Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

(Film Review) The Da Vinci Code

This morning I went and saw The Da Vinci Code with weaselbitch at the local moving picture establishment.

I was intrigued to see the film even though I thought the book was a real disappointment and a waste of trees and time (you can see my book review here: Saturday 9th July 2005). I've said for a while that I thought it would be a better film than it was a book (which is something I will rarely say as books give you so much more that is not captured on celluoid) so was interested to see the film despite all my opinions on Mr Browns lucklustre novel.

I've also been surprised that the film has been fairly universally panned in the press. I've not seen a positive review of it as yet and many places have called it this years dullest film. I, strangely enough, now find myself defending Mr Browns novel. For starters I guess they haven't read the book. The book is hardly an action thriller. It's a 590+ page book that covers the event of ONE day. The book is slow, the book doesn't give the reader anything real to think about - just leading them from one encounter or discovery of a bit information to another. THE DA VINCI CODE WAS NEVER GOING TO BE A FAST PACED FILM!

I also find myself flowing against public opinion once again.

Public Opinion on the book: Loved It
Angus Opinion on the book: " the book is actually about as controversial and ground breaking as a book as Busted is to Punk rock."

Public Opinion on the film: (So far) Found it boring
Angus Opinion on the film: Far better than the book and actually pretty enjoyable

Yes that's right folks. I, Angus, Hater of All Things Brown "LIKED" the film adaptation.

And it is an adaptation. They have changed a number of things from the book (as with almost all adaptations) some of which are for the better others of which are not. Maybe because at it's core The Da Vinci Code seems to have been written for the big screen as well as airport lounges. Maybe it's because I prefer wasting a couple of hours at the cinema than several nights reading a bland piece of fiction. In anycase I enjoyed the film.

Yes, it is slow paced. But, as I mentioned before, anyone who has read the book should be expecting this. The ideas and settings suit the big screen and have been very well handled by Ron Howard (yes, he of Happy Days fame). Tom Hanks does a fine job as Robert Langdon - won't be getting any Oscar nominations for it, but he portrays him well and once again comes across as a good actor - Audrey Tautou (whom I've loved since Amelie) is still sexy and lends Sophie Neveu an added element of charm and sex appeal, Ian McKellen is brilliant as Sir Leigh Teabing and Paul Bettany is an excellent Silas (the albino monk).

It was odd seeing Alfred Molina playing Bishop Aringarosa as whenever he came on sceen I just kept thinking about Doctor Octopus! Jean Reno (who was excellent in Leon/The Professional - depending on which continent you live on) put in a disappointing performance as Captain Fache. I can't really put my finger on it but he just didn't come across as well as he did in the books. This is probably partially because of some changes they made in his storyline.

I had to smile at a couple of scenes (mainly street scenes in Paris) as the director must have done some homework because some of the location he uses (that aren't mentioned in the book) are actually fairly important in Templar history. One in particular near Notre Dame :p

Overall I was surprised by the film. Despite my views on the novel - and the fact that I feel they changed a few of the good bits in the transition - I found myself enjoying the film and would certainly recommend it to people as long as they like slower paced more thinking films.

I can't believe I've actually said good things about this! If you've ever thought about reading the book - don't. Go and watch the film instead. If you want a proper book dealing with the Templars and conspiracy theories go and read the excellent Focaults Pendulum by Umberto Eco instead. That is something that deserves the title of 'Masterpiece'.

School Report: B (Ron Howard somehow made a bland book into an interesting film)


( 10 comments — Leave a comment )
May. 20th, 2006 03:05 pm (UTC)
You know, when the cast was announced I thought that Jean Reno would be a perfect cast for "Vache" but apparently, I've been mistaken.
May. 20th, 2006 03:06 pm (UTC)
I also thought he was perfectly cast. But something just didn't come off right with his character in the film.

I'll be interested to hear your thoughts once you've seen it (if you do).
May. 20th, 2006 03:29 pm (UTC)
It's not on my to watch list currently, to be honest but I'll probably rent it on DVD.
May. 20th, 2006 03:15 pm (UTC)
I have never forgiven Ron Howard for the travasty that is "A Beautiful Mind" The one and only movie I nearly walk out of a cinema from. Not that I did, I was with David (who hadnt read the book) and damn it, I had paid money for the ticket. Had it been a free ticket or on DVD I'd have stopped watching.

I fear that I hated DVC when I read the book, I think I am going to hate the movie too. I may even treat it with the same contempt that I treat Tom Cruise movies.
May. 20th, 2006 03:26 pm (UTC)
I'm almost with my friend madam_h in the 'only going to see it for the self-flaggelating albino Paul Bettany' camp!
May. 20th, 2006 03:31 pm (UTC)
Angus Opinion on the book: " the book is actually about as controversial and ground breaking as a book as Busted is to Punk rock."


You could always read Rat Scabies and the holy grail which is not at all similar to Da Vinci Code or Busted. It's mildly amusing though.
May. 20th, 2006 03:32 pm (UTC)
Oh yeah and why Anakin Skywalker, just before he get the cool black suit in it?
May. 20th, 2006 03:51 pm (UTC)
**Oh yeah and why Anakin Skywalker, just before he get the cool black suit in it?**


me no understand
May. 20th, 2006 04:08 pm (UTC)
Next time you see a poster for the film you will. Bloody Anakin Skywalker 4 from left, looking all broody.
May. 21st, 2006 01:22 pm (UTC)
Well i haven't seen it and i doubt i'll be rushing to the cinema to do so. I like Ron Howards work and everything i've heard says he made a damned good job out of poor material. But the material was useless...the book was boring, it was essentially a chase thriller, it was obviously written for the movies and i'm disappointed that it got this far. Fair play to Dan Brown for making lots of money.

But the studio's must be desperate.
( 10 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2015


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow