Warned by the critics not to expect too much, I turned up last night to watch the movie, The Da Vinci Code.
Almost full marks for use of paintings in the movie. Stand out scenes in this regard included the flight of Sauniere in the Louvre and the room used for the conference of clerics at Castel Gandolfo. I felt the use of visual effects in Teabing’s analysis of The Last Supper was overdone.
Introduction of Langdon as an alternative voice in Teabing’s analysis of the Holy Grail mysteries. Without Langdon’s protests, the dialogue would have come across as ill informed.
The constant flashbacks became rather irksome. The references to the memories of the characters were fine. The historical references, however, gave the movie the feel of a badly done television documentary. Some scenes were laughable, such as the Council of Nicaea portraying perhaps a hundred ornately dressed clergy all speaking at the same time. Were these the imaginings of Teabing – speculative and unbalanced? Isaac Newton’s funeral came across as something out of The Sixth Sense.
To keep the plot moving, conversations were abbreviated or conflated. Langdon came across as the expert while Neveu as the helpless damsel in distress. Their dialogue would have been enhanced by introducing more of her skills as a cryptologist. The addition of a faith element for Langdon was fascinating. Was Ron Howard attempting to make the film more accessible to an American audience? Langdon’s exploration of the human/divine element put into words what I had been thinking through the movie.
Understandably, the red Smart Car was changed to a lighter colour to allow for filming in night scenes.
The ending is slightly different, providing a focus on the feminine side of the story and downplaying the male connection.
At the end of the movie one woman clapped and cheered and yelled, “Nice one. Well done Ron!”. And that was it.