As reported elsewhere, we had a group outing to see The Da Vinci Code on Friday. We made our normal “going to opening night” plans to arrive around 45 minutes early. I don’t entirely understand why, but for some reason there weren’t lines wrapping down the hallway, the theatre was not packed, and we had no problem getting 12 seats in the optimal location (about three rows in the upper seating area).
Before the main event, lets discuss a few bullet points from the trailers:
* The new James Bond looks like David Caruso.
* Its too soon for a September 11th movie. My mom couldn’t even not cry during the trailer. It felt like a punch in the gut for me too, and I’m not usually the “cries at movies” type.
* At no time should Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock be allowed on the same screen. Especially one that involves the fabric of space and time. Their collective bad acting could actually cause the end of all humanity as we know it if the aforementioned fabric is damaged.
Anyway, the main event… in short, it was good. Not great, not terrible. But good. The acting was OK… Tom Hanks is Tom Hanks, so you know he was good. I found most of the supporting cast very wooden and unpleasant, but they were also that way in the book so its hard to say if that was by design or due to bad performances. I thought Audrey Tautou (who played Sophie) did a passable job… she seemed to give a labored performance as well. Ian McKellen was awesome as usual, giving perhaps the most “real” performance of the film.
The plot, as the book, was fantastic. They took plenty of liberties with some of the more minor plot points, most omitted for time I am sure. I was a little upset at the glossing over of a few of the major developments around Sophie’s grandfather, as well as the “beating the audience about the head and shoulders” with the end. The book left things nice and ambiguous and didn’t make you come to a full conclusion and I thought that was a part of the mystique of the book. The film, however, gave a pretty definitive ending shot that irritated me a bit.
I enjoyed the book more than the film. That happens a lot. I think I will probably add the film to my collection once it comes out on DVD. I will probably buy the cryptex from the Noble Collection when they are available.
I find all the controversy surrounding this book and movie very interesting and funny. It is very amazing to me the people that are faithful to their religion yet so close minded to not be able to comprehend unique takes on the subject matter at hand. I think that this film raises some interesting points, but at its root is still fiction. Did some of the conspiricies exist? Possibly. Did the Church cover stuff up in the early years and middle ages? Probably. Does any of these facts dissuade Jesus’s message or his impact on history? Nope, not for me at least. Who gives a rip if he was married or parented children? He was human. Humans do that stuff, and did back in the day.
Does it make me any less of a Catholic? No. As a matter of fact, a few priests that I’ve talked to about this take pretty much the same stance. Its not the message or the subject matter that is necessarily at the root of the Church’s objection to this film… it is the concern that Joe Sixpack will take all this as face-value fact and be potentially misled. The History Channel did a pretty passable job of proving that the whole Merovignian bloodline thing was a giant pile of crap based on DNA testing of known Merovingian remains.
Look at the facts that we have. Analyze them and see what you find out. Being rooted in antiquity, it will very likely come down to a matter of faith. Have some, its good for you. I think that this whole business is a good piece of fiction, and that’s all.
(For the record, if I was
Related Articles
1 user responded in this post