May 21, 2006
man was conned
beware, for coming up next is of course, my review of the da vinci code movie, as is requisite for all people who have half the mind to do so. with all the issues and controversies generated by the novel, and subsequently by the movie, any self-respecting christian is bound to have some opinion of the whole affair. now, i don't profess to be anything near the level of the thumb-wielding critic duo extraordinaire, and as such let it be known that anything i express in this entry shouldn't be taken as fact; but rather, be taken with a grain of salt.
i may not be an expert in this field, but i do know what movies i like and don't like. and as far as the da vinci code as a movie is concerned, it's definitely a don't like. much. again, simply taking it as a movie on its own, the plot was spread too thinly. for such a deep and twisted story line, a lot of the major plot elements were ignored or downplayed, leaving the entire experience feeling a bit holey. for instance, the motives of the opus dei for wanting to find the grail were unclear. for that matter, the opus dei factor in the story was so weak and unnecessary, that aside from explicitly connecting silas' self-mutilating tendencies to a specific doctrine, they could have been omitted altogether. the flow of the events in the movie also weren't directed well. you'd be given a 30-minute explanation on the priory, a short suspense clip, then even more discussion. boring. you start looking for the climax of the movie, then you realize that it's already come and gone. there also comes a point during the film that you would get the feeling that it's almost at an end, but then it just falls into a great anticlimactic prattle about the blood line. it was as if the director, producers, and scriptwriters wanted to impress upon the audience the *truths* of the holy grail, but at the expense of neglecting to develop the practical aspects of the movie.
but then, when you do connect this film to the novel which actually started the whole thing, it gets even worse. for one thing, **spoiler alert** it cuts out a big chunk of the story involving the second cryptex, as well as other parts, both major and minor. but even worse, it fails to capture the feeling of page-turning suspense in the written work. yes, this could be attributed to the fact that i have read the book before watching the movie, thus knowing the general trend of the story and feeling no need to get to the next plot point, but it also falls on the lackluster pacing of the events in the film. in these and many more ways, it just fails to do the novel justice.
and in the end, that is what is most disappointing of all. i think that the people who go to watch the movie can be divided into two crude classifications: those who have read the book and expect the movie to exude the same thrill as reading, and those who have simply been aroused by all the excitement and curious to find out what all the fuss is about. and to both parties, the movie fails to deliver. the readers don't experience the rush, the curious just witness a mediocre attempt to bring the story to life. it really isn't deserving of all the hype it's created or the controversy it's raised. in fact, if it wasn't for all the hype and controversy, it might not even be as successful as it's doing today.
however, if the movie did do something right, it might be in the way that it actually resolves the entire issue of faith and the integrity of the church, although as cryptically as all the other riddles in the story. i absolutely suck at quoting from movies (that's kiki's job) unless i have a cellphone handy, but the line goes something like this: **spoiler alert** "who knows whether (the heir of jesus) will destroy the faith, or renew it. all that matters is what you believe." a line from langdon to sophie, during the emotional goodbye scene. it actually strikes me more like a disclaimer, albeit inserted at the end of the movie. it really wasn't enough to dispel all the controversy; it might not even be picked up by everyone who watches the movie; but the apparent effort just made me look up and smile. a little treat for all the staunch protesters out there.
i may not be an expert in this field, but i do know what movies i like and don't like. and as far as the da vinci code as a movie is concerned, it's definitely a don't like. much. again, simply taking it as a movie on its own, the plot was spread too thinly. for such a deep and twisted story line, a lot of the major plot elements were ignored or downplayed, leaving the entire experience feeling a bit holey. for instance, the motives of the opus dei for wanting to find the grail were unclear. for that matter, the opus dei factor in the story was so weak and unnecessary, that aside from explicitly connecting silas' self-mutilating tendencies to a specific doctrine, they could have been omitted altogether. the flow of the events in the movie also weren't directed well. you'd be given a 30-minute explanation on the priory, a short suspense clip, then even more discussion. boring. you start looking for the climax of the movie, then you realize that it's already come and gone. there also comes a point during the film that you would get the feeling that it's almost at an end, but then it just falls into a great anticlimactic prattle about the blood line. it was as if the director, producers, and scriptwriters wanted to impress upon the audience the *truths* of the holy grail, but at the expense of neglecting to develop the practical aspects of the movie.
but then, when you do connect this film to the novel which actually started the whole thing, it gets even worse. for one thing, **spoiler alert** it cuts out a big chunk of the story involving the second cryptex, as well as other parts, both major and minor. but even worse, it fails to capture the feeling of page-turning suspense in the written work. yes, this could be attributed to the fact that i have read the book before watching the movie, thus knowing the general trend of the story and feeling no need to get to the next plot point, but it also falls on the lackluster pacing of the events in the film. in these and many more ways, it just fails to do the novel justice.
and in the end, that is what is most disappointing of all. i think that the people who go to watch the movie can be divided into two crude classifications: those who have read the book and expect the movie to exude the same thrill as reading, and those who have simply been aroused by all the excitement and curious to find out what all the fuss is about. and to both parties, the movie fails to deliver. the readers don't experience the rush, the curious just witness a mediocre attempt to bring the story to life. it really isn't deserving of all the hype it's created or the controversy it's raised. in fact, if it wasn't for all the hype and controversy, it might not even be as successful as it's doing today.
however, if the movie did do something right, it might be in the way that it actually resolves the entire issue of faith and the integrity of the church, although as cryptically as all the other riddles in the story. i absolutely suck at quoting from movies (that's kiki's job) unless i have a cellphone handy, but the line goes something like this: **spoiler alert** "who knows whether (the heir of jesus) will destroy the faith, or renew it. all that matters is what you believe." a line from langdon to sophie, during the emotional goodbye scene. it actually strikes me more like a disclaimer, albeit inserted at the end of the movie. it really wasn't enough to dispel all the controversy; it might not even be picked up by everyone who watches the movie; but the apparent effort just made me look up and smile. a little treat for all the staunch protesters out there.
Posted by no_brainer on May 21, 2006 at 05:49 AM | 2 comments