Da Vinci reviews

Well, I read the book and enjoyed it. Not a classic, but it moved quickly and made me turn the page.

The book didn't inspire me to want to see the film, especially as that film is a stinker, by most accounts, but it did inspire me to want to go and see The Louvre, Westminster Abbey, Roslyn Chapel etc, etc. For that I am grateful to the author...even if his research is exceptionally dodgy and you can't trust much of what he tells you.
 
Went to see the film this afternoon. The Empire in Newcastle was pretty quiet for the film.

First off, I thought the book was a good thriller but very badly written and somewhat predictable but easy to read, so it goes in the Potter bracket.

The film itself feels too long.

Reno and McKellen couldn't have been cast more stereotypically. Then again, neither could Hanks.

He ploRAB through this film like a lost boy wanting the paycheck at the end.

Tatou looks completely at unease and the bloke who plays Silas is so astonishingly bad it kills any aura the character had.

The book was never great, so the film wasn't going to do much either.

Suject matter alone has propelled it into position it is in. Watchable but, for conspiracy thriller, its like National Treasure (yes that bad)

4/10 (I pity Reno and McKellen, they must be regretting this)
 
I hated the book - thought it was appalling. When a few people I know saw the film and said it was worse than the book I had to go and see it since that just didn't seem possible.

Wow. It's bad. Really bad. I wouldn't say worse than the book but my opinion of that is so low it would have been hard for the film to accomplish that. It did equal the book though. Very hammy acting. Awful diologue. Particularly annoying habit of highlighting the "clues" along the way didn't help either. And as for the final "climactic" scene at the end and one line in particular - I was almost crying with laughter.
 
Having read the book and just home from seeing the film at the pics i feel that the film makes it a bit more complicated to understand to the person that hasnt read the book! Its scared me friend off reading the book!

I enjoyed the film but felt that they tipped toed round views! and tried too much to appease the ones who said OH U BETTER NOT SAY THAT! by having Robert Langdon question everything Leabing was saying! to even up all that was supposidly contreversial about the book!
 
I hadnt read the book,and had nothing to compare it to.

So I completley loved it.
However,once I read the book,I have a feeling my opinion may change.

I really and truly loved that film to bits.
I had no vision of any of the characters in my head.
The story was excellent,and I thought the acting was aslwell,remember that I havent read the book,so cant really say wether they did the characters of the book justice or not.

I was very impressed and usally Im not impressed too easily.
My father found it strange that I loved this film which he didnt like too much,as I usually complain about the films of nowadays.
 
Well I started this thread, so my not-read-the-book-pennysworth...

Not nearly as bad as the reviews said.

THE GOOD: Interesting underlying ideas (however fantastical), Ian McKellen

THE BAD: The rest of the (mis)cast, esp Tom Hanks (whom I do like, but not in this... wouldn't this have been a much better film with Harrison Ford in the lead?)

THE UGLY: Some of the dialogue, and endless theological conversations in the middle of stupid car chases.

So I think I'll go with the majority consensus here - not a turkey by any means, but not all it could have been.
 
Back
Top