CRS
Chandler, Arizona, United States

There's an old saying. If you don't want someone to join a crowd, you ask them, "If everyone were jumping off of a cliff, would you?" Well, I have. So my answer would be "Yes". True story.
Profile continued . . .

ARCHIVES!
Review of The Da Vinci Code

Friday, June 23, 2006

this entry brought to you by tool, "jambi"



A few years ago when the idea for an adaptation of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code came into fruition, it must have seemed like a great idea. Firstly, the novel was the most popular in the world, and easily the most controversial in a decade. Getting Oscar winning director Ron Howard would cinch it as a great movie, and having Oscar winning Tom Hanks star in it would rank in anyone not already curious about the subject matter. Then throw in master thespian Ian McKellen (who's been everywhere lately, not that I can complain), and a couple of excellent French actors, one a fan favorite bad-ass (Jean Reno), the other an up-and-coming art house cutie (Audrey Tatou), and Da Vinci Code would easily be the Blockbuster of the year; basically an invitation to print money for all investors involved.

For the record, the basis of the controversial aspects-- that Da Vinci was part of the secret society privy to the truth about Jesus Christ, and that his depiction of The Last Supper has Mary Magdalene, not John, to his right-- is fascinating, as are the theories of the following Millennia-long cover-up. Of course, the myriad theories that are the foundation of the story are not the invention of the author, and could have been looked up on Usenet more than a decade ago. That the main theories explained have been around for years gives the story authenticity, but it also reinforces how poorly this story was adapted to the screen. When theories are being explained to Sophie Neveu (Tautou), and therefore, to the audience, I found the movie fascinating; even though these theories get taken to illogical extremes (Jesus Christ had a single bloodline throughout the centuries?) the movie stays firmly planted in entertainment as opposed to reality, like a really, really wordy Indiana Jones. With the excellent cast delivering the wordy dialogue, the explanations never felt like a chore. However, when the movie switches from religious conspiracies 101 to summer adventure/thriller, it becomes a lot more like a really, really boring Indiana Jones.

As interesting as the theory education itself, the plot itself is tepid, bordering even on banal. Though in a large scope, Da Vinci Code is about the largest conspiracy in the history of mankind, there is absolutely no sense of danger. The heroes are hunted every step of the way by bumbling law enforcement that are easily thwarted every time. There's a psychotic, self-flagellating, nun-clobbering albino on their tail who will stop at nothing to kill them... and upon confronting the heroes, is hit on the back of the head and taken hostage, never to be a real threat again. The entire movie seems very confident that it is much more exciting than it really is, but if you remove Jesus Christ entirely from the story, what you're left with is a by-the-numbers thriller with no thrills that stays way past its welcome after the bad guy is revealed and apprehended in the climax.

The best a movie adapted from another source can shoot for is to stand on its own as an artistic achievement. The least an adapted movie should do at minimum is be a glorified advertisement for the book. Unfortunately, The Da Vinci Code ends up being a failure because it is definitely not an artistic achievement, but worse, makes me want to avoid the book. Because if the novel is a uneventful and tepid as the movie, then it'll be coma-inducing; after all, I can handle a 2 hour, 40 minute movie, but a book hundred of pages long?
-----



on this day last year jonah, on yesterday's last year's entry, made a loving comeback. just in case you had no idea who he was, he came back the next day to give you a quick run-down.
-----

with love from CRS @ 10:12 PM 

0 Comments:

Post a Comment