Da Vinci Code (movie) (spoilers inside)

[Necromotic]

Surprised there is no thread about the movie yet. I read the book two weeks before the movie came out to know what actually happens as movies always miss key elements when translated to the big screen. I found the movie thoroughly engaging despite the so-so reviews from critics. It held the suspense and urgency found in the book, and overall I thought the cast did a good job of portraying their roles. Hanks surprisingly did a good job as well as Jean Reno as Bezu Fache. Silas's portrayal in the movie also added some different layers and is very well appreciated.

The movie theaters I was in was jam packed, had to sit in the first row. Was straining my neck to watch it but it was worth it.

I give it a 4/5

[MirrorriM]

Spoiler ALERT!!!

I didnt like it. I can understand if some parts are cut out of the movie for time, but making stuff up??? come on.

--------------SPOILER DONT READ ANYMORE AFTER THIS-------------------

For those who have read the book:

what happened to the second cryptex??? completely taken out.

her family? she actually meets her brother, and she wasnt in the car when the accident happened (which she says later in the movie, but in her flashback she's in the car-oops!)

the whole ancient papers in the basement of a church? ok, where did that come from in the book.

she went to boarding school? she was at college and came home early from break and caught her grandfather.

Anyone notice the disclaimers from Langdon? Lol, when him and Teabing were discussing the whole Grail thing, he constantly was arguing with the old guy. He didn't do that in the book, he asked questions, but didnt outright fight with the man and completely disagree. Quote: "The killer is from Opus Dei!" Langdon: "fascist Opus Dei." He does it quite a lot throughout the movie, oh wonderful politics :P

I did read this last December, so I could be wrong..but it really annoys me that script writers take it upon themselves to make stuff up when the book is perfectly fine.

[Dameon Angell]

I just put the spoiler alert in the main title for ... well .. ya know ... for those people who don't wanna read sub titles.

[Colossos]

I read it last year and really enjoyed it, looking forward to seeing the film. I guess some things had to be changed in order to a) not offend the church and b) make it easier for idiots to understand.

[Galleleo]

I found nothing wrong with the movie. I watched it last night.

From what I understand (didn't read the reviews myself) the 2 main points of critism from the critics are:

1. You can't follow the movie if you didn't read the book.
2. The movie is way different then the book.

(I could be wrong on these because I only heard someone else say those were the main critic points)

I think they are both bs.. the movie is the same as the book, if you can follow the book you can follow the movie.
And I disagree with mirr, tho the movie might differ from the book on a couple of details, it just follows the book and what the book is about. It doesn't really matter for the story if she goes to boarding school or college, there was no other way to show the accident then to put her in the car. It's obvious the guy at the church is her brother. I don't think that the details missing are harmfull to the storyline of the book and film, they are still both about the exact same thing, and they tell the exact same thing.

Things were also missing from LOTR compared to the books, it didn't make the movies any less good.

[T3l Ca7]

The beginning of the movie was a bit slow. There were many places the movie was different from the book, but the movie did follow the book fair closely.

There were a few things I didn't like about the movie: 1st I could not imagine Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon. Hanks is an extraordinary actor, but he does not suit the role.

Second, I expected Teabing to be slightly younger.

The thing I disliked the movie the most was that the movie played down Sophie Neveu. In the book, Robert Langdon was more knowledgeable and Sophie was more intelligent. In the movie, most of the problems were solved by Langdon, and more than half of the things Sophie had done did not even get mentioned.

The biggest difference was: the book never explicitly confirmed anything and movie went on saying "hey it is true".


But over all, it is not a bad movie and is better than what critics have said.

[intersect]

books are way better, gg

[Necromotic]

$77,000,000 opening weekend. not bad for a so-so reviewed flick

[Colonel]

only thing that i think is ridiculous... people only started reading the book when they saw the preview for the movie. Jesus christ you gotta love hollywood

[DoTheFandango]

Critics can lick my nuts. They hate on it because it's the cool thing to do after the Cannes people took a french shit on it.

Well they can go suck a dick, all of 'em -- because I still loved it.

[Squeezer]

it was ok, it just dragged on a little too long, and I already knew what was going to happen (due to reading the book a bajillion times).

That, and Ron Howard may very well be the worst director in history.

[Riesen]

I don't think the second cryptex issue is really all that big of a deal. If memory serves, they open the first to find the second...not all that necessary.

Overall, I quite enjoyed the movie and found it interesting to see something I've read brought to life so well. I was tempted, however, to shout out answers to some of the puzzles throughout the movie, like "APPLE!"

I just wish they would now make Angels and Demons. I so want to see a movie about the Vatican almost being blown up.

[Kings]

I just saw the movie at the theater, and i have to ask WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS MOVIE ABOUT FOR FUCK SAKE?!?!??!?!?!

[Ward]

didnt like that movie, its simply boring

[MirrorriM]

To me, they could have had the second cryptex, makes it more of a treasure hunt like the book. There were definitely slow parts in the movie, especially the beginning.

The movie didnt seem long to me, maybe because I was trying to follow the events like it happened in the book (which zoomed by on screen).

To Gall: I said I understand parts being taken out for time reasons, I dont disagree with (most) of the film about that. My main point is the whole hidden-archives-dating-back-to-jesus thing in the church. For the car accident, lots of movies have flashbacks of events that happened, it didnt need to be in Sophie's memory.