The Da Vinci Code (2006) (SPOILERS possible - but use spoiler space)

  • Thread starter Thread starter S.A.S.H.A.
  • Start date Start date
I like Audrey Tatou. She's so cute.
I like Tom but don't see him in the role. I was picturing Alfred Molina, but he's playing the Bishop, I think.
For Silas, the albino, I pictured him to be skinny and fragile. I wasn't picturing Paul, but I want and see how he is in the role.
 
McKellen is a great choice.
And so is Tautou. We can't reduce her to Amelie. She's done many other works apart from it and the blockbusters that went overseas. I'm sure she'll handle the role perfectly well.
 
That's true, but I think it goes both ways. I know some people who are on the fence about seeing it after the bad reviews (that is, for people who haven't read the book and just want a good action thriller).
 
I wouldn't say that the casting is bad. I mean, it doesn't seem like Hanks and Tautou will have any chemistry, but it'll work out. I just hope it just doesn't end up too awkward or anything.
 
Hi everyone. I've reading the last quarter of the Da Vinci Code. I agree that this is going to be a challenge since it does involve serious religious taboos and conflicts. However, that's what makes the book fascinating. It challenges the reader to think outside of the box, and contemplate the possibilities.


Now on for my mini-criticism:

Ummm...Tom Hanks as Langdon? Ouch. Okay, I have two little problems with this group.

First. It's being directed by Ron Howard.

Second. Tom Hanks.


Let me be clear. I appreciate and love both Howard and Hanks previous works. However, I cannot help but feel as if this decision for them to spearhead The De Vinci Code is nothing short of playing it safe.

Let's look at Howard's previous styles in his films? They are dramatic and well executed. Yet, a majority of his films end almost tooo well.

As for Hanks? The last film where he really wowed me was Philadelphia & Saving Private Ryan. He is capable of the performance, but in honor of the book, he wouldn't be a first pick. Langdon seems a little bit more driven, and I don't know if I could picture Hanks in the same fashion.


Now in terms of actors??? I think it depend on the choice of directors.

The Da Vinci Code has a great edge that's a mixture of intrigue and suspense.


My choice for a dream director?


Martin Scorsese.

The man is not only a brilliant filmmaker, but he's a lover of films. I've read and seen many of his interviews, and his thoughts are in constant loop full of details and specs. for his (current and/or prospective) projects.

I think he would add a lot to this story as well as illustrate the layered themes that permeate in the book.

Aside from that, I think he would do a great job in collecting a great cast of actors new, and famous.
 
Perhaps then they should have done an Angels and Demons film instead? If you want to talk about the urgency of Religion and the Catholic faith diminishing because of social apathy. The so-called bad guys' entire agenda was to ignite the religious faith in those who were straying from the Catholic church. And when I say urgent I mean urgent. The threat of the Catholic faith dying due to technology and awareness was a pretty big deal in A&D. And if it took a nuclear explosion at the Vatican where the conclave was taking place to elect a new Pope to get people flocking back to their church, then well, that's what had to be done.

Intense and very thought provoking.
 
i went to see the movie today. i liked it, it followed closely to the book, it was fast-paced and very well done. if you've never read the book i reccomend that you do, the book is ten times better.
 
Yeah, I agree with you. I can't imagine Hanks as Langdon. I love his movies, but I just don't think he suits this part. I might be wrong of course, and might change my opinion once I see the movies.:D

And, yes orion, I was hoping for a sexier Langdon.;)



Yeah, I like Julie Delpy. She could be a good choice.
 
More Tom Hanks news..

Tom Hanks Deciphers The Da Vinci Code
Source: Newsweek November 14, 2004

Tom Hanks has been pegged to play the lead role in Sony's upcoming film The Da Vinci Code, the adaptation of author Dan Brown's best-selling thriller, Newsweek has learned. Director Ron Howard and producer Brian Grazer, the duo who helped make Hanks a star with their 1984 comedy Splash and rehired him 11 years later for Apollo 13, cast Hanks as the globe-trotting scholar Robert Langdon, a decision based partially on the cerebral (riddle-solving, code-cracking) nature of the action in "Da Vinci."

"Tom is an exciting actor to watch thinking," Howard tells the magazine. "We probably don't need his status from a box-office standpoint" -- by now, The Da Vinci Code sells itself -- "but he gives Langdon instant legitimacy."

Howard and Grazer are taking their time casting "Da Vinci," but plan to hire actual foreign actors to play the book's foreign characters. "If there's any book that's supposed to be an international thriller, says Grazer, "this is it." Grazer tells Newsweek that one recent Oscar winner inquired about the role of Parisian cryptologist Sophie Neveu, "and she could easily do it. But I think the audience would be let down a bit. They expect a French girl." As for the role of bullish cop Bezu Fache, Gordon reports that Jean Reno is on Grazer's short list.

Grazer first got wind of The Da Vinci Code early in 2003, when Joel Surnow -- creator of the acclaimed TV series 24 -- thought "Da Vinci" would make a terrific story line for the show's third season. Surnow asked his boss, Grazer, to look into acquiring the rights. But as Brown had no intention of handing over his book to a mere TV show, Grazer says that "it quickly became clear that we had no chance." A few months later Sony paid $6 million for the movie rights -- and hired Grazer as the producer for the biggest film adaptation since "Harry Potter."

The 53-year-old Grazer, who also paired with Howard on the Oscar-winning A Beautiful Mind, has several upcoming projects on his slate, including an animated Curious George film with Will Ferrell and Fun with Dick and Jane starring Jim Carrey. Grazer is also producing a documentary about the notorious skinflick Deep Throat, Gordon reports. Due out in February, it may be the first NC-17 movie released by a major studio in years.
 
I'm really looking forward to seeing this one. I read the book a long time ago and all of the trailers i've seen so far have been very cool.
 
Check out the first pages of this thread and you'll see me dying for Viggo to be cast. I liked the movie and I liked Tom in it but I kept thinking, "Viggo would've been amazing in this", etc, etc...

I'm not sure what Viggo thinks about the whole Da Vinci code phenomenon but he would've made an amazing Rober Langdon. I read the book years ago and I pictured Viggo since the very very beginning.
 
You know who I'd like to see - Willem Defoe. He does well with these types of subjects.

Tom Hanks? Russell Crowe?

Well, if either's true I won't be seeing the film.
 
Audrey Tatou? :rolleyes: This casting is getting worse every day. I mean I loved her in Amelie but she really doesn't fit the role. Have they read the descriptions on the book at all?
 
The movie is not bad. But it is very shallow because the mystery of the film is already known to most of the public (even if you haven't read the book). There is no real sense of urgency or intrigue because there really is no "bad guy(s)" even though they are physically there and do "bad" things.

What I think hurts the film isn't so much the religious aspect, but how religion itself is a very abstrct concept to base an entire mystery around.

This isn't the first movie or story about religious conspiracies, but compared to something like a government cover-up and saving millions of lives, religion and religious conspiracies aren't a universal element for most people (for a lot of reasons), nor are the projected impacts they may or might have had (in the past) if they are revealed. I think this is what dectracts from the overall sense of urgency a film like this needs.

Basically, the good guys find out the "big secret" the church and various covert religious groups has been hiding, killing and willing to die for... But so what? Is the world going to end? Are millions of people's lives going to be suddeny changed forever? This is what I mean about the religious subject matter not really being a universal element and how there is no real sense of urgency ("what is at stake") in the film which takes some of the suspense away and ultimately does a disservice to a film which is all about the mystery and racing against the proverbial clock to uncover it before the opposition does.
 
The more protests it gets, the more people will be interested. Bad publicity is still a publicity.
 
The thought of AaD becoming a movie is intriguing but the studio should of had the foresight to have done it properly and shot it first not after TDC. It's a much more compelling and thrilling story in my opinion.
 
Yeah, true, he was pretty good actually. I liked him and he should be up to the task. The cast is great top to bottom. Pretty pumped for this one.
 
Back
Top