Bloodline (I) (2008) User Reviews

Who Knows What to Think?

[Buddy-51 · 6/10 · 24 January 2012]

In "Bloodline," documentarian Bruce Burgess explores the theory, made popular by Don Brown's recent bestseller "The Da Vinci Code," that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were lovers, that they fled to what is now modern-day France, and that French royalty can trace its lineage back to them and their children. The theory also posits that this "truth" has been carefully guarded by a shadowy organization called The Priory of Sion, and that the Catholic Church will literally stop at nothing to keep the story from getting out. Some contend that The Priory has been letting the details slip out little by little over the course of the centuries – mainly through art works with "coded messages" embedded in them - in a concerted effort to prepare the way for an illumination of the truth which, when finally revealed, will rock the very foundations of Christendom and thereby change the world.

Burgess spends much of the film interviewing people supposedly connected with or at least knowledgeable about the secret, individuals he meets in clandestine, off-the-beaten-path settings who speak in hushed tones about their theories and discoveries, and who claim to live in fear of their lives for even deigning to speak on the subject. The bulk of the second half of the film is taken up exploring what Burgess and amateur archaeologist Ben Hammott claim may be the tomb of Mary Magdalene, located in an isolated area in the south of France.

In all honesty, who knows what to make of this film or the conspiracy theory itself? Half the time the open-minded viewer feels as if he's watching something at least partway plausible – and the other half believing he's probably being made the dupe in an elaborate and colossal hoax. In fact, there are many sites dedicated to debunking the whole theory, including the entry on The Priory of Sion found on Wikipedia.

As a nonbeliever myself, I have to say that nothing put forth by this film strikes me as being any less plausible or historical than what is contained in the gospels themselves – which is to say that I find them both HIGHLY implausible and a-historical. I have no doubt that many people throughout the last two millennia have BELIEVED what Hammott and his minions are proposing, but that doesn't mean that any of it ever actually happened in real life.

Bloodline" is one of those movies that comes replete with a website where you can look up further information on the topic if so inclined. I suggest you look up quite a few others as well.

Depends on your premise...

[akalias · 7/10 · 10 January 2010]

From a purely filmatic point of view, the journalistic objectivity might be a bit skewed, but it is entertaining nonetheless - especially if you enjoyed The Da Vinci Code. Which reveals a lot...

Simply put, devout Christians and Catholics (and maybe even also the moderates) will hate this movie because it goes against their faith, and will probably therefore never ever change their closed-minds about it. End of debate.

Anyone else who has an open mind and sees the definite possibility that Jesus just was an (albeit, outstanding) man (as in non-supernatural with a human male nature) also sees the historical possibility of the marriage between Mary Magdalene and Jesus. And that's not even taking in the account of numerous historical documents that are pro the marriage of Christ (Gospel of Thomas, Judas and Mary Magdalene - the Gnostic Gospels etc.) that are all historically equal and equally legitimate to the Roman-favored texts that ended up in the new testament, that decline that version of history. Historical sociology even tells us that it would be very ill-seen-upon for a Jewish man not to be married by the time of his twenties, making it even more likely Jesus became married.

The Roman Church had to change this story because in their time of religious reformation towards Christianity, the other faiths had demi-gods that could otherwise compete with the new official faith. So besides of all kinds of symbolism being mixed into the practice of worship (symbolic eating of the flesh and blood, the sun-symbols of the halo, the astrological cross etc.) to ensure an easy societal-transformation, they also rewrote the gospels, making Jesus more God-like and Mary Magdalene a mere whore.

So there - it's a repetition of the tired debate "faith vs. logic" and as always the illogical religious people are really getting their panties in a twist over it.

But honestly, I think most thinking people don't even care at all - and why should they? That, on the other hand, would be worth discussing.

As I see it the ultimate question is whether you believe the big-bang (an unavoidable fact of science) was created by some sort of intelligence or simply happened on account of something that may be explained some day. All the religious texts are just lazy answers to big questions that have since been answered logically - and I believe this will also become the case with the big bang. Which way the coin will turn up remains the only valid question where the use of faith is acceptable.

But religion as a concept is so middle-ages. It's time to get over it.

Suspenseful??.....yeah... a little to suspenseful for this kind of documentary

[gebe_vlady · 1/10 · 9 September 2008]

The director clearly wants this to be a sensational piece rather than a scientific one. I mean some scenes clearly are taken from a crime movie for example the Gino Sandri scene (where the guy is threatened in a hand note by someone from the café in which the interview takes place), Nicolas Haywood (wow now this bloke in awesome....i mean talk about acting....with the slow talk and the long pauses LOL)or Ben Hammott (a guy who digs up all kinds of "authentic clues" near a church in France).A little to convenient for my taste. Way to obvious. As for the story itself, absolute BS IMHO, based on circumstantial evidence, "ancient" coded texts, heretic madmen. I mean come on....no hard evidence....none. Just speculation,outrageous cripted maps, outrageous connections and deductions, all based on the eledged findings of a mad priest (which BTW no one knows what he found yet some claim to have) thus dragging this ridiculous conspiracy theory further. I have no doubt that the Vatican are not that saint at all and that they are one of the most manipulative powers in the world, but what goes on in this "film" is mind-blowingly SF and thriller-like all for the sake of sensational.

Two thumbs down for this one

heavily flawed by amateur nature

[mehdimuqtadir · 1/10 · 6 September 2008]

After watching this movie i had to come on IMDb to say my piece. This movie although, very interesting and an enjoyable watch, is utterly ridiculous. Not the subject matter but the purely amateurish attempt to dupe gullible da vinci code fans into watching it. Its a very cynical attempt at making a quick buck on the back of something that so many people hold serious views on.

What makes me angry the most is how stupid do u have to be to think that anything they've found is anything other than pure rubbish. Purely for 1 reason.

When you find something important of an archaeological nature there are a number of procedures u follow. Namely only retards who know they are handling fake goods would actually touch them with their hands. The amateurish way they handle and store there 'finds' leads me to believe they are all fake.

SPOILER WARNING SPOILER WARNING when the guy starts tearing the cloth off the body things get even more ridiculous. Mainly because you don't just start ripping apart and removing shrouds of embalmed mummies. Mainly because u could damage them or even contaminate them. The fact they didn't use any serious forensic techniques to ensure that they kept the integrity of their finds means they knew what they were handling was fake.

think about it, if u really thought u'd just discovered anything of real importance u wouldn't start tearing it apart and touching it with your hands lol. Amateur fakery at its worst.

funny to watch how they could make so many silly mistakes in one movie tho

Da Vinci Code meets Blair Witch Project

[okami36 · 2/10 · 21 August 2010]

There's not much to this movie. The director/narrator/prime interviewer rambles around southwestern France with an Englishman, looking for evidence of the Priory of Sion and the bodies of Jesus, and/or Mary Magdalene, and they do some amateur "archeology" that does nothing but disrupt and disturb the "sites" they find.

With interviews featuring such people as a guy who looks like they found him at a bus stop (my hair looks like a bird's nest, your argument is invalid), another who looks like a failed stage magician (complete with bad "dramatic" lighting, barely contained smirking/laughter, and several liar's tells), and locations that look like miniature sets made of clay, Kleenex, and painted styrofoam, its hard to take this film seriously. Its good for a few laughs, but little else. A trip to the film's website for the "latest news" gets you very little but the cast's activities for the last 3 years, and a pitch to spend a couple thousand dollars for a tour of the region.

Better Than The Da Vinci Code!

[woollyrules · 10/10 · 7 June 2008]

In the first place I was dragged down to the movies by my friends to see what they described as 'a really cool movie' and I was not at all looking forward to seeing it, thinking it would be just as dull as The Da Vinci Code. When I started watching it though I changed my mind. I thought it was suspenseful, interesting, intriguing with great pictures of the tomb. I think it's great that an 'amateur' like Ben Hammott could find something like that. He's just an ordinary guy who became interested in this mystery in this little village in France and decided to investigate.

Me and my friends agree that it was an enjoyable and interesting film and I've recommended it to everyone I know. Well done guys for making such a good film, can't wait to see who's in the tomb and what all the artifacts are and I will keep checking the Bloodline website and Ben Hammott's one for updates - they're both really cool btw!

Considering the huge budget that The Da Vinci Code had and the small budget that Bloodline had these guys have done an awesome job and should be proud of themselves for doing such a great film!

HOAX: principal "archeaologist" has confessed

[speeed001 · 9 May 2012]

Seems the movie is a fraud, staged on a set in an English warehouse.

See:

1) Text of email confession at grailseekers.blogspot.com, search for March 2012 Hoax

2) Podcast of confession at http://latalkradio.com/Rene.php, March 21, 2012.

I'm disappointed, and I now consider Ben Hammott to be beneath the richest con artist or the deadliest drug lord. Preying on one's money or addictions is unconscionable; preying on one's most basic, fundamental beliefs - the universal/cosmic order, correct or not, upon which every aspect of the lives of millions is built - is inhuman.

Even if the questions/possibilities raised by the hoax are interesting as hell. No pun intended.

Seriously...how stupid does this guy think we are??

[punk_sk8 · 4/10 · 3 December 2008]

In terms of pure, fictional, entertainment value? This wasn't the wost film i've ever seen, but PLEASE do not look at the events in this film as fact! I honestly don't know why they even bothered putting this thing together. I just happen to be a huge believer in this particular theory, but I think all the makers of this film have done, is take away any legitimacy from the claim.

Seriously...who the HELL handles archaeological evidence in that manner? Either they are really stupid, or they just don't care if people realise its fake...

I really don't know what else to say....shameful!

One Giant Step Forward

[filmfangal · 9/10 · 18 May 2008]

For me, the most important message of this film is that we are moving forward as a species. We are becoming willing in greater numbers to question what has been fed to us down through the ages. Regardless of whether a "bloodline" really exists -- or if Jesus was, in fact, married -- didn't matter as much to me as the sense of hope I felt. The film left me with a very positive feeling for our collective future because the theater was PACKED with enthusiastic people, and important questions were being asked. The film is really very exciting and moving. Who doesn't LOVE a good treasure hunt? Fascinating and original. I recommend it highly.

don't believe the hype

[anselms · 2/10 · 4 October 2008]

after Sunday roast i was plonked in front of the TV to watch a ground breaking piece of film making,after about ten minutes of viewing i thought some one had got the turkey back out of the oven but no it was on the screen,my impression was it was a bank roller for the film company.I've done a bit of bottle digging and they don't come out of the ground with just a bit of dirt on them,they are 9 times out of ten stained,when a boulder was moved to reveal a bottle what do we see dry earth,no worms or bugs under it and the way they handle so called historic artifacts was outrages,you put a pair of gloves on at least.the so called tomb,i mean isn't there no respect for the dead unless it was a dummy.what made me laugh was the air of danger surrounding the film,guys not saying too much lest them from above get upset i mean why didn't the camera crew get a kicking from a bunch of paid up franciscan monks,im no catholic or Christian but found the film confusing,so what Jesus didn't die on the cross big deal but wait there is a blood line which hints at a messiah to come out of the hinterlands to save us,but isn't that what christians preach with the endtime in revelations etc,and yet the film seems to be saying that the church is the enemy but the church invented this story in the first place.bottom line if i had a house id put it on the fact that the catholic church funded this amusing flick in the vain attempt to get people attending church again.the priest at the end got it spot on when he said christians had abused,killed,raped,robbed and taxed the people,they ve done from the start up until now.ohh the zion members have infiltrated the vatican,give me a break,what makes them think we are so bothered to give a xxxx...do you think the forces will get me now....

Bloodline is decent entertainment but a really bad documentary

[respzik8 · 4/10 · 18 May 2009]

Let me first say that I am not someone who regularly posts comments on movies. However, I get so disturbed by film making posing as factual journalism that sometimes I find I cannot avoid comment. This is one such time. Don't get me wrong, Bloodline is good solid entertainment. I watched with great interest and excitement as the elements of a so called plot by the Vatican to cover up the true history of Jesus and Mary Magdalene was revealed in step by step film noir fashion. The trouble is that there is nothing in the film that links any of these seemingly miraculous discoveries to the point that the movie is trying to make. Lots of suspicious artifacts are uncovered and revealed as true relics simply by proclamation by the people making the discovery. Some attempt is made is one case to back the claim with scientific evidence but the incredibly amateurish method of uncovering the relics, the lack of proper excavating procedure and artifact handling methods just adds to the suspicious nature of the claims. Everything discovered is contaminated by the people making the discovery. This is the worst form of amateur archeology I have ever seen and as a scientist myself I can only say how absolutely disastrous such a procedure is to substantiating authenticity. All that aside, the evidence presented is simply entertainment detail with nothing to directly connect it to the claim and I would expect, the premise of the documentary. Let me say simply that it's OK to make a film expressing a controversial point of view about any subject. The da Vinci Code showed there was real interest and big money in it for something done well. The problem with Bloodline is that although it was done reasonably well, there were too many loose ends that were just dropped when the movie ended. As much as I didn't like The da Vinci Code at least that movie had some plausible explanation for the connection between discoveries and the theme of the movie, and it provided at least some kind of closure. Bloodline has none! I expect more from a documentary.

Interesting, But Unfortunately Founded on Baloney

[gavin6942 · 4/10 · 27 September 2012]

One man's journey into the world of the so-called "Bloodline" conspiracy, at the heart of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code...

This documentary examines a great conspiracy, and uncovers some interesting food for thought -- particularly about the three men killed within 24 hours of each other. There seems to be an interesting history behind the Priory of Sion, assuming such an organization even exists.

I notice that others have compared this to the "Blair Witch Project", and that is not unfair. Much of it involves a shaky camera following one guy around -- a guy who clearly might be a bit too open to fringe ideas.

Sadly, whatever truth is uncovered here, it is greatly undermined by the revelation that "the tomb man" and his discoveries are a hoax (and he has admitted as much). So, you know, it is even harder to sort fact from fiction when you have to discount almost half of what you see... perhaps a re-editing?

Divine Debacle

[sunnyorange · 1/10 · 30 March 2014]

"It's pretentious to create art just for the sake of stroking the artists ego." ~ Lou Reed

Was so looking forward to this documentary -- to view previously uncovered materials, experts offering opinions & some valid discussions. However, during the first 19min of the film, the director seems to be suffering from the grandiose idea that the viewer would rather listen to him pontificate whilst getting slightly sea-sick from the choppy camera work, than to be presented with material.

For that reason & that alone, simply refuse to recommend this film to anyone seeking information on Sangreal theories.

Suspenseful, shocking, and brilliant!

[cinemactivist · 10/10 · 8 April 2008]

I was lucky enough to see Bloodline before it hits theaters next month.

The documentary follows the director around France who is piecing together clues from the past to figure out if Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a child. He interviews members of the secret Priory of Sion and those who have also been searching for the truth about this long held mystery. As the film goes on, the mystery unfolds.

Anyone who is interested in the Priory of Sion, Mary Magdalene, the Catholic church, or Christianity should see this film. It's beautifully shot, suspenseful, and an overall well crafted documentary. You will sit on the edge of your seat during the entire film, begging for more.

Inaccurate & contrived

[nhill64 · 1/10 · 24 April 2012]

I just watched this film and I can't believe how many 10 star reviews I see. This film is full of inaccuracies and suppositions that, in the end, lead no where. Definitely a De Vinci dud. During one scene, when a Frenchman was being interviewed, supposedly after the camera's were turned off a man came over and handed the Frenchmen a note. The Frenchman refused to speak after that. We saw all of this take place. How could this be if the cameras were off? And if the note-passing scene was a re-enactment how did they get the Frenchman to play along when he was supposedly too afraid to speak? I watch documentaries more than any other type of film so I was hoping to see good investigation uncover some cold hard facts. Instead I saw a boring pseudo-documentary. Honestly I haven't seen such a poorly done documentary since "Paul Is Dead!"

Very Thought Provoking Film 10/10

[arcadia-18 · 10/10 · 4 June 2008]

A super film which I recommend you go and see.

When I first thought about going to see this film I checked the web for reviews and because of some of them were bad I nearly didn't go to see it but I am very glad I did. I don't know if these people writing the bad reviews are Christians or have even seen it, I know some of the worst comments are on Christian websites , and I have nothing against Christians or any other religion, and maybe they feel threatened by the subject matter of the film. I know the Vatican has already tried to dismiss the film as nonsense so this may have had an influence on some reviewers. Also there has been talk that some of the evidence is slightly shaky by some Renne-le-Château researchers, but then these researchers have their own research, book writing career, etc. to protect so their opinions are very bias against the film. Ignore everything you read about this film, good or bad, and just go and see it for yourself with an open mind. I read another comment in a review here about the cinema audience liking the film and I must agree, the same was with the people in the screening I saw. When the film was over 4 people, who had not seen the film, entered the cinema and started quoting scriptures from the bible. Needless to say they were booed constantly until they left. This is evidence that the Christian church are worried by this film and the questions it raises. I think all Christians should go and see Bloodline so they too can join in the debate that will surly follow over the coming months. It is a great film on more than one level and if the Vatican is worried by the points raised in the film then it must have been built on very shaky ground indeed. Perhaps it is time they come clean about some of the secrets they keep hidden away on the true story of their church. The present Pope only inherited the lies and I think it would make the church stronger if they were more open and honest about their history.

Riveting, Intriguing and informative - A must see 10 Stars

[indianabones-1 · 10/10 · 5 June 2008]

Ignore all the controversy about this film and the comments from those who have not even seen the film yet, go and view it for yourself you will not regret it. It is a cool film and the best cinema documentary I have seen. Riveting, Intriguing and informative. I see that the Vatican had a spokesman appear on TV to attack the film and many Catholic web sites responded in kind, so there must be something revealed in the film they are afraid of, although I believe if Christians just went and saw the film it may help them to raise questions that the Vatican needs to answer. The film will in no way bring the Vatican crashing down, far from it, it may even help them if they would just put their hands up and say Yes in the past we have made mistakes and hidden some truths but let us wipe the slate clean by revealing what we know to make the church stronger and more in line to the message Jesus wanted us to follow.

Bloodline is an amazing film

[iamafunkymonkey · 10/10 · 14 May 2008]

I was taken to the premiere of this film in NY by my boyfriend who is interested in this sort of thing, yawn. I have sat through many of his documentary films on TV so I wasn't looking forward to sitting through another at the cinema but as he had already brought the tickets I went with none of the enthusiasm he felt. But this all changed as soon as we entered the packed cinema, the atmosphere was electrifying and listening to all the others talking excitedly about the film, it wasn't long before I too became excited to see it.

As soon as the film started I was drawn into the story, wanting, no hungering, to know more, hanging on every word that was said, and every image shown. I don't want to give anything away about the story here but the image at the end stayed with me long after the film had finished. When the film ended a wave of applause spread across the cinema by everyone in the room and I found myself joining in.

There followed a Q&A session next with the Director and Producer of the film, which was engrossing and their answers to the many questions put to them by the audience was very interesting.

I am sure this film will receive mixed reviews due to its controversial nature, but I can tell you everyone I have spoken to who has seen the film, thoroughly enjoyed it and I am sure you too will not be disappointed.

I have never felt this way about a film before, the closest if I had to make a choice would be Dirty Dancing, but Guys, please don't let that put you off, Bloodline is nothing like Dirty Dancing. Bloodline is one of those films that you will be thinking about long after the final credits and I cannot recommend this film enough.

I am certain the issues it explores and the evidence revealed, will be debated for many years to come, so don't be left out, go and see it while you can.

Michael Moore Takes On the Catholic Church?

[grathy · 8/10 · 25 May 2008]

This film extends the investigation over the bloodline between Jesus and Mary, but provides some additional information that is quite profound. I'm not a big fan of documentaries, but since I was raised Catholic, I found this film to be quite fascinating, and full of ramifications, should the investigation prove to be true.

I have seen a few of Michael Moore's movies, and this one is similar to his genre of film-making. I found the line of reasoning plausible and quite illuminating. Given all the trouble that the Catholic church has endured in recent years, this is the icing on the cake.

I'm familiar with the music of Miriam Cutler, as I knew her through some fellow musicians when I was in college, when she wrote and participated in a very colorful jazz band. I still have one of her early recordings, and it's a real gem. It's great to see her outstanding work applied to such an endeavor.

Must See Da Vinci Code - documentary with a conspiracy twist

[parhat · 10/10 · 4 February 2009]

I watched the movie DaVinci Code. It was long and boring. However this documentary DaVinci code, whether you believe it or not, has a strange conspiracy while making the movie and makes it all the more intriguing watch. Coverups, strange death of Lord Lichfield before getting interview for this movie, infiltration of the Roman Catholic Church into CIA, and Masonic Lodges, strange man who gave notes to a Priori Scion to shut up (which he did), the going to the location where the "original secret parchment" relating to the Bloodline of Jesus, makes an intriguing Spy vs. Spy type of movie. Mind you, I am not a Christian, have little interests in DaVinci Code or even another DaVinci code movie, got me really up and running as is this documentary is done with the intrigues of a real movie. What makes it so interesting is it's suppose to be a documentary with conspiracy background makes it all too intriguing. A must see movie, for both the skeptics and believers alike.

What if the Premise of This Storyline...

[wanderer2008 · 20 December 2010]

The film asks the question: "What if the greatest story ever told was a lie?" Perhaps the question that should be asked is: "What if the premise and storyline in this movie is a lie?" What if somebody recently placed the parchments in bottles for the archaeological scavenger hunt in order to find the wooden chest? What if somebody recently bought some ancient coins, an ungenterium, a common clay cup, and a glass phial from one of the antiquities dealers in Jerusalem several years ago and places it in the wooden chest? What if somebody recently forged all those parchments? What if somebody recently recreated a plastic mummified "body" of Mary Magdalene (actually just her head and hands)? What if somebody had an agenda to attempt to disprove the deity of the Lord Jesus and His bodily resurrection? What if they wanted to lead people away from the truth of the greatest story ever told, and also try and cash in on the run away best selling fictitious novel, the Da Vinci Code?

This movie is just another Hollywood hoax. Period.

A for effort, E for Stupidity

[deepak-singh-mech-914-711075 · 22 August 2012]

I noticed that the "Shroud" was different than the one in the old footage shown in the first half. I Paused the movie and searched on internet. I found out that Ben had already confessed about faking the discovery and planting the clues by himself.

Bruce could have caught it in time. He seems to have no eye for detail. He got tricked like a fifth grader. And I got tricked for a worth of four packs of cigarettes. And I spent 5 more minutes in writing this review than actually finishing the rest of it.

An honest approach by a not very observant director ruined by a con artist's ambition to feel important.

Use your heads

[christopher-cole83 · 8 June 2013]

I don't put any stock into the whole "Bloodline Conspiracy" that seems to be the basis for books and movies now, so going into this movie upfront I already have a bias against it. It seems however my bias was justified.

WARNING-THE REST OF THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS

Take away the fact that the guy who found the tomb admitted that it was a sound stage in England where they filmed, you still have a lot of inconsistencies to deal with in the "documentary" itself. Such as:

In first Century Jewish tradition, shrouds were removed from a body once the flesh had decomposed. The bones were then gathered up and placed in a box. Body's were not left in shrouds.

Plus, any burial shroud left in such the condition that it was found would have greatly decayed, if not disintegrated completely.

As it was mentioned before, the way the "artifacts" that were found and handled is, at best, very amateurish. That isn't to say that great discoveries haven't been made by accident, but if you're looking for something that could potentially blow the lid off of 2000 years of Christian history, you want to take someone with you who is better than an amateur.

Plus, all the discoveries just seemed way too convenient. Are we really supposed to believe that bottles buried in the ground just suddenly appeared at the time a camera was rolling? Wouldn't weathering, erosion, etc have revealed those bottles with those messages long before had they not been faked?

And what of all those mysterious deaths? That too seemed rather convenient to drive a plot along rather than a journalist wanting to get some answers.

There are just too many mistakes made to come to any other conclusion than it was an attempt to capitalize on "The Da Vinci Code" and nothing more.