Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

davesimondotcom · 11:18 PM

Just got back from watching the Da Vinci Code with my wife.

Both of us have read the book multiple times - I recommend the illustrated version that comes with an illustrated version of Angels & Demons.

I find the book very entertaining. It's not highbrow writing or anything, but I enjoy the action and the puzzles. I also find it interesting how Brown uses little interesting tidbits to make you think that something like this could really be true. (Before this turns in to a thread arguing about truth vs. fiction, please remember it is a NOVEL not a textbook!)

To the movie! ******* MINOR SPOILERS *******

There were, as with any books made into movies, some minor changes and things omitted to make things shorter. There were things changed to make it easier to tell the story in a different form.

I did find one of the more major changes a bit frustrating. They made some changes to Sophie's backstory that I don't think improved anything. And they left me questioning how well-developed her relationship with her grandfather could have been in such a short time.

I thought that there were so many places that the characters have to explain a backstory of some sort that it was sometimes a bit awkward. None of the actors give Oscar worthy performances. But that's not what this movie is about. It's about fun.

So, was it fun? Yeah, I think so. I liked it more than I liked King Kong, which I found laborious. It wasn't as fun as National Treasure, which I thought was inspired very much by the Da Vinci Code book.

I would say that if you have time to see it, see it. It's not the best movie ever, for certain. But it wasn't BAD.

If I was doing a

or

, I would give it

On a scale of 5 stars, I'd give it a solid 3. Maybe 3.5.

FeLiZeCaT · May 19, 2006, 10:02 PM

That's consistent with the critic's opinions I have read so far.

I may go watch it because I am a Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou fan.

davesimondotcom · May 19, 2006, 10:06 PM

Audrey Tautou is a very beautiful woman. Nice to look at the whole movie...

FeLiZeCaT · May 19, 2006, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Audrey Tautou is a very beautiful woman. Nice to look at the whole movie...

I read that she could have been better.

Sir Ian McKellen apparently does an excellent job. Apparently, the pictures are real swell, but the movie is "too centerd on suspens", so the book has not been very well transfered on film.

I have not read the book yet (pretyy much the only one I have not read from the guy) and I am quite hesitant to read it; I am allergic to fame.

But I may give the movie a try.

E's Lil Theorem · May 19, 2006, 10:55 PM

Good to hear. I'm looking forward to it as well - headed for it shortly

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

... as with any book made into a movie....

Fixed ™

simonjames · May 20, 2006, 12:43 AM

Why does 'casting' get the wrong person for the lead role? I am guessing the idiot responsible for casting Nic Cage as Captain Corelli is also the brainstorm behind Tom Hanks in DVC.

The only book I've seen that was successfully translated into a movie was Peter Høeg's "Miss Smilla's Feeling for Snow". Not everyone's cup of tea - as I have Danish family I had some background to understanding/visualising the book.

Who would you cast for Langdon? Perhaps Willem Dafoe?

In Corelli would have replaced Nic Cage with Gabriel Byrne

brassplayersrock² · May 20, 2006, 02:20 AM

i often found myself more bored than i thought i should have been with this movie. i was really looking forward to it, it wasnt a HUGE dissapointment for me, it was more of a letdown. they added things to dummy down the movie a bit, and added some to make it more excitable. they changed the plot abit, shortened some things, omited others. overall, if i were a movie critique i'd have to say 2 1/2, maybe 3 stars out of 5.

Apple Pro Underwear · May 20, 2006, 03:05 AM

I just got back from seeing it. I purposefully did not read any posts from this thread yet (nor any other reviews)

Here is a quick opinion:

Tom Hanks is not what I pictured in my head as Robert Langdon. However he does a quality job and by the end of the movie I am more or less happy he was cast. I do wonder if they got a more obscure, non-hip actor to play him it would be les distracting. Tom Hanks looks too Tom Hanksy (and his receding hairline made me look at himeven more).

Audrey Tatou was great. No complaints. Iam McClellan was great, his psycho last scene was genious.

The story/plot is better in book forma because the subject matter lends itself to being readt. So although the movie translation is good it can never compare. I thought it was slow but there was no other way. The themes and ideas need to be clear and not confusing. Ron Howard was very faithful to the book and I thought he did a good job. Was it long? Yeah, but anything less would not have done it justice.

I give this movie a reccomendation.

_________

p.s. Did Langdon kiss Sophie on the lips in the book? they handled this differently in the movie and think it was a good move. Tom Hanks kissing her on the mouth would have sucked.

Apple Pro Underwear · May 20, 2006, 03:14 AM

Originally Posted by simonjames

Who would you cast for Langdon? Perhaps Willem Dafoe?

this is who I sort of imagined in my head: David Morse
http://imdb.com/name/nm0001556/

Daniel Craig
http://imdb.com/name/nm0185819/

Wiskedjak · May 20, 2006, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear

The story/plot is better in book forma because the subject matter lends itself to being readt. So although the movie translation is good it can never compare. I thought it was slow but there was no other way. The themes and ideas need to be clear and not confusing. Ron Howard was very faithful to the book and I thought he did a good job. Was it long? Yeah, but anything less would not have done it justice.

Angels and Demons would translate to movie MUCH better (I also found it to be a better read than DVC)

Apple Pro Underwear · May 20, 2006, 11:16 AM

Let me refresh 1 comment — the story was "slow" in comparison to a action suspense thriller... i felt LoTR was slow, DVC went by pretty quick.

______________

I couldn't get through A&D — the story was unappealing for whatever reason. DVC was the firrst to introduce me to the "Theory"

davesimondotcom · May 20, 2006, 05:43 PM

APU, you should try Angels & Demons again, I think it is a better story overall to Da Vinci.

Ulrich Kinbote · May 20, 2006, 06:08 PM

I am dumbfounded at the Da Vinci Code's popularity. The ideas are cribbed. The characters are like cardboard cutouts. The plot is predictable. The dialogue hamfisted. The ending cheese. A movie version of Foucault's Pendulum. That'd be worth seeing. 'Cept maybe not Richie Cunningham directing.

Eug Wanker · May 22, 2006, 12:16 AM

That was one of the worst movies I've seen in a long time. I was bored beyond belief.

It was surprised at just how bad a Ron Howard movie can suck, cuz I usually like Ron Howard movies.

I'd rather watch an episode of the cheezy Relic Hunter.

In fact, I was disappointed I only slept for 5 minutes in the movie. I would have been asleep longer had there not been a car crash flashback to wake me up.

What a frickin' waste of time.

His Dudeness · May 22, 2006, 07:59 AM

Haven't seen it yet, but Hanks as Langdon? I think he's being over-casted. I'm seeing him waaaaaay too much. But it has to be more exciting than the book.

Eug Wanker · May 22, 2006, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

Haven't seen it yet, but Hanks as Langdon? I think he's being over-casted. I'm seeing him waaaaaay too much. But it has to be more exciting than the book.

Get ready for a snoozefest...

olePigeon · May 22, 2006, 03:53 PM

I thought it was very anticlimatic and lackluster. The trailer was more exciting than the movie. It wasn't bad, bad, but I would've opted to rent it instead of paying $9.50 for the movie.

olePigeon · May 22, 2006, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by Ulrich Kinbote

I am dumbfounded at the Da Vinci Code's popularity. The ideas are cribbed. The characters are like cardboard cutouts. The plot is predictable. The dialogue hamfisted. The ending cheese. A movie version of Foucault's Pendulum. That'd be worth seeing. 'Cept maybe not Richie Cunningham directing.

Bah. I'm waiting for Joss Wheedon to direct Ender's Game. Now THAT would be a badass movie!

Ulrich Kinbote · May 22, 2006, 03:56 PM

The NY Times said "A 'Da Vinci Code' That Takes Longer to Watch Than Read"

Ha ha.

LinK: http://movies2.nytimes.com/2006/05/1...es/18code.html

Jawbone54 · May 22, 2006, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

APU, you should try Angels & Demons again, I think it is a better story overall to Da Vinci.

This is what everyone has been telling me. I'm thinking about buying the illustrated versions mentioned earlier.

Obi Wan's Ghost · May 22, 2006, 04:11 PM

DVC was great. I really liked the part when the fat man with the chainsaw was chasing me in a fire station and transformed into an ex girlfriend.

Sorry that was the dream I had when I fell asleep watching DVC. What a great movie that dream was.

Eug Wanker · May 22, 2006, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by Ulrich Kinbote

The NY Times said "A 'Da Vinci Code' That Takes Longer to Watch Than Read"

Ha ha.

LinK: http://movies2.nytimes.com/2006/05/1...es/18code.html

"But of course movies of that ilk rarely deal with issues like the divinity of Jesus or the search for the Holy Grail. In the cinema such matters are best left to Monty Python."

olePigeon · May 22, 2006, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

"But of course movies of that ilk rarely deal with issues like the divinity of Jesus or the search for the Holy Grail. In the cinema such matters are best left to Monty Python."

Blessed are the Cheese Makers.