Da Vinci Code

S

Stephanie C

New member
I watched this for the first time last night on telly, and wasnt one bit impressed, it was so muddled. lets hope the book was much better.. very disappointed, even the scenes in the Rosslyn Chapel , could have been filmed anywhere, apart from going down to the crypt you didnt see the main parts of the fabulous chapel..
 
The film is a million times better than the badly written book. You could use the book as a guide to the series of puzzles and their solution or you could watch the film again and suspend believe and just enjoy it as a silly history / adventure romp.

The Angels and Demons book is a much better story but again written as a film synopsis. Will the upcoming film be worth watching? Maybe.
 
I feel the opposite to gomezz. I read the book first and loved it. I watched the movie and realised just how ridiculous the story really was (I knew it was silly but when you see it in film it really hits you at how silly it is). The novel is just a really good trashy type novel and the movie just took it too seriously. Plus - I just couldn't buy Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon. I thought the plot twists were more organic in the book and were really badly dealt with in the movie. Loved Ian Mckellen though.
 
The book is amusing - the film was rubbish.

Tom Hanks and Paul Bettany were horribly miscast. Sam Neill as Robert Langdon, and John Malkovich or Christopher Eccleston as Silas, would have been much better.
 
Same here, put it on half way through, and thought that was the reason I wasnt twigging to the plot, even at the end I was waiting for some demon or godlike thing to appear, but none did, very disappointing.
 
Bit of a damp squib, I thought.

Liked the premise but the ending was hardly a stunner, and after seeing that episode of South Park I always see a bunny rabbit on that painting of The Last Supper.:o
 
I read the book (interesting story, very badly written) but have only seen the second half of the film. It was not very good! Quite how it made $750 million at the box office I'll never know! Angels and Demons should be better - a much faster '24' like pace to it.
 
I saw about 10-15 minutes the other night and in that time window managed to catch some of the worst dialogue ever.

Tom Hanks is looking at the worRAB written on the floor in an attempt to see if they are an anagram...

"Do you have an eidetic memory?" [Why would he need one? What evidence suggested to her that he had an eidetic memory? The fact that he could read and imagine the worRAB jumbled up a bit? He doesn't need to remember the worRAB...they are right there in front of him for God's sake!]

"Not quite, but I can remember what I see." [But sadly he has never seen the dictionary definition of an Eidetic Memory]

:D
 
The first 15 minutes or so are pretty good, particularly the corporal mortification scene with Silas! But after that it plays as such a boring run-of-the-mill movie with not much too it until the Christ bloodline revelation at the end. They shouldn't have stuck so closely to the book, added some more action and whatnot.

Angels & Demons IS much better, more of a thriller and way more interesting subject matter IMO. I just hope Ron Howard managed to inject plenty of pace into proceedings.
 
Angels and Demons has had some quite scathing early reviews.

It's ironic that Dan Brown writes his books as if he is writing a film screenplay, and as it turns out, they don't translate to the big screen too well at all.
 
I'm with one above poster. Film was much better than the book, but yes Angels and Demons makes for a better film and think people will enjoy it more than the Da Vinci Code that was mostly a lot of talk over action, unlike Angels and Demons.

I was happy with the cast for Da Vinci Code, and thought Bettany was perfect for his role, CE would have been the terrible miscast and you don't want all menacing for the role, need a bit of innocence in it too and Bettany got that across perfectly.
 
I found the Da Vinci Code such a boring film. The pacing was too slow and Tom Hanks sleep walked his way through the role.

Angels & Demons looks much better though. I think it will be a stronger film in terms of storyline and performence. (I'm judging this by the trailer. I haven't read either book)
 
I played the game before seeing the film...and as yet I haven't read the book.

Neither are classics...but I enjoyed both well enough. Obviously I have no sense of the alleged mis-casting of Hanks in particular. My biggest gripe with the film was Audrey Tautou whom I didn't find convincing....although I've liked her in several French language films.
 
Back
Top