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.

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.

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

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.