes logical sense more than the other story does
@@scottadams4655it makes more sense that you can reach god through sex?.. how about it’s all just a biological function of evolution?.. there is no god to be reached. It’s just physics and chemistry. Same with drugs. Plus men and women need each other for reproduction. It’s stupid.
Tom Hanks is genuine movie star. His choices of movie scrpits are excellent.
The Da Vinci Code is a good movie but nobody is seriously claiming that it's anywhere near factual. It's a work of fiction pure and simple.
as is christianity too
Was the greatest story ever told just that? A story?
Like the Bible, you mean.
Uh, and what makes any other version true?
@@psychospoiler Would you say the same of other religions too?
Or are you singling us out because you fear us, and our message of peace and hope and light.
This is why I got all the Dan Brown books
Simply brilliant
The biggest plot twist of the entire novel. I love history
This is not history. It's fiction.
Perfect casting of Sir Ian... brilliant in the role
He's got a one of a kind voice
doesn't matter what you watch
when he speaks you know who is speaking
hollywood loves to throw shade at things like this all the time
I don't know why, I have seen every Tom Hanks movie out there. Yet, this is my favorite movie he's been in, next to You've Got Mail. I love seeing both sides of an actors abilities. For him, drama and comedy.
The writing for this scene is incredible, so convincing too
this was the best scene of that movie
It was good but I prefer the scene where Tom Hank's character tells her she is the end of the bloodline.
I would like to spend a lot of time in that study room, reading old books, discovering old secrets, and play some Age of Empires 2 when I'm tired of reading.
I love how upset this movie makes people
Same I do too 😂, I also love the Lucifer series of DC which portrayed Lucifer and Lilith as good people and God and Angels as douche.
A beautiful scene... a well acted and well written... work of fiction.
The real title of the picture is "So how are we splitting this bill?"
Family Guy ?
Lol I never seen family guy but just looked it up,, Good to be on same wave length@@m.r.rohithkrishnaa1398
And please don’t forget the Tip!..
Watched this movie a couple of times but now I finally get it.
I never watched this before, it’s just showed up on my feed. I always thought this would be a lot smarter than it is.
Davinci painted the last supper around 1498. Like most renaissance painting someone paid, chose the scripture and posed for the painting. Now, this was over 1400 after Christs death, the fact that some people take this scene to be real amazes me. Just like the painting of Jesus, it was literally a patron that posed for the painting. Amazing.
DaVinci is known for Hiding msgs in his paintings. Like the image of Brain around God in 'The creation of Adam'.
And DaVinci was part of Illuminati.
So, its very probably he was hiding the Truth about Mary magdalene and Christ in this painting, irrespective of whether posed by a patron or not.
In the movie, the reason that they used "The Last Supper" as a "proof" or a puzzle is that it was hinted that Leonardo was a member of the Priory of Sion, not solely on the contents of the painting.
Leonardo, proven time and time again to be a man of passion, probably used his dearest art to scatter proof of Jesus's humanity, which I think makes absolute sense. That being in the movies/books universe, of course.
In one way or another, I find the idea of Jesus Christ having a child to be plausible. Even if there isn't any proof (at least verified), he was, quite simply, a man. He had desires like any other person, so finding a partner (in this particular case, a wife) and having children is not a far stretched idea.
But that is another topic, of course.
Well... the fact that people still think that magic is real, amazes me. 100+ old religions are "mythos", but this one is the real deal. People should not be this stupid. But here we are. That some people then take this scene as real, is not really that farfetched.
Yeah yeah…it’s not the painting it’s DA VINCI…the whole point of it is that Leo was part of the whole secret society to keep the descendants of Jesus a secret. It’s what’s supposed to explain all his art work and inventions….
Literally, to be a Rabbi at the time, the man had to be married...
The backlash to this scene alone was probably why the early Assassin's Creed games had to include disclaimers about being works of fiction
nah Ezio and Davinci were chill like that (historically accurate)
@@willct8026 "Books are written by people, Mr. Miles. People used to write books about the world being flat."
I feel like Sir Ian McKellen would be perfect somewhere in an adaptation of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings.
This movie is the prequel to LOTR part 1 or had you not realised?
Um, reading it or being Gandalf
This is the greatest scene through the whole trilogy
never ever insult Magneto, Tom. you would pay dearly.
There they are, McKellen with a very British accent and Hanks with a very American accent. They nailed them perfectly. If there's someday a film starring both of them, I would suggest to make it as a political drama, with McKellen portraying a British PM and Hanks portraying the President of the United States.
Sir Ian Mckellen carries this lik a boss! What a legend!
Ah yes , The Da Vinci Code, back when Dan Brown really churned out page turning thrillers.
Whatever you choose to believe or not believe about this, the way it was written and acted almost makes the story more plausible than it most likely is.
Ian McKellan could read the phonebook and he would keep 100% of your attention.
Ian McKellan, Patrick Stewart, Charles Dance....they could read menus and we're still going to stop and listen.
I recalled this movie scene in the past.
Intrigue to the point of freezing someone, so well written and so beautifully made into a movie: masterpiece...
This was the first time i read the book before seeing the movie, and i remember reading this particular scene in the book and in my mind i was thinking Ian McKellen would be great as the role of Teabing if they ever made a movie. Low and behold months later he was announced
"Historically inaccurate" absolutely, but close enough to fact that a non fiction document revealing all of this already existed long before The Da Vinci Code was written. The original author tried to sue for plagiarism but was denied because "historical evidence cannot be copyrighted". The Church tried to block this book/movie multiple times but was unsuccessful for fear of the damage it would cause to those whose faith was lacking. The documents mentioned here, the omitted gospels, translations for sangreal, companion and others... every source quoted in this segment exists but cannot be 100% verified as true (just like every part of any religious text) but are real enough to scare the church shitless, for good reason
if you're talking about The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, it presents ideas taken from a previous book from 1972, so it's plagiarism too, and has nothing historical in it. Your mind wants to read what you want to believe, to paraphrase McKellen.
@@thegp2008 You're absolutely right. A magical reincarnating superhuman doing magic, the global ecosystem confined to a wooden boat and the entire human race propagating form a single mated pair with only sons makes far more sense
Uh, this entire historical premise of the Da Vinci Code is utter hogwash. It takes precisely two seconds of actual historical research to debunk massive chunks of Dan Browns ridiculous claims. It’s conspiracy theory nonsense.
@@kriddius To be fair, that's a fairly narrow view of the concept of Christianity. To the point of being disingenuous. Pull it back a bit.
@@ch3nz3n I will not. When a faith claims their ancient fairytales are the one and only truth you must accept all of it or none at all. It only seems disingenuous because of how stupid it is to anyone but an indoctrinated child
I saw this when it first came out with some chums. Edge of my seat the whole time. The book was even better.
🎉🎉🎉 This is my favorite, I love this scene, I probably replay it 6 or 7 times whenever I watch the movie 😁🔥
Love the Da Vinci code! Yea, this was the scene, the big revelation! Conspiracy theory or not, this version of the truth hits harder. Dan Brown is such a great writer, I remember I had a tough time putting this book down. The movie is great but somehow the book is better.
This scene shows the dangers of looking to much into history and forgetting that while much of our views on history are interpreted as best we can, hard facts in history do exist. If for no other reason to remind us not to become fanatical in our beliefs about the past.
Actually we have to be even more careful than that. Historical 'facts' aren't necessarily 'provable' in the sense we have writings of them and sometimes writings from two or more sources. None of that makes it a 'fact' simply because it was written down. The further back you go the less clarity we have on what actually transpired.
I know Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute
Several great things about this movie :
1. Young(er) Tom Hanks made scholarly Tom Hanks
2. Sir Ian McKellen
3. Follow the novel faithfully
4. (Younger) Paul Bettany
5. Hans Zimmer
I don’t actually care If it’s true. It’s a much, much better story.
I really think this movie is slept on.
I can watch all these 3 movies many times still learn something new every single time.. like how?
I have this image, Sir Ian makes his speech, and everyone is amazed. Then he pulls Holy Blood and the Holy Grail out of a pile, i bought this in the bargain bin a few years ago. It was also a BBC documentary in 82. Everybody turns around and goes home 😂.
Always love how Leonardo knew all the secrets when he painted this. It's like he was there and took a photo.
The whole sequence does not make sense. Leonardo lived in the 15. century, why would he know the secrets 1500 years after? And the witchhunts took place at the same time and not during the middle ages, also 1500 years after. What happened during that long time? For clarification: Thats 3 times longer then the timespan between Leonardo and us.
Masterclass in acting
I can count at least one more pair of figures in that painting, leaning away from each to create the shape of a chalice in the negative space between. Potentially two more pairs.
My favorite scene
The book and movie were like a mind virus that infected everyone.
I bet people were going crazy in the theater during these scenes. 😂
They filmed this movie really close to the town I grew up in and they actually filmed in and around roslin Chappel where some believe the holy grail is
Catholics didn't like this 💀
They don't like fairy tales about their fairy tales. lol!
The bible has historical ties and the Catholic churchhas been a running institution and patron of science for over a thousand years.
The Old testament is reference but not the core of Christianity that would be the new testament, The Old testament has more importance in the Jewish tradition than Christianity
@@lettuceman9439 Umm... bit of a stretch there to say the Catholic Church has been a 'running institution and patron of science for over a thousand years'... in the 11th century the Catholic church was anything but that. Recall that the Catholic Church in the 1630s accused Galileo of heresy for disagreeing with the idea of the Sun and all the other planets revolving around the Earth and had him before the Inquisition forcing him to recant and live under house arrest for the remainder of his life. Not exactly a 'patronage', yes?
GREAT scene.
I do! I do ! I do ! First heard McKellan’s voice in high school as we studied Hamlet. And also ‘Acting Shakespeare’.
I can relate to this scene. I too have a copy of the Malleus Maleficarum lying around and toss it at people during conversations about Jesus...
I'd love to come over for afternoon tea, if I was ever invited 🎉
Love this movie, this scene, and Ian McKellen!!! 🥰
What's the name of it
@@FaithWhite-xz2fm The movie is called The DaVinci Code.
I have never watched this set of films but I think I'm going to have to now
“The truth” and the “DaVinci Code” in the same sentence is hilarious
Certainly the book is fiction and all the primary characters fiction. The underlying facts as laid out by the character Sir Leigh? Those are absolutely real.
I was in a Catholic school when this film premiered. My school and Religion teacher never mentioned Mary Magdalene.
Jesus Christ Superstar has her in it.
As someone who has read the book... This hits differently
When I first watched this, I managed to guess every single twist in the plot except for Apple
Amazing! Truly amazing!🤯
I love this movie. And thanks to this scene, I can never look at the Last Supper the same again. I recommend this movie to anyone along with the novel.
You do know that this is fiction correct? That isn't Mary Magdalene, its St. John. He's portrayed as a youth by ancient greek standards, which is what Da Vinci was portraying.
Interesting movie, bad history.
Don't take the movie seriously. It is fiction -- it is all made up. No serious scholar of art would accept the silliness that is proposed here.
@@ratatoskr9366 What source are you referencing when you say the character sitting in the place of honor to Jesus' right hand is John?
@@guiwhiz The painter, Leonardo Da Vinici. That's my source. Plus because I know scripture and history, John is always portrayed as young looking as he is the youngest apostle. And seeing as Renaissance painters took much from the greeks, youth was always portrayed with femininity. A simple web search wouldve told you all of this.
@@ratatoskr9366 Wow you spoke to Leonardo Da Vinci?! Or.. perhaps.. you read a hearsay account of somebody who SAID they spoke to Da Vinci and SAID that he SAID it was John?
A very powerful scene
This scene gave me chills & goosebumps. Church is full of lies & deceit here. Their excuse It's to give hope. Even in Angels & Demons as how it shows Camerlengo was in fact the bad guy but made it look like hero in the end.
This scene is the most intense but also is what the movie is all about
Meanwhile DaVinci is laughing in the afterlife about the biggest oldest prank ever pulled. But in all seriousness were those gospels he read confirmed to have been written before the the legend was conceived?
I believe truth and fact matter, regardless of what our beliefs are. To be clear, all the so-called 'lost gospels' he read from were rejected by the Council of Nicea for good reason, for one, they are all dated much later than the canonical gospels we have today of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Nearly every scholar, conservative and liberal agree the vast majority of the New Testament we have today was written well within the 1st C AD. The Gospel of Phillip he reads from was written in the 3rd C AD. All the Council of Nicea did was once and for all establish what the church had known for years, officially formulating which books were original gospels and authentic writings of the Apostles and which ones were later forgeries or pseudo-gospels. The Lost Gospels do contain some rather peculiar pictures of Jesus Christ, In the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus tells Mary she must have a sex-change to enter in the Kingdom and become a male, and in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Jesus uses his divine powers to kill a boy he gets in a fight with. All this is to say, the Church Fathers as early as the 2nd C AD knew and quoted from the New Testament Canon we have today and we are able to reconstruct majority of the NT from their quotations alone, not to mention we have a plethora of Greek NT Manuscripts (over 5,000) and a complete Bible dating from 306AD the Codex Vaticanus which predates the Council of Nicea in 325AD by 19 years.
@@Drooblemeister "To be clear, all the so-called 'lost gospels' he read from were rejected by the Council of Nicea for good reason" ... the Council of Nicaea didn't discuss or decide upon the books of the bible. The claim that they did is one of the falsehoods included in the "Da Vinci Code."
@ReaverLordTonus btw. His name was Leonardo, "da Vinci" was not his surname, simply the town he was from. ie "of Vinci."
They can't pay off everyone's right
The gospels selected for the Bible we know were written long after the events they describe. They're essentially hearsay.
@@Drooblemeister "All the Council of Nicea did was once and for all establish what the church had known for years, officially formulating which books were original gospels and authentic writings of the Apostles" except none of the gospels were written by apostles. We have no signed copies. They are all anonymous. They are not first hand accounts.
my face during the whole scene when i first saw this movie :O
Many people don't realize that Christ was followed and financially supported in ministry by women of great wealth. Mary Magdalena was The Master Apostle/Teacher to the other 12. The discples were used to spread the gospel, but Mary Magdalena Was The Church.
This movie was so famous when it got released but I've never heard anyone talk about it a few years later
because the catholic church didn't approve this, it's the same with a lot off highly religious catholics or christians
Everytime I watch it I think it is too pushy in its portrayal as an intelligent movie.
It’s a scavenger hunt that chose to include Biblical characters and events.
Idk why people hate on this movie, it’s awesome
Well to be more specific. The movie didn't got heat because people hated it. It was because this movie went and challenged the very foundation of Christianity. By saying that Jesus didn't died staying as a virgin but that he had a relationship with Madeline and more importantly bared a child with her. In which the church, at the time, understandably renounce that implication. As well wanted the people to skip seeing the movie because of it.
@antonionunez3759 because it's stupid. Imagine making a movie about an ancient religion, and making claims about it... based on... a painting... from an unrelated painter 500 years ago. So DaVinci didn't paint a chalice... and? Is he some important figure in Christianity and its origin?? No. The movie is for stupid people who want to pretense an 5 cent education and rebel against God.
because it challenges their religion I personally believe its true about Mary Magdelen and I am a full Roman Catholic. Never took the Bible for 100% truth as it was written by men and men are imperfect.
@@christopherm4662 Hardly more stupid than the claims the religion itself makes - tortured efforts to reconcile contradictory accounts of events written generations after the events and coming from a tradition that didn't value a documentary approach?
@@jeffreymiller6847same. I’m Catholic and this rings true to me. I won’t renounce my faith yet I understand that the Bible has magic and fiction and motives
fun fact about the Malleus Maleficarum: it was written in large part due to the author, Heimrich Kramer's, incident with a woman named Helena Scheuberin. He was an insane priest whose sermons were described as 'heretical' by Helena, and she avoided and spoke out against them, and also allegedly spat at Heimrich and said: "Fie on you, you bad monk, may the falling evil take you".
Heimrich was so enraged that this woman spoke out against him that he put her and thirteen others on trial. However, the judge released her and the thirteen others with no punishment or light penance. Heimrich went insane over her winning the trial, and stayed in Innsbruck to 'continue the investigation against her' which meant stalking Helena, and the Bishop himself noticed this and banished him for his insane obsession over Helena.
This prompted Heimrich to write the Malleus Maleficarum. Which really makes you realize how it's essentially his own torture fantasies
I would have liked Ian McKellen as Leigh to be a recurring character in dan browns movies. Being him as the secret antagonist of this movie kind of irritates me. He could be critical character in angels and demons or inferno.
Does anyone know, can anyone tell me the name of the program that Ian Mckellen (Leigh Teabing) is using?
I have a feeling it's a Hollywood special effect thing and may not exist. I could be wrong. But if it does exist, I'd love to know too!
It's a well known fact that Da Vinci couldn't paint cups. That's why there were no cups at the table
And the Bible NEVER calls the cup of wine a "holy grail".
Da Vinci could paint people, landscapes, architecture etc but couldn't paint cups... Yeah, I'm going to say that statement is false
like da vinci would say, if he was here today............ duh...........
@@trojandubz8685 He means cup as in "cup size"
The way Ian said "penis" was so calm & decent 😌
Would have messed the whole scene up if Robert simply asked: How many apostles are there?
How many people do you see at the table?
If only it were true, it would be the greatest travesty the world has ever known. It would break the very foundations of religion.
So not a travesty, but a healing moment. Also - the majority of religions wouldn't be affected one way or the other.
foundations of religion? the foundation of religion has nothing to do with jesus' marital life. it has to do with him dying on the cross. married unmarried makes no difference.
@@AsifKhan-hf9zy Oh it does to Roman Catholic Church and the power, legitimacy, authority of Pope.
"The more penises you have, the higher your rank. Boys will be boys."
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Sir Ian improvised that line
Sorry to disappoint but that line was in the book
In the biblical accounts of the Last Supper (found in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), there is no mention of a specific, singular Holy Grail. The Gospels refer to Jesus taking a cup, giving thanks, and sharing it, but they do not describe the cup in a way that singles it out as an iconic object. Leonardo may have aimed for a more biblically accurate portrayal by not emphasizing a specific Grail
Never saw this movie before. Interesting 🧐
What I find hilarious is that the entire movie and novel hinges on the bloodline of Jesus of Nazareth but if he had a child 2000 years ago then there are millions of his descendants walking around today. There's a good chance that anyone reading this comment could be descended from Jesus and countless other figures from history.
most of the people who voted for trump are clearly descendants of jesus........
I find it more hilarious that we came from Adam & Eve and we fucked all our family from generations & generations and now we are all retarded.
But God has to drown all those retarded people and save Noah's family to do it all over again. And we are now double retarded. He doesn't make mistakes.. Oh but wait until Jesus.. lol
brilliant how this is all not true yet could be so true
while the book and story are fiction the underlying elements of it are very 'true' at least in the sense that all of what the character Sir Teabing brings up is accurate.
I swear I saw this at night, stumbling upon this on what is then Star Movies channel, when I was an 11 year-old fifth grader on a Catholic school. This scene blew my mind.
It all made sense--why priests are always men, why there seemed to be so many messed up things the church has done in the past yet every catholic were chill with it (because the church says it's God's will), and the undeniable possibility that Jesus and Magdalene buried the corn cob. I mean they say during His life, Jesus was just like any other--a man, a carpenter, who just so happens to be a really *really* shiny Pokemon. If so, then surely the dude fell in love somehow, and Him having kids is possible.
I mentioned having seen the film and my classmates were like "that's blasphemy! I'll tell on you!". They called our Christian Living Education teacher and I said "I only saw the trailer". Bunch of snitches lol 😅 but that only made more sense because people are either a) absolute sheeps, b) fear of being wrong the entire time, or c) a bigger conspiracy that everyone involved in spreading Catholicism were in on it, my teacher included 😅, trying to find Mary Magdalene and stop the truth from coming out. It was dumb. 😅
hahahahahahahahahaha
Never understood why they made Langdon a skeptic, in the book he was well educated historian and he only saw it as a historian. Or why they changed that the grandfather was not her grandfather.
True or not it’s absolutely fascinating and I want to hear more
true or not, for historical purposes its a very interesting theory.
The thing that's always stood out most about this movie and the book, is that if Jesus is not divine and only human, then Mary Magdalene, the disciples and Sophie aren't important in the scheme of things at all. So why be awestruck at all about the "Grail"?
Very interesting
My thing is France wasn’t France at that time. It was Gaul, I seriously doubt a pregnant woman would journey that far to a unknown land to have a child by foot or even by sea. It wasn’t like Gaul ( now known as France ) was like some wonderful place at that time. Caesar just conquered it like 30-40 years before.
it;d be the edge of the Empire, ideal hiding place from political powers
@@ZannNewman they had control of the entire land. If that’s the argument than Germany would make more sense.