|I Am From The Surete. It's A Sort Of French F.B.I.
||[Nov. 16th, 2006|12:05 pm]
The Da Vinci Code is a Hitchcock chase movie in which the McGuffin takes the starring role.|
I think I've understood why people love it so. This New Age conspiracy stuff is addictive. What a pity none of it is true.
But take away the excitement of the ideas, and its a dull ride.
There's no chemistry between Hanks and Tatou. Instead they conduct a seminar on the run.
Almost anyone would have been better in this role than Hanks. What a pity Cary Grant was unavailable.
The energy picks up when Ian McKellen is on screen and subsides when he leaves.
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I shuddered when I heard they had cast Tom Hanks in the role. I did read the book, and it was an enjoyable read as long as you suspended disbelief.
I don't hate Hanks. He's got a middle-aged-man-next-door quality that's fine for certain roles. But here he just seemed all at sea.
Exactly. I don't dislike him, either - there are films where he shines. But I knew this wouldn't be one of them. This was completely out of his realm, and I had no doubt he would seem out of place.
I guess he and Ron Howard are good mates.
The ascendancy of Tom Hanks is a little hard to understand. Sometimes I think he's the modern James Stewart, but Stewart had much bigger range and could play edgy and obsessive as well as nice.
When given an appropriately neurotic part, Stewart could be extremely scary, as in Vertigo. Or the final scene of The Naked Spur (which I cannot recommend enough if you haven't seen it).
Your bringing up Cary Grant and French things made me flash back to Charade, another lovely reminder of how great CG truly was.
Stewart and Grant- arguably the two greatest actors in the history of Hollywood.
My favourites, anyway.
Yes, I had Charade in mind- plus North by Northwest and To Catch a Thief. Those films have a lightness of touch that the Da Vinci Code is entirely lacking.
I couldn't read the book--it was just too dreadfully written. I was hoping the movie would take away the horror of bad writing and expose an interesting story, entertainingly dramatized, but that didn't happen. It's simply a lame story, badly told, and I think if people weren't so hungry, all unconscious, for a little Goddess and sex and the body in their religion, it wouldn't have been so successful.
But in a way, it was worth seeing just to hear Ian McKellen deliver a line like, "Penises sprouting up everywhere!" or whatever it was. *g*
The film was badly written too. There was no attempt to establish character or create relationships and the dialogue was almost entirely concerned with the swapping of information.
Perhaps if they'd been prepared to offend Dan Brown's fan base and take a hatchet to the book they could have made something decent out of it.
2006-11-17 06:07 pm (UTC)
It's rare you find a film of the same caliber as the book....
Books and films work differently. I think a major problem with the DVC movie is that it didn't do enough to rethink the book in filmic terms.