Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
Vox Audita Perrit, Literra Scripta Manet....
The heard word is lost, the written letter remains...
Argh, I'm such a sheep. I went and saw The Da Vinci Code yesterday. Not so much because I thought the book was the BEST THING EVAH EVAH WRITTEN AND SOOO TRUE OMG, but because my desired specialty for my honours year is early Christianity and there was the perfectly logical reason that I was just dying to see Paul Bettany as a mad not-so-albino monk and Ian McKellen as a cheeky British knight/academic. Plus, there was always the horror of Tom Hanks' hair to marvel at as well. Also, I had a movie voucher and this seemed like the right thing to waste it on (that way I couldn't have kicked myself for spending eleven bucks on a film that sucked).

Decent adaptation, even though I wasn't fussed on the specifics for once. Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou didn't exactly have much chemistry, but we can take solace in the fact that Ron Howard decided to ditch that particular subplot (it was kind of pointless in the book anyway).

I liked the reenactments, particularly the one of the Council of Nicaea. Beautiful locations, of course (the churches in London and Paris). Ian McKellen was kind of hammy, but it was the kind of film that merited that sort of performance. Paul Bettany was suitably mad as Silas. So those two I liked, and I couldn't help but like Tom Hanks in some bits of the film. Audrey Tautou was pretty, and fulfilled her purpose. And Jean Reno was surprisingly menacing as Fache.

The message at the end of the film is that if Jesus married and had a child, why should it take away from his divinity, and I have to say I agree with that to some extent. While I prefer to see Jesus as a celibate figure, if historical evidence turned up that he wasn't, I wouldn't be upset or anything. I do think many Christians forget that Jesus was human as well as divine, and thus I like anything that touches upon the human side that seems to be neglected.

I think that maybe Dan Brown's first Langdon novel 'Angels and Demons' would've made a better film. It's set at a faster pace than Da Vinci Code, still has the interesting historical and symbolic elements and probably simply would've translated better. However, religion versus science is old hat I suppose, and been tried and tested before.

And now, I have two essays to really hunker down and start work on. However, the lure of Rose and Maloney is proving to be a little too much. Particularly as Anthony Stewart Head (who seems to be turning up in every British tv show lately) is guest starring. Saw another promo for Jericho before as well...there is some good tv coming up in the next few months!
2 comments or Leave a comment
moony_girl13 From: moony_girl13 Date: May 19th, 2006 11:02 am (UTC) (Link)
I personally really didn't like the book, but am interested in seeing the film anyway (probably because the book had a summer blockbuster feel to it). One of the things I highly disliked about the novel was how the plot always slowed down so that a bunch of characters could throw-out pages and pages of (sometimes inaccurate) trivia, but I suppose that problem is avoided in the film because of the pacing?

I've generally heard a lot of mixed reviews about the movie, with some people complaining it was as intellectual as the book (?!), although that's not really something I care about -- was it worth $11, or is it more of a 'better to rent and watch at home' kind of film?
normandie_m From: normandie_m Date: May 19th, 2006 11:38 am (UTC) (Link)
The pacing was still a bit sluggish in places, particularly since they've included historical flashbacks in addition to Langdon and Teabing exchanging bits and pieces on symbolism and Mary Magdalene. Even the final showdown between Teabing and Langdon seemed a little slow, since Teabing was doing the typical villain thing of explaining his plan while wandering around the church and holding them at gunpoint. The film definitely went on too long, I thought. That's why I think that 'Angels and Demons' would've made a better film, because Langdon really had to race against the clock to save the day.

I paid five bucks to see it with the voucher I used. Which is probably what you'd pay to rent it when it's out on dvd, if that's anything to go by. I wouldn't have paid more than that to see it, so I suggest you do wait.
2 comments or Leave a comment