The Da Vinci Code Review by Nicky Santoro

Blitzkrieg

Heading towards The Da Vinci Code, I had done quite the bit of studying up before the film. I read the book version which was excellent and I had seen many specials on A&E and The History Channel with historians analyzing the content. This was a unique situation for me.

Earlier in the week, this film was slammed by many critics with the common theme being that it had lost the edge the book had and was also boring or too long.

First let me address the film supposedly being too long or boring. The film in my estimation ran around 2 and a half hours and while long, I never felt it was too long. I'm a great judge on movies being too long because I'll be the first one in the theatre to start moving around and losing patience. This didn't happen. I would also like to point out that nobody in my theatre left the entire time the film was on and this incudes people of all ages.

So with that out of the way, lets get to the good stuff. The most important part for me is did they stay true to the plotline that made the book so interesting? Did they stick with the controversy surrounding Jesus the father and his bloodline, Mary Magnalene being the Holy Grail ad the Catholic Church trying to keep the secret hidden away for the obvious reasons? To that I say they did a fine job.. There were a couple things such as Robert and Sophie's budding relationship being left almost entirely out, and that had no effect on me personally. To me it would have only gotten in the way of a more important idea being driven home. The only other thing I could tell was the shorter interpretation of The Last Supper painting than I was expecting and again, I didn't see a problem with this. Director Ron Howard got the point across and if McKellen had dragged the part out any longer it would have screwed up the flow of the film.

Speaking of the flow of the film, I thought they did a nice job between speech and action. I don't like a film that's all talking during certain points and then all action. We got a good mix of history, action, understanding/decrypting the messages, more action.. I thought they did a nice job with it.

The film was beautifully shot. I read somewhere that the film cost approx. $120M to make and they used their money wisely. Great job on the casting also. One can't find a better set of actors in one film than this one and to no surprise they all delivered. Everyone can laugh about Tom Hank's hair (it was bad), but he was the perfect guy to play Robert Langdon. Hanks has always been a thinking man, daring but smart. Langdon is no Super Hero and neither is Hanks.. he's just a brilliant man who is driven, and that is what takes him to his destinations. What can one say about Audrey Tatou? Stunning, intelligent, tough, etc.. etc.. The woman is awesome.

In conclusion, was this one of the best movies of the year? An Oscar canidate? Probably not. I don't blame that on the acting, the story, Ron Howard.. none of it. I blame it on a tough transition. It's always interesting to see how books will translate into films. More often then not you are left with a film that isn't what it could have been, but for The Da Vinci Code, it was all it could have been. I believe in my heart that this is the best anyone could have done with it.

The Da Vinci Code rates a 3.9 out of 5.0

Joseph T. Cool

Administrator & WC HOF'er

Excellent review thank you.

Your opinion holds a lot of weight with me in considering the value of paying money to see the film before DVD release.

Blitzkrieg

Thanks, I wanted to drive home that I wasn't "bored" during the film. Was it long? Yes.. it was long, but it wasn't long in the "When is this going to be over?" kind of way.. I was interested throughout and is why I graded it so high. I didn't get carried away, if I thought the film sucked, I'd say it.

I'm a little scared though.. lol.. I don't want you to run out and watch it and then come back to me saying "WTF??" haha..

Gigglypuff

Well I saw it last night and I wasnt as impressed as you appear to be. I loved the book, so much so that I read it in 8 hours! And kind of went a little obsessive waiting for the film to come out. It was good, but I feel that some things werent explained very well and that people who were seeing the film without reading it first might be comfused. They didnt explain the reasons why Silas tortured himself and the reason for the Pagan ritual that Sophie witnessed her grandfather involved in years earlier - to most people it probably just looked like a random orgy and not the Paganistic ritual to worship the sacred feminine.

I liked it though dont get me wrong but it seemed to speed through the beginning really quickly and then start to drag nearer the end. But because Id built it up in my head, that it was probably gonna be amazing I am somewhat disappointed.

Blitzkrieg

I hear you on that Giggly, I just thought it was better than all the critics were saying. I don't want to give the wrong impression that it was a must see for everyone.

I dunno, I enjoyed it. I agree that some of those issues were rushed, you are correct, however, I think if the film were any longer it would have killed it for a lot of people. They'll probably have extra scenes in the DVD version.

Gigglypuff

Yeah, Im totally a fidgeter and 2 and a half hours was pushing it for me! However, it was probably not the nest plan to go at 11pm after being at work all day after being out drinking the night before, lol, that might have had something to do with me being easily distracted from the film.

Joseph T. Cool

Administrator & WC HOF'er

I've made up my mind to wait for it on DVD.

I am short on cash and it's getting to be a hassle anymore to get down to the theater with the crowds and nosy teens running around and talking during the movie.

I think I will brave the rush for X-Men 3 next week and maybe Superman but so far nothing else has made me want to rush to theater thus far this season.

vixxxen

Just went to see it & I agree with Giggly. They didn't explain certain parts very well. Then again, it could be because of the amount of time that it would have taken to explain it fully. I thought the movie wasn't too bad and was worth the money I spent to see it.

Gigglypuff

yeah, I understand that to explain everything would have taken forever, which is obviously the reason for missing some things out, such as the 2nd cryptex - but the things thet left in they obviously deemed them important to the story, so should have explained the better.

Erin

Monk's First Lady

I saw it Friday night with a bunch of my friends. I had never read the book, and found it a bit difficult to follow at points. There were too many characters switching sides, that I didn't know who I was supposted to be rooting against. In my opinion it was way too long, I fell asleep in the third hour.

I found it interesting, but I think a lot of the arguements Dan Brown presents are really weak. Though I do think the director did a good job with the movie. I also liked it because I visited a lot of the places they filmed the movie at, and ti was neat to see their signifigance.