The DaVinci Code (PG-13)
Mike:
Scott:
Scott: Tonight we are reviewing The Da Vinci Code
, the movie based on the controversial and best selling book from author Dan Brown. First came the book the Vatican doesn't want you to see, and now the movie the Vatican doesn't want you to see.
What'd you think Mike?
Mike: I liked it. I walked in unsure. I was set to like it having liked the book. I loved that Ron Howard was directing and Tom Hanks starring. Then, the past few days I've been hearing that critics didn’t like it.
Scott: It was almost a conspiracy with what the critics had been saying.
Mike: Luckily, we are not like all the other critics. We are here to tell you what regular people think about movies.
Scott: Yes, because Mike and I, from our mansions, are regular people. We have drivers for our Bentley's just like everyone else.
Mike: I almost got my driver to do my review for me.
Scott: That would have been cool.
Mike: Don't start with me…
Scott: But enough about that. Let me start with the actors
You mentioned Hanks, he played Robert Langdon, and he did a passable job.
Mike: I think he did a fine job. Langdon is not an action hero even if we want him to be.
Scott: I read the book, and the picture I had of him was different, but that often happens with books and movies
Mike: I think if he seemed kind of boring or reserved, it’s because the character is like that. He is a professor after all. Not an archeologist or something.
Scott: Indiana Jones was a prof too. So you can be exciting and be a professor.
Actually, he fascinated me in the book, I just didn't get that feel and that may have been because we couldn't get as much of a background on him.
Mike: One thing is that there is no way to get the detail of book like this one into a reasonable length movie. This movie runs around 2 and 1/2 hours as it is.
Scott: Very true. It just seemed that he faded into some scenes; he didn't stand out as much as I had hoped.
Mike: I remember thinking when I was reading the book, that he should beat people up or shoot a gun or something. However, he's not that character. He is more of an actual everyman thrown into a remarkable situation.
Besides Hanks, this movie boasts a great cast. I am quite happy with Audrey Tatou as Sophie Neveu.
Scott: I thought she was great. I had been hearing that she had the life taken from her and she was stiff and even nerdy. I don't think so, I thought she did really well.
Mike: I fell in love with her when I saw the French movie Amelie .
Scott: I haven't seen her before, but I look forward to seeing her again.
Mike: Ian McKellen was a great choice for the pivotal role of Sir Leigh Teabing.
Scott: Yes, he is the Grail expert; whom our main characters seek out for help. I'm used to seeing him with a beard, or some metal contraption on his head, it was nice to see him dressed normally, if a bit tweedy.
Mike: McKellen has become the “go to” elder British actor and I am thrilled. He never disappoints.
Scott: Paul Bettany as evil albino, Silas, was not quite as scary as I was expecting.
Mike:He was creepy though.
Scott: The last movie I saw him in was A Knight's Tale. A movie I liked and I think his complexion was a bit better in that one.
Mike: Looks like Ron Howard is turning Bettany into one of his regulars.
He was memorable in A Beautiful Mind.
They rounded out the cast with some other actors you will recognize. I was glad to see Jean Reno, Alfred Molina and an old favorite Jurgen Prochnow. I just like to say Prochnow.
Scott: I'm trying to think in which movie I last saw Prochnow. Oh yeah, the terrible, House of the Dead. Wow, was that a bad movie.
Mike: If you don't recognize the names, Reno was in The Professional, Molina was Dr Octopus in Spiderman 2 and Prochnow is the U-boat captain in Das Boat.
Prochnow will never be able to surpass his performance in Das Boat.
Scott: Not with movies like House of the Dead he won't.
Mike: Let me mention one major annoyance.
Subtitles.
All the French people had to speak French.
Scott: I liked that. I thought the different languages gave the movie a more European feel, something it needed. After all, we are visiting Europe and seeing some really cool locations.
Mike: A few subtitles would be fine, but they over did it. They could have started in French and transitioned to English.
Scott: I think they should have done that with Chewbacca in Star Wars too. That speech was hard to understand... Mike, I completely disagree with you on this.
Mike: It wasn't the use of subtitles, it was the quantity.
Scott: But there was only one American in the movie, just about everyone else's first language wasn't English. I think it would have hurt the movie to see the French police talking in English
Mike: This ain't a foreign film. It’s a Hollywood film. Don't go artsy fartsy on me!
Scott: This movie is based on an international best selling book. It needed to stay international.
Mike: An International book written in ENGLISH.
After having read the book, it was great to actually see the locations. Since the book relied on many real places that most Americans haven't seen pictures of, let alone visit.
I believe that the scenes in the Louvre were actually filmed there.
Scott: They were given permission to film in locations where no filming had ever taken place.
Mike: I felt like the film was pretty faithful to the book. Many plot points kept coming back to me as the film progressed.
Scott: So you had some, 'Oh yeah' moments? I did too. It's been so long since I read the book that I only had a ghost of a memory of what was happening.
Mike: I remember when I was reading the book that it seemed to go on for days, but when you see a timeline, the story takes place over about 24 hours. That was much more apparent here in the movie. Much of the action happens at night, which makes for a dark first half.
Scott: I was thinking about that as I watched it too, but night is dark, so that's how it goes.
You mentioned something that bothered you, I was bothered by the car chase with Tautou driving. I thought that was a bit ridiculous.
Mike: I agree about the car chase. I thought I was back at the Bourne Supremacy. Very out of focus.
Scott: It was a bit hard to follow. The car was a super duper sub-sub compact and they couldn't get it into frame?
I wanted to mention the score. Hans Zimmer really came through for this one. I think his music added to the puzzles and to the twists and turns like a nice warm blanket.
Mike: I thought it was good, but it didn't suck me in emotionally like some scores do.
Let’s talk about the director.
Scott: The movie didn't have the fast pace that the book had. Ron Howard had to explain some things that slowed the pace down
Mike: No, it did not have a fast pace, but I don't think it was slow, per se either.
It came across as more drama than action flick.
Scott: I guess the book was more action and there was the difference
Mike: The book had cliffhanger chapters and those are hard to replicate in a film.
Scott: I liked Howard’s use of CGI to show historic events, or what the characters were visualizing or thinking.
Mike: The flashing back to historical events was very effective.
Scott: The thing that movies in general bring to the table is the ability to show in 10 seconds what an author might spend ten pages on, that ability was well used here.
Some items I was confused on in the book, mostly because the book forced me to read at a super-sonic pace, the movie clarified some of these concepts.
The description of the Last Supper really benefited from being shown on the screen, it helped underscore what Brown was writing.
Mike: If someone hasn't read the book, some of the revelations in the film will hopefully be surprising.
The problem is with the millions of people who have read the DaVinci Code, some of the film is going to seem like rereading the book. If I had one major complaint it's that there were no surprises for me. But that’s okay because I get really annoyed when some genius figures they should change a story that worked very well in a novel. Hear me Spielberg and The Lost World: Jurassic Park?
Scott: Directors know best, but then sometimes Executive Producers who write the books like Brown, help prevent that from happening.
So how do you rate this?
Mike: I give this 3.5 stars for mystery/thriller and a 4 overall. Once again, Ron Howard did not disappoint me.
And you?
Scott: I give it a 3 overall and a 4 for mystery thriller. It was one of the better thriller type movies out there, but was missing some stuff overall.
Mike: Also, I'm sure someone will think this is controversial, but I'm not one of them. I guess if you are a member of the clergy or the real Opus Dei you may have a problem with it.
The one thing I would stress is that the book and the movie are fictional.
Scott: Which means based on fun, not fact.
Make the world a better place; bring a Catholic with you when you go see this fiction movie!
