|
24/06/06
The Da Vinci Code by Jenni  Overall rating: 30% I was going to write my own non-geek review of X-Men 3 (sorry Craig, I love you to bits, but you gotta admit that review had structure problems!!), but I couldn’t really be arsed. So here is my review of The Da Vinci Code. Although I will point out I saw this about 3 weeks ago during the craziness of the exam period so chances are I won’t remember the finer points of this film, but here goes… Many a debate has been had over the merits of Dan Brown’s work. Whilst I can see where the critics are coming from when they talk of lazy writing style and 2D characters, I’m not ashamed to say I enjoyed The Da Vinci Code. I think the reason why is because for all his faults, Dan Brown has a very cinematic way of telling a story. That said The Da Vinci Code, with its linear story and its mini cliff hangers at the end of almost every chapter, should have been easy to adapt for the big screen. I mean everyone loves a good old fashioned treasure hunt don’t they? The Da Vinci Code stays relatively true to the book in its plot; it opens with the murder of the Louvre museum’s curator – the only clues as to whodunit are the strange symbols written in UV pen around his body. Symbologist (is that a real job?) Prof. Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is called in to investigate. By agreeing, Langdon unwittingly involves himself in a mystery bigger than he can ever imagine – here’s a hint: it involves Jesus! Along the way he meets Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou), a cryptologist (again – real occupation???) who helps Langdon unveil a secret that many a ‘villain’ (including Paul Bettany as Silas – an albino monk, and Alfred Molina as an ultraconservative bishop) will do anything to protect. Sounds exciting on paper doesn’t it?.... Well I’m afraid to say that all director Ron Howard has managed to do is create a dull, pretentious film that exposes all the flaws of the book. Far too laden with dialogue and lacking in any real character identity, I resorted to revising Formulation Science in my head rather than watch. The film has its moments, most of them involving Paul Bettany, but it ultimately collapses under its own weight. The code breaking and puzzle solving may be intriguing in the book, but it’s rather tedious to watch and takes away from the moments of action and suspense. None of the actors give ‘bad’ performances as such, but they don’t excel themselves either. We all knew that Hanks was miscast from the word go – Robert Langdon should be well…sexier! (Come to think about it – when was the last time Tom Hanks had a decent film out?) Audrey Tautou seems a little too cute to play fearless Sophie and Jean Reno is underused as French Police officer Bezu Fache. Ian McKellen provides some entertainment, but I feel he is there mainly to placate the American audience. The only memorable character is Paul Bettany’s devoted albino monk Silas. The main issue with The Da Vinci Code is that character development plays second fiddle to a lengthy and tangled plot. The film tries to play it safe to avoid the inevitable controversy and as a result it fails to entertain. But at least I may have passed Formulation Science!!! In Summary: It’ll probably be quicker and more fun to read the book. If anyone sees Ron Howard, he owes me 2 ½ hours of my life back…..Actually he owes me 5 – I sat through A Beautiful Mind! |