Da Vinci Code to get Government Censorship Committee Ban

He's gone. But elements of his and his party's "New Moral Order" remain. This time the Government is again appeasing elements of the Christian fringe and banning parts of the Da Vinci Code movie. They are also planning to require the movie to add a disclaimer as to the movie being "fiction". Funny, the film does not promote itself as a documentary. Therefore it seems that it must already be fiction. Perhaps the Government Censorship Committee should read a dictionary instead of wasting time making believe they, of all governments, are part of the Grand Inquisition. My hope is that the producers refuse to release the movie in Thailand so that, like turning away tourists, the theatre owners of Thai society can suffer the consequences of anti-free speech stupidity and the final demise of this government will be hastened.

As a result of this, another government STAB at free speech, I will not go to a Thai movie house ever again and I encourage all of you to act that way, as well.


The Da Vinci Code will be cut 10 minutes

Censorship Committee have decided to cut the final 10 minutes of "The Da Vinci Code" as the parts effect the faith and belief of Christianity.

"The committee also agree that the movie should have a message before opening credit that the movie was produced from a fiction, not a real story," said Chavana Mahitchartkul, a mass communication expert, who is a committee member.

She was speaking after attending a review on the controversial movie on Christ which is scheduled to open in Thailand on Thursday. Representatives of local Christian groups also participated in the review.

Four major local Christian groups yesterday submitted a request to the Royal Thai Police asking that the controversial Hollywood movie "The Da Vinci Code" be banned from Thailand.

The movie, produced by Sony Pictures from Dan Brown's novel of the same title. The Christian groups claimed that The movie "distorts the Bible and violates the dignity of the Jesus." They believed that the novel and the movie deliberately insult Jesus Christ.

The movie depicts Jesus as only a man, and not entitled to the prophecy, as believed by Christians worldwide. Moreover, in the movie he is "married to Mary Magdalene and fathers a son with her, which is completely false", he added.

The film, starring Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou, will be shown at the Cannes Film Festival later this month.

The Nation

Is this the most important thing you can find to get all up-in-arms about? Just buy the DVD, or see the movie overseas, and shut up.

And I can't imagine many (or any?) of us here following your inane suggestion to boycott seeing all movies in Thailand because of it. I'm sure theater owners are quaking in their boots at this very moment...

I will not go to a Thai movie house ever again and I encourage all of you to act that way, as well.


The Da Vinci Code will be cut 10 minutes



Not sure that your boycott will make the headlines tomorrow (but thank you for playing!), and while the sentiment may be admirable, it may be a bit of an overreaction for 10 minutes of a film. There are other censorship issues to be a lot more angry about -- like the banning in some (savage) places of films (like Brokeback Mountain [okay, I'll admit, I never bothered to see it and am not particularly interested]), or the state-sponsored suppression of films which expose important socio-political ills (e.g. A Quiet American). Beyond that, Thai cinemas are quite nice, and it would be a shame to boycott them!

Your ill thought-out little boycott would also be hurting the group of people (the theater owners) that detest the censorship board more than anyone else. Why don't you chain yourself to a tree outside the censor's office in protest?

If you hadn't noticed before, Thai people take religion very seriously. You don't honestly think they would allow a film -- albeit fictional -- that triviliazed the Buddha to be shown here. Do you? You probably wouldn't think twice about it. It would be hypocritical not to extend the same treatment to a film trivializing another religion to which a large number of Thai people subscribe. Don't you think?

Anyway, Dorothy...this ain't Kansas. Why don't you boycott the whole country by going away and not coming back?

[jimnbkk]

When I was in LOS in February, they were selling DVD copies of this movie on the street. It still hasn't been released here. I wish I had bought it then!!! I have no idea how good the copies are, or how they got ahold of the movie to make the copies. Anyway, the censors suppressing the last ten minutes strikes me as closing the barn doors after all the horses have already escapted.

[RonanTheBarbarian]

Anyway, Dorothy...this ain't Kansas.

No, it is not, but it is not Alice's Wonderland either, or at least it is not meant to be.

Just look at yourself Boygeenyus. Your determination to defend the doings of the Thailand authorities at all costs has put you into the ludicrous position of defending the Thai censors idea of letting the "Da Vinci Code" to be shown, but with the last ten minutes cut off.:idea:

Cutting off the last ten minutes ?

This is a suspense thriller, F.F.S.!!

If a cinema owner tries to cut the film ten minutes before the end, the audience will riot! :blackeye: :bom: :blackeye:

That sounds like something out of Alice in Wonderland all right - the Queen of Hearts!

I guess it the Thai authorities decided to finish bridges five metres before the far riverbank, you would defend that too, Boygeenyus?

Just look at yourself Boygeenyus

Yup. The same guy who supports Thaksin and wishes he would come back to power in rigged elections. He supports entrapment, censorship, ...

A friend of mine was talkig about her church this past Sunday - apparently the priest spent a great deal of his sermon debasing the DaVinci Code. Much like a priest I used to work for who had gone on a crusade against the Harry Potter books (even *after* the Vatican said there were in no way harmful to the morals or faith of children).

This just pissed me off - why do Christians have to make a big fuss about everything? Lets face it - the best thing that could happen to any creative work is to have some church or another pissed off about it. It makes the news, the talk shows etc. - and most importantly, it makes people like me want to see/read it, even if I had no interest before.

I have to wonder about the moral obligation involved with this. OK, you think it is wrong, so you feel you must complain lest your silence seem like complicity...

Hmmm - sounds like Vatican during the Holocaust...or pretty much every church in the world since the Iraq invasion/occupation.

What the Thai government is going to do is make sure that anyone who sees or hears about this movie becomes bound and determined to see the rest. If I was in the bootleg DVD business - this is where I'd put my money!

Just look at yourself Boygeenyus. Your determination to defend the doings of the Thailand authorities at all costsI fear that when it comes to Thailand and the Thai authorities, Uncle Pol Pot (aka. boygeenyus) reminds one of those Roman Catholic converts who are described as "more Catholic than the Pope". His moral sense is so attenuated that there are periodic rants about "sex tourists" ie. most members of this Forum coming the Thailand and offing boys in go-go bars, but when pressed UPP admits that he too goes to go-go bars and offs boys; apparently that's OK because he lives in Thailand and therefore isn't a tourist. To retain the religious imagery for a moment (since we are, after all, in a thread about a religious fantasy, although not one with the same sado-masochistic overtones as Mel Gibson's snuff movie of 2005), UPP/boygeenyus is one of those persons mentioned in Matthew 23.27

[Surfcrest]

If you hadn't noticed before, Thai people take religion very seriously. You don't honestly think they would allow a film -- albeit fictional -- that triviliazed the Buddha to be shown here. Do you?

I read both Da Vinci Code and Holy Blood Holy Grail while parked down at Jomtien this year.

I don't recall anything about Buddha being mentioned in either book.
Did they put something in the movie about Buddha?

One thing to note, that although it does undermine some elements of Roman Catholicism it also supports it to a great extent. All the fantasy or miracles entwinded into an incredible story are stripped away so that he focus returns to the message. Dan Brown's prequel to Da Vinci is titled Angels And Demons. It explores the foundations of the Vatican and the Illiminati message.

While this doesn't have a lot to deal with Gay Thailand, its interesting that the Thais would give a hoot about Da Vinci. They are surely not going to understand it unless they know a great deal about Christian faith and the history of its evolution since Christ.

Surfcrest

Oscar Wilde is credited with describing fox hunters as "The unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible". There must be some similarly pithy comment for the Da Vinci Code. I don't know how it begins, but it ends "... in support of the improbable"

"The same guy who supports Thaksin and wishes he would come back to power in rigged elections."

What ARE you talking about, you silly old queen? Quit your braying, and putting words into people's mouths. When have I ever said I even LIKED Thaksin?

Anyway, I think you all have an IQ of 50 between you. I'm not in favor of censorship of the Da Vinci Code. I'm in favor of 1) not attempting to change Thailand according to my own, Western standards; 2) seeing that the Thais extend the same reverence they have of Buddhism to other religions, instead of hypocritically censoring things ONLY that cast an unwanted light on Buddhism.

In any case, it's of absolutely no matter here or there, because I quit going to Thai theaters a long time ago. I'm tired of being frustrated by people nattering away on their cellphones during the films, projectionists who can't focus, and 30 minutes of advertising before the main event.

[fedssocr]

Will they require a disclaimer on every biblical film to say they are fiction? I had to laugh at the irony of this whole thing since to my way of thinking the whole Bible is basically a work of fiction. While there are many actual historical events in it, it is still largely mythology and fiction.

[cottmann]

Quote: I'm in favor of 1) not attempting to change Thailand according to my own, Western standards; 2) seeing that the Thais extend the same reverence they have of Buddhism to other religions, instead of hypocritically censoring things ONLY that cast an unwanted light on Buddhism.

A viewpoint that is eminently reasonable, particularly for guests in a country, but at what stage do the rights of believers - in any religion - outweigh the rights of unbelievers? Surely, if people object to a movie's message, then they can stay away. And considering the message of the book "The Da Vince Code," this sort of logic would suggest that the last pages of the book also be excised because they might offend believers.

Personally, I believe that all religion is a farce and should be open territory for parody and criticism from all sides. You're not going to find me sitting on Buddha's head in protest, though, or flailing my arms at the Thai's decision to censor "Little Buddha" or "Da Vinci Code". It's not my country, and not my culture.

[cottmann]

Personally, I believe that all religion is a farce and should be open territory for parody and criticism from all sides. You're not going to find me sitting on Buddha's head in protest, though, or flailing my arms at the Thai's decision to censor "Little Buddha" or "Da Vinci Code". It's not my country, and not my culture.

Given the critics' poor reviews of the movie at its opening in Cannes, seeing the movie might be a waste of money anyway:

"Whistles instead of applause were all that greeted the end of (the) film, and worse than that, the 2,000-strong audience even burst out laughing at the movie's key moment. "I didn't like it very much. I thought it was almost as bad as the book. Tom Hanks was a zombie. Thank goodness for Ian McKellen. It was overplayed, there was too much music and it was much too grandiose," .....Thus book's detractors will no doubt be comforted to hear that when Hanks reveals who is supposedly the last surviving descendant of Jesus, the Cannes audience couldn't hold back their laughter. "At the high point, there was laughter among the journalists. Not loud laughs, but a snicker and I think that says it all," ....Other critics said the 2 1/2-hour film was confusing to those who hadn't read the book. "People were confused, there was no applause, just silence," ....."I have only read half the book, and then I got bored. It's terrible," ....."It was really disappointing. The dialogue was cheesy. The acting wasn't too bad, but the film is not as good as the book," ..

According to the critics, both Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou are disappointing, Ian McKellen is very good, but "Paul Bettany is suitably menacing as a self-flagellating albino monk on a mission to kill. "

The last might appeal to some.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 47,00.html (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19165950-16947,00.html)

What disturbs me about the censoship issue is that as a Christian, many Christians are way too radical and do not present the majority Christain view..............whatever that is!!!

This is a fictional movie. It is not rying to "recruit" people. Some "Christians" have spread untruths and done unspeakable acts against humanity as part of their faith. Yes there have been good works done by some.

Is there an email address so I may send "my" Christian view to the censoship Board.

I'm in favor of 1) not attempting to change Thailand according to my own, Western standards; 2) seeing that the Thais extend the same reverence they have of Buddhism to other religions, instead of hypocritically censoring things ONLY that cast an unwanted light on Buddhism.Two mutually exclusive aims if ever I saw them

Is there an email address so I may send "my" Christian view to the censoship Board.At the same time, dear boy, I hope you'll point out to them how living in a seaside brothel and presumably partaking of its pleasures fits in with Christian practices

....the best thing that could happen to any creative work is to have some church or another pissed off about it. It makes the news, the talk shows etc. - and most importantly, it makes people like me want to see/read it, even if I had no interest before.

If you are suggesting a...um...Hollywood publicity agent might have deliberately set a cat among the pidgeons...I agree--And think he did a pretty good job of it, even though the pidgeons in question are so reactionairy a little whiff of kitty-litter would have done as well...I mean, Jesus Christ Superstar got some holier-than-thou tits in a lather. Surely they remember the Legion of Decency: books movies that undoubatedly did better for being banned: Martin Luther, Underwater, The French Line; (Hell, I only went to see Underwater because it was banned--I don't even like boobs!) and when, 'Banned in Boston,' was a sure-fire ticket to success.
Even though the ending falls flat; this silly book has prompted (Feeding-frenzy #1) a court case and more than twenty other books either refuting or defending it. Whether out of righteous indignation or the scent of money the sales roll on and on--And a hack writer got a movie deal (Feeding-frenzy #2) and another book deal.

BTW: I don't like censorship but axing that crappy ending might be an improvement.
And, could it be?....The Thai censors are just waiting for Hollywood to kick in 'their' share of the goodies?



....living in a seaside brothel and presumably partaking of its pleasures fits in with Christian practices.
It's a fact: travel statistics consistantly prove christians much prefer seaside brothels over land-locked brothels, the exception being Las Vegas.

boygeenyus wrote:
I'm in favor of 1) not attempting to change Thailand according to my own, Western standards; 2) seeing that the Thais extend the same reverence they have of Buddhism to other religions, instead of hypocritically censoring things ONLY that cast an unwanted light on Buddhism.

Two mutually exclusive aims if ever I saw them



Yes, dear Homi, I agree. I could have expressed my statement much more clearly.

1) I do not attempt to change Thailand according to my own cultural/intellectual/moral standards/beliefs;

2) I appreciate it when the Thais extend the same reverence they have of Buddhism to other religions, instead of hypocritically censoring thigns ONLY that cast an unwanted light on Buddhism. I do not try to influence them one way or another, though, nor do I lodge a "protest" or flail my arms, gnash my teeth, or tear at my hair in frustration when they don't.

Some of you may remember that the same issue turned up many years ago in regard to the Keanu Reeves movie "Little Buddha". The Buddhist lobby convinced the censorship board that the movie was disrespectful to Buddhism, and had it banned. I appreciate that the same standards were applied in the case of "The Da Vinci Code", and think it is refreshing (and just) they were.

HOWEVER, personally (and let me spell this out clearly for the dimmer, more reactionary members of our forum): I would have preferred that neither film's release had been interfered with.

[Smiles]

It's terrible," ....."It was really disappointing. The dialogue was cheesy. The acting wasn't too bad, but the film is not as good as the book," .. According to the critics, both Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou are disappointing, Ian McKellen is very good, but "Paul Bettany is suitably menacing as a self-flagellating albino monk on a mission to kill ... "
Not surprising given the Director (IMHO).
Ron Howard is a film maker who's never seen a maudlin cliche that he didn't clutch tightly to his breast . . . . and then take to even more ludicrous & sappy heights. I enjoyed one film of his ("what's it's name?") about Apollo 13 (14? 9? 16?) but it was the tight and gut-wrenching story itself which made it . . . Howard was just around to wave Old Glory at every opportunity.

I read the book (Da Vinci Code that is) a year ago (the story was interesting, the writing mediocre). Thought then, and think now, what's all the fuss about?

Coming at it from a different perspective than the Western kneejerk frothing-at-the-mouth-over-all-types-of-censorship ... try this on for size:

I doubt that a change in government parties or leaders is going to make one iota of difference to the Thai Censor Board's (is that what's it's called?) predilection to meddle.
I wonder whether their enthusiasm toward chopping movies up has more to do with the Thai cultural value (deeply engrained) of not allowing one's self to cause offense to others . . . to be "impolite" in a public way . . . to make others feel "uncomfortable".

Thais take on this behavior on a personal level, and on a national level quite often (witness the dropping of paper birds by airplane all over the southern provinces during the worst of the upheaval there last year. Can you imagine the Bush Admin thinking to do that to try calming the waters of Mexican indignation over American immigration policy?).

I just wonder whether the folks on the Censor Board are acting in a similar fashion in their foolish censoring of a movie than may, possibly, give offense to ... er .... an amorphous "someone", or an amorphous "group". Another interesting Thai behavior filed under "TiT".

Just speculation on my part . . .

Cheers ...

) seeing that the Thais extend the same reverence they have of Buddhism to other religions, instead of hypocritically censoring things ONLY that cast an unwanted light on Buddhism.

As Buddhists, Thais, or as government officials of a Democracy, the Thais should mind their own business, especially on issues like this. The Da Vinci Code author and producers are all westerners, born Christian, at least. I'm a westerner and I approve of the Da Vinci Code plot. If there is any "insult" with the fiction then it is an internal matter to be discussed by westerners, and not subject to the holy dictates of the Thai Government Censorship Committee, taking sides in a western controversy.

Thus book's detractors will no doubt be comforted to hear that when Hanks reveals who is supposedly the last surviving descendant of Jesus, the Cannes audience couldn't hold back their laughter

George Bush?

Thus book's detractors will no doubt be comforted to hear that when Hanks reveals who is supposedly the last surviving descendant of Jesus, the Cannes audience couldn't hold back their laughter

BoyGeenyus?

[wowpow]

Breaking News: Censors reverse tack, Da Vinci Code approved

BANGKOK: -- The police censorship board has upheld the appeal of film distributors, and will allow The Da Vinci Code to be shown uncut and unchanged. "The panel voted six to five to keep the movie as it is," said James Dhiraputra of Buena Vista International, the company which made the appeal.

Just one remnant remains of the censorship. Exhibitors must show a disclaimer at the start and end of the film stating that it is fiction. Christian groups have protested against its thesis that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had children. The decision reverses a decision by the same board 24 hours previously, which ordered that the film's last 10 minutes be cut, and changes made to the subtitles and opening. Protestant groups had urged that the film be banned or at least cut. The major Christian church in Thailand, the Catholics, have made no public comment on the controversial film.

According to Reuters, the evangelical Christian alliance which brought the censorship request accepted the final decison. "We respect the ruling," Thongchai Pradabchananurat, chairman of the Protestant Coordinating Committee told the news agency. "We have already expressed our feelings in this case and we will just have to forgive."

Foreign film critics, allowed to see the film for the first time today, just 24 hours before it opens in Thai theatres, roundly and apparently unanimously panned it.
Reuters reported that at a press screening late on Tuesday in Cannes, members of the audience laughed at the thriller's pivotal moment, and the end of the $125 million picture was greeted with stony silence. "'Da Vinci' never rises to the level of a guilty pleasure. Too much guilt. Not enough pleasure," said Kirk Honeycutt of the Hollywood Reporter. Other critics agreed.

Lee Marshall of Screen International told the news agency: "I thought it was plodding and there was a complete lack of chemistry between Audrey Tautou and Tom Hanks." For 24 hours, Thailand was the only country on Earth which agreed to censor the film. After the Tuesday decision by the film censorship board, the distributors appealed - and won.

Pol Maj Gen Somwong Lipiphun, who serves as chairman of the censorship committee, told reporters this evening that the film "can be screened without any cuts," a total reversal of Tuesday's censorship.

--Bangkokpost.com, Agencies 2006-05-17

Slow down and wipe the foam from your mouth, dear. You're not making any sense.

The Thai authorities are not demanding that changes be made to the film worldwide, only as it is shown in Thailand to Thai audiences. Why that gets you so riled up, I have no idea.

Well, thank God they've reversed their decision. A major victory for free speech in Thailand: we can now see this crappy movie in its entirety, and the Thai cinema industry won't be destroyed by our friend's boycott.

But...but...if the Buddhists can get "Little Buddha" banned, why can't the Christians get "Da Vinci Code" banned? I guess not all religions' sensitivities are of equal concern to the Thai censors.

For 24 hours, Thailand was the only country on Earth which agreed to censor the film.

I am happy to see that the Thai Government backed down on this, as they rightly should have. And I see that it WAS a fringe group of Christians that they appeased, not the majority Catholics in Thailand.

Like MI3, I will not be running out to the theatres for this one anyway. Based on the reviews of MI3 and DVC, Hollywood is producing some pretty lame movies of late, and only have themselves to blame for poor revenues.

As to "fiction", well that's another issue. DVC as well as "The Messiah" and the bible should ALL be labelled "fiction". I hope the Thai Government is consistent from now on in labelling fictional movies as "fiction".

Breaking News: Censors reverse tack, Da Vinci Code approved

BANGKOK: -- The police censorship board has upheld the appeal of film distributors, and will allow The Da Vinci Code to be shown uncut and unchanged. "The panel voted six to five to keep the movie as it is," said James Dhiraputra of Buena Vista International, the company which made the appeal.


My god, Arnoid -- your boycot on Thai cinemas did the trick! And after only one day!!!

You have got to be kidding.

After all your self-righteous posturing, breathless huffing and puffing, and look-at-me indignation...you're not even going to go see the film now that you got your way?

As I wrote: "my" Christian view.

you're not even going to go see the film now that you got your way?

I suppose when it gets to network TV I'll watch it.

I had forgotten about the "Little Buddha" controversy. I suppose that the Thais absolutely should express their indignation at someone sitting on a Buddha head. I remember also a promotional graphic for The Beach getting the ax as it depicted a bunch of slob westerners standing on a sleeping Buddha. But I don't think in either case the movie was offensive to Buddhism and don't believe either that the producers had any intent to offend. And we saw how Muslims reacted to a few harmless cartoons about their prophet. I do remember some "artistic" depictions of the Virgin Mary getting the ax in the USA as well.

[cottmann]

.... I do remember some "artistic" depictions of the Virgin Mary getting the ax in the USA as well.

I'll forego the obvious comment about ambiguous postings, though the imagery it conjures up is remarkable. I find nothing remarkable in the activities of various Christian groups to control what others (including non-Christians) see and think - the Roman Catholic Church has had a Propaganda Office for centuries! It is objectionable, however.

As I wrote: "my" Christian view.Aha - another Humpty Dumpty. I look forward to your list of acknowledged Christians who have made unequivocal statements about the compatibility of promiscuous sex and Christian belief

Whoa...some seriously stinky reviews!

www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/ (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/)

I do remember some "artistic" depictions of the Virgin Mary getting the ax in the USA as well.

There was a fuss over Dali's Nude Crucifixion (.....Fiction?)--But I think it's still hanging...and still hung.



Christian groups have protested against its thesis that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had children.

That's simply not be true!
He was gay!
Hung out with twelve guys; a couple were sailors. One was his brother. (Incest?)
Mary Magdalene was a fag-hag with a foot fetish.

A recent book proves he didn't die. They took him down alive (Citing the Jewish burial laws to take him away before sundown.), he patched himself up and got out of town, unnoticed, during the passover orgies.

Another book claims he'd previously been in China...as Confucius.

...And about that Japanese goddess who rides across the moon....

I look forward to your list of acknowledged Christians who have made unequivocal statements about the compatibility of promiscuous sex and Christian beliefAnd still waiting (unexpectantly - it doesn't exist)