Customer Reviews

The Real Da Vinci Code

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Tony Robinson manages to analyse the supposedly 'historical' claims made in Dan Brown's fiction to see if these claims - believed by many of Brown's readers - stand up to detailed scrutiny. Such an enterprise could end up being earnest, boring or (worst of all) motivated by some Christian agenda, but as a veteran of popularising history, Robinson manages to keep the pace rapid and the tone light without dumbing down the content.

The strength of this documentary is that it sticks purely to the evidence, comparing it at every stage with the claims Brown makes as part of the allegedly 'well researched' background to his novel. In particular, Robinson demolishes the claim made on the novel's first page (under the bold heading 'FACT') that the so-called "Priory of Sion" is a real organisation. Robinson takes to this claim with an entertaining combination of detailed detective work and obvious relish and lays out the real story of the 'Priory' - not a real medieval secret society at all, but rather a clumsy modern hoax by a French eccentric.

With the claims about the 'Priory' demolished (complete with a rather funny interview with a visibly squirming *Holy Blood Holy Grail* author, Mighael Baigent) just about all of the rest of the 'historical background' to Brown's novel begins to fall apart.

While this section of the documentary is highly detailed and definitely worth telling, other parts towards the end of the DVD seemed a little rushed by comparison. Robinson features Leonardo expert, Charles Nicholl (author of *Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind*) who gives a very clear explanation as to why the figure of John to Jesus' right in The Last Supper is not 'Mary Magdalene' and why Leonardo would paint a young man in such an effeminate manner. But, compared to earlier analysis in the DVD, this seems a little brief. The 'fact' that this figure is 'definitely a woman' is one of the things that even casual readers of Brown's novel find convincing, so a bit more of the fairly extensive evidence about the traditional depictions of John as a beautiful youth would have been useful here. Leonardo was working within the traditions of his time, but Nicholl's contribution is so brief that the DVD never makes this totally clear to Brown fans who think they can trust the evidence of their own (totally untrained) eyes over some 'expert'.

Unfortunately, the weakest part of the DVD is the (again) rather hurried analysis of the Gnostic gospels. The average viewer would get the idea from this section of the documentary that the gospels which give Mary a central role in the story are on the same historical level as the gospels in the Bible and they were censored by the evolving Christian faith out of pure sexism. It neglects to make clear that these gospels are far later than the canonical gospels and tell us more about what Second and Third Century Gnostics believed than they do about Mary's likely earlier historical status.

Robinson never explains the far later date of these texts or the fact that they were rejected largely because Fourth Century Christians knew they were of recent origin and didn't represent a truly historical picture of Jesus, let alone Magdalene's role. Bart Ehrman is one non-Christian scholar who does a rather better job of putting these texts back into their historical context and making it clear that, as interesting as they are, they can't be taken at face value as an authentic picture of Magdalene's status in the earliest days of the Jesus Sect. I'm no Christian, but it's quite clear that the Gnostic view of Mary is late, symbolic and theological, not early, authentic and historical.

Robinson compounds this by baldly stating that Pope Gregory the Great declared that Magdalene was 'a prostitute'. In fact, Gregory never said anything of the sort. He did wrongly conflate Magdalene with Mary of Bethany and with the 'woman taken in adultery', but he never said Magdalene was a prostitute - that was simply a folk belief that arose later. Robinson could have made this clear, but in not doing so he gives at least one of Brown's errors credence.

There are also two other important claims that *The Da Vinci Code* makes which have convinced many of its readers - (i) that Jesus was considered simply a mortal prophet before he was turned into a god by the Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD in a cynical political ploy and (ii) that Constantine chose the books of the modern Bible. Both these claims are complete and utter nonsense, but unfortunately Robinson never even tackles them.

This could be because the documentary was long enough and detailed enough as it was. That's fair, but there is quite a bit of time at the beginning given over to a British kook who thinks a tiny alabaster Roman perfume jar he's found is the real Holy Grail and a rather meandering excursus about the Cathars. It's a pity Robinson and his producers didn't cut this stuff short and devote some of the documentary to the rather silly claims about the Council of Nicea and the formation of the canon of the Bible.

It was a pity that Robinson was never able to get Dan Brown himself to comment on the historicity of the background to his novel, considering it's convinced so many readers that it's legitimate, historical and factual. But Brown has become strangely shy about interviews in recent years. Despite this, there was a time when Brown made some quite categorical statements about the history behind his fiction. Robinson uses footage of one of these earlier interviews - one where Brown states emphatically that all the artworks, rituals and secret societies mentioned in his novel are 'all accurate'.

That's quite a claim, but unfortunately it's far from the most extravagant historical claim Brown made on this topic before he mysteriously clammed up to interviewers. In other interviews he insisted that the background was 'all factual'. In one, when asked if he'd have written the book differently if he had written a non-fiction book he declared 'I don't think I would have', assuring the interviewer that, in the course of researching its background 'I became a believer'.

It's a pity Robinnson didn't use those more damning quotes from Brown, since many of his fans try to pretend he never claimed the background to his fiction was historical, when actually he has done so several times.

All that said, this is one of the best refutations of the pseudo history presented as the 'factual' background of Brown's fiction. Brown has stated many times that this background is 'all factual' and Robinson has some glee in showing that it is mostly 'total rubbish'. Many people wonder why anyone would debunk a fictional work, but they seem to overlook the fact that not only has its background been presented and marketed as 'all factual', but millions of readers have taken it as such. If you want a detailed, intelligent, unbiased, completely non-Christian and highly entertaining counter to the idea that there is any validity in the background to Dan Brown's fiction, watch this DVD.

Not the definitive scholarly debunking of this novel's background, but damn close to it. Superb stuff. Highly recommended.

I saw this programme when it was aired on Channel 4 in the UK in 2005.It is a first class production which mercilesly debunks the novel in a scholarly way.The problem faced by some is that this is a secular debunking,so charges of religious bias are groundless and crtics of this programme must rely on challenges to Christian teaching regarding Gnostic beliefs.A critical review of this programme is difficult to mount hence the reviewer who gave it 2 stars only justified this low figure, not because of the calibre of the programme, but because she disagreed with Christian teaching.It is 5 stars all the way and is deservedly considered to be the finest expose of the "Da Vinci" nonsense.

This is a good production that is useful critique to the Da Vinci Code. The program presents some credible investigation into the supposed facts behind The Da Vinci Code. Robinson does his best to discredit some issues raised in the Holy Blood, Holy Grail and the Da Vinci Code.

This is a well made documentary where Robinson presents his arguments, proposals and conclusions based on the available evidence and compares and contrast the claims and arguments presented by Dan brown. I liked his methodical approach that is convincing particularly the scholarly way he exposes the Priory de Sion as a hoax and not some medieval secret society. Much to his credit, Tony Robinson does not approach the investigation from a religious view, giving his finding much objectivity.

This is a worthwhile film for those who are seeking a more thoroughly investigated refutation of Dan Brown's claims and arguments, although it is not a very conclusive and definitive rebuttal, due to some omissions in the film. Very good viewing for the open minded.

After seeing a lot of documentaries made on the Da Vinci Code, which essentially try to verify the story by Dan Brown, THIS ONE tells the whooooole truth about the "Da Vinci Code". It presents evidence that the other documentaries ignore, because they want to go with the ride of Dan Brown's novel. For example, that the Dossier Secrets are all forgeries, that the Priur? de Sion was a fraud created in the 1950's, that there is no such Merovingian dynasty present today, that Pierre Plantard is not a Merovingian descendant, and that the Merovingian dynasty does NOT descend of the Jews (which has been historically and genetically confirmed), that Margaret Starbird is essentially wrong about her theory of how Mary Magdalen went to France,that the Holy Grial has nothing to do with the bloodline, that all of Da Vinci's paintings can be explained WITHOUT supposing him knowing anything about Jesus and Mary Magdalen, etc. etc. etc. And STILL people like Michael Baigent insists that there has been no evidence against the main thesis of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", when Henry Lincoln has publically admitted that their work in that book HAS NO SCIENTIFIC VALUE WHATSOEVER!

And what about the so-called researchers like Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince in their extremely poor research in their book "The Templar Revelation" or Margaret Starbird's credentials in her "Woman of the Alabaster Jar"? They are all discredited!

If you really want to get rid of all this "Da Vinci Code" madness, the authors of this documentary hosted by Tony Robinson is great! The other book recommendation is "The Da Vinci Hoax". Feel free to embrace the truth over sensationalism!

Tony Robinson -- with intellectual vigor and some humor, thoroughly investigates the key contentions and themes of Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. The cast of experts are truly authoritative and offer, clear, straighforward, factual information on each point covered. Yes, they offer compelling facts that are backed up convincingly.

This is my fourth Da Vinci "decoding" viewing (this and three others), and this particular one will not leave you guessing or flipping a coin to decide what the real facts are behind Dan Brown's claims and whether he has it all together -- or not.

Most strongly recommended, especially if viewing of the others such as the Da Vinci Delusion, National Geographic's Is it the Real Da Vinci's Code or Breaking the Da Vinci Code has left questions lingering in your mind.

I find it amusing how much energy has gone into disproving bits & pieces of a fictional work. Must the book bear the waiver, "Warning: This is a novel, don't live your life by it"?

The book's verisimilar approach is central to the mood that the author wanted to create he succeed wonderfully at it. To go ahead and prove Dan Brown wrong in his novel's details is silly. But wait, it sells DVDs.

An interesting DVD it is, too, but it won't take away the Da Vinci Code's appeal. If anything, those who watch this DVD will be eager to read Dan Brown's book if they hadn't done so already.

At the end of the day, the feeling that is left is that the DVD producers found a way to go along for the ride in Brown's huge success.

This is a fourth update to my original post. (See below for UPDATE 4)

Before I continue, I would recommend that before buying this DVD, you may want to borrow it from your public library, which is what I did. If they don't have it, you could probably ask them to order it.

Many people who've read (or heard about) Dan Brown's book, "The Da Vinci Code," may fail to recall that the author himself has claimed that the book is a work of fiction mixed with some facts. The facts, according to Mr. Brown, are in reference to the artwork, the existence of certain institutions, etc. And from what I understand, these facts have nothing to do with his fictional interpretation of them for use in his book. But, then again, I'm not Mr. Brown, so ultimately, who knows.

However, I was corrected by a reviewer in regard to the above. This correction has led me to do further investigation on the subject so that I may come to my own conclusions. In response to the comment of Dan Brown being my hero...he's not. I have no hero's. I would like to add too that I do not agree, as do many, that everything in Dan Brown's book is accurate/absolutely true/etc.

One final note in regard to the above. While I have not seen some of the interviews the reviewer mentioned, it wouldn't matter anyway. As you'll see in the comment section of this review, I've recently added another opinion.

I would also like to add that I have found that too often many of us believe written history, as well as oral history, as being the absolute truth (or quite near that), whether it's ancient history or recent history. We can all argue who's correct and who's incorrect based on what this or that scholar/expert said, or this person of prominence wrote, instructed, revealed, etc. Ultimately, in my opinion, I don't think we can ever know the all truth. Otherwise, why would we keep on learning, discovering new things, etc?! However, that's just my opinion.

As a former nun I witnessed a lot of deception and alteration of history from an inside point of view. I personally witnessed the "sweeping under the rug" from recent controversies to the political BS and in-fighting for power. Furthermore, I witnessed "history" being altered right in front of me. As well, being the nun in charge of writing the history of my former community, I was "forced" to alter it in order to protect those whom were benefited by the alteration. So, I'm sure this has often been the case throughout history.

UPDATE 4:

Having watched this DVD several times now, along with other "DaVinci" items, I think it's a good item to have in your personal library if your open to all sides of an issue. While I'm not thrilled with what I perceive to be a sarcastic tone on the interviewer's part, I think a lot of what is said should be considered when one embark's on their "Grail Quest." I would suggest seeing, "The DaVinci Code Decoded" along with this one, maybe even before seeing this one. I would just suggest being open to what they both say.

I guess many people do not quite understand that the value of Dan Brown's book is not in accuracy of biblic facts, so they gladly fight the parts of novel that are obviously fictional. I think concentrating on discussions of Holy blood, and Magdalene marriage distracts reader's attention from the major message of the book. This message is not fictional at all. It is rather
serious idea about danger of destroying male-female balance in human society. A human being consists of two parts. Males and females have very different views on this World so that these views should be well balanced. If one of the parts becomes heavily predominating, it may be dangerous for survival of our species. Dan Brown takes our attention to this, not fictional, problem. He shows that this imbalance has a long history and it might be an underestimated source of many current problems in human society.

Tony Robinson has the skill, through his personality, to convince the viewer of the thoroughness of his research and sincerity. Indeed that is what comes over in this documentary.

Unfortunately when the documentary is closely examined it is not objective. For example Robinson conducts an irrelevant Grail chase and he ridicules Dan Brown's claim that all the art, architecture and secret societies in his book are real. However, Robinson does not prove that any of these are false. It is true that he challenges their significance but that is not the same as proving that Brown was wrong in identifying them.

This documentary lacks the balance that is necessary to make it credible and my impression is that it follows a preconceived notion to present the book as a hoax. Unfortunately Robinson appears to have lost the plot for the book is a work of fiction.