The Da Vinci Code (2006) - Reviews & Comments Thread [Merged]

[Cinemaman]

Ok, I will see it tomorrow. And if it is so bad, I will be too disappointed.

[Darth Elektra]

So how packed was it when you saw it in France?

[War Party]

A chef is only as good as his ingredients, an expression that aptly applies to the film (http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/davincin.php#) version of this decade's biggest selling novel "The Da Vinci Code (http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/davincin.php#)". Despite the involvement of Oscar-winning talent both in front of and behind the camera, none can lift Dan Brown's material above the level of dull melodrama. Slavishly loyal to a fault, no real attempt is made to adapt the work beyond what is literally on the page. Thus, forced into the quite different mold of feature film cinema, the flaws of the narrative become far more overt on screen than they do on the page.

Brown's book is far from what you would consider great fiction with major gaps in logic, highly speculative long-winded research, little in the way of character, and twists that were so laughably cliche it seems like a joke at first glance. Nevertheless the general hook of the novel is an intriguing one, even with some long drawn out explanations it still ripped along at a decent pace, and the location hopping and moments of action were entertaining enough to be an enjoyable diversion whilst sitting on a bus or plane.

Howard's film is as close to the text as a major studio film probably can be. Some very minor elements are changed - no second codex, Langdon is approached differently, the last act is slightly altered, some of the explanations are dramatically shortened - but otherwise it follows the novel almost to the letter. Thus, much of the problems with the picture can be placed entirely on Brown's source material rather than its cinematic touches.

The trouble with the book was that whilst all the background information about symbology and the intriguing skewering of Christian mythology and church corruption made for interesting reading, the adventure of a killer albino monk and a bland Harvard professor caught up in a murder that framed it wasn't so engaging. On screen that story is a little better thanks to the use of the book's real life locales and Howard's cinematic approach, but too often it grinds to a halt for those long spiels of explanation which don't work so well on screen and help drag it out to a far too long 2.5 hours.

Howard tries to make these scenes more palatable by visually punching up elements, for example the Langdon character has a way of seeing code that's lifted directly from Howard's "A Beautiful Mind". Other scenes contain some not particularly convincing flashbacks to ancient times. Yet they can't get over the fact that much of the film is either talking or low-rent treasure hunting. That can be alright if there's a sense of fun, adventure, intrigue or suspense but none of that is present.

The real life locations and the intercutting of Hanks lecture with Sauniere's murder provides a strong start, but once things leave the Louvre it all becomes deathly serious, solemn, and sticks to the point. To some extent like the far more literate and engaging Michael Crichton, Brown has a habit of focusing on plot so much that little is left to develop the characters. The film itself conveys that problem, all the actors given stock and somewhat flat characters whose only purpose is to drive the plot along. We never get to see the human side of these people and often their actions border on not just the illogical but the stupid - and this is despite the supposed intelligence required for their professions.

A good actor can rise above the material but everyone from Hanks to Molina to Reno all turn in performances on the level of the limp material and nothing more. Bettany and Tatou try their best but the former's character has been reduced to little more than a mildly tragic grunt whilst the latter struggles to be credible. Hanks and Tatou also simply don't work well together, never convincingly pulling off any chemistry, and aren't helped by having to fit so much of the novel's prose in that their dialogue sounds forced - especially Tatou whose English is a little strained at one or two points.

Halfway through the film the action lifts up a little when Ian McKellen enters the picture. The only character to exhibit some life, his few quips and eye twinkle add the sole bits of fire to this very cold affair. McKellen's monologue about the Grail's history, easily the longest one of the book and film, is compelling and utilises elements such as the Last Supper painting to good effect. However as the story goes on and the character follows his predictable thread, he becomes less interesting - even if his general motives for involvement in the quest, when revealed, make for a reasonable argument.

Like the book the film drags out a little with three distinct endings that get flatter and more tired as they go on. Salvatore Totino's cinematography makes great use of the locales and has some excellent wide shots, but much of the action suffers from far too many severe close-ups and camera shifts to seem frentic but only serve to confuse the action. Hans Zimmer's score has moments of strong resonance but at other times is far too bombastic and overpowering for its scenes.

The stop-start nature of the material is fine in a book thanks to chapter breaks and the general ability to walk away and come back to a novel, on screen it feels awkward and uncomfortable. The general concept of the book does make for a great movie idea but the actual tome was never exactly cinematic - certainly nothing like Brown's other Langdon adventure, the far more Hollywood friendly "Angels and Demons". With its ticking time bomb under the Vatican Conclave and Langdon's race around Rome to stop a serial killer slaying cardinals at famous landmarks every hour, it would've made a far more suitable film than Da Vinci does, even if it didn't sell as well in the book stores.

The film version of "The Da Vinci Code" demonstrates, much like the first two "Harry Potter" movies, the danger of being loyal to a book's words rather than its general spirit. All this eruption about the religious controversy of the novel will most likely disappear once the film is out and people realise that quite frankly the movie is so dull it won't change any opinions, and may if anything bolster interest in religion rather than undermine it. It's a very polished affair with moments of interest, but simply too long, too talky and just not interesting or clever enough to engage let alone entertain. Yet another lame entry in what's already been a relatively dull start to the Summer film season.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/davincin.php

Basically if you like the book, you'll like the movie. It's pretty much a direct adaptation.

[Darth Elektra]

Thanks for the article.

[War Party]

Like the article says, I would of prefered a Angels and Demons adaptation, but I'm sure I'm going to enjoy Da Vinci Code. I like talky films.

[Equinox]

Rottentomatoes is at 8 reviews that are rotten now... :(

Cant beleive that this movie is soo bad!!! I will still watch it, coz Tom Hanks is my fav. actor of all time...

[War Party]

I stopped listening to critics a long time ago. If the movie sucks, oh well. It won't be the end of the world.

[Gamma Ray]

0% so far. That's really pathetic.

[Aiden]

A 9th Fresh one has been added but a 10th Rotten one was added as well. It should be at 10% soon

[Equinox]

A 9th Fresh one has been added but a 10th Rotten one was added as well. It should be at 10% soon

Finally....

One "fresh" review :eek:

http://www.nypost.com/movies/66112.htm

And it is soo different from the negative reviews we've had so far...

[War Party]

It's going to be a hit or miss film.

[Equinox]

Its on 1(fresh) - 14(rotten) now...

Cmonn..Is it really that bad :confused: ... Even Fantastic four has a better rating :mad:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/?critic=all

[Darth Elektra]

Its starting to rise a little bit.

[Darth Elektra]

"DA VINCI CODE'S first review."

DA VINCI CODE'S A CRACKER
JOHN HISCOCK IN L.A. IS FIRST TO SEE DA VINCI FILM. HIS VERDICT..

IT HAS been at the centre of months of fevered anticipation, condemnation and worldwide debate.

But at last the veil of secrecy shrouding the movie based on author Dan Brown's best-seller The Da Vinci Code has been lifted.

The Mirror has been given an exclusive first look at the religious suspense thriller. And I can report that it Is destined to become a huge hit when it is released next week.

Although some special effects and Hans Zimmer's musical score had still to be added when I saw it, the movie races along at breakneck pace.

In the dramatic opening scenes, a terrified Louvre curator runs through the museum's dark galleries, pursued by a homicidal albino monk, Silas, chillingly played by Paul Bettany.

Director Ron Howard graphically depicts the curator's dying moments as, with bloodstained hands, he feebly struggles to leave the clues that draw Tom Hanks's character Robert Langdon into the murder mystery.

Hanks, with long hair swept back, ideally suits the role of the unsuspecting college lecturer drawn into a murderous conspiracy - while Bettany will give audiences nightmares as the limping, murderous monk.

He has some particularly grisly scenes in which, stripped naked and bleeding profusely from self-inflicted wounds, he viciously whips himself while wearing a pain-inducing barbed strap on his thigh, muttering: "I chastise my body."

ALTHOUGH the film closely follows Brown's storyline, Howard delivers something the book doesn't.

He goes back in time to show Brown's controversial theory that, for 2,000 years, the Catholic church has been covering up the fact that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and fathered a daughter, whose bloodline has survived into present-day Europe.

As well as scenes of the Inquisition and of women being tortured, burned and drowned, Howard shows Mary fleeing the Holy Land for France and giving birth there.

Action fans will revel in a hair-raising car chase in which Langdon's French cryptographer friend Sophie Neveu, fetchingly played by Audrey Tautou, careers her little Smart car backwards along the streets and pavements of Paris with the police, led by Jean Reno's Bezu Fache, in hot pursuit.

Surprisingly, Hanks is the only American in the large cast, which features Sir Ian McKellen in a strong supporting role as the manic Holy Grail historian Sir Leigh Teabing. In a gripping scene set at his mansion in the French countryside he reveals the secrets of Leonardo Da Vinci's famous painting The Last Supper.

Then he explains what he describes as "the greatest cover-up in human history" to an incredulous Sophie, while Langdon expounds on the meaning of certain historical and religious symbols.

But his lecture is cut short in a stunning and unexpected fashion.

The trio, taking with them a bound Silas, travel by private plane to London, where more clues add to the mystery and Silas stages a final assassination involving Bishop Aringarosa, strongly played by Alfred Molina.

Set mainly at night, the film has a sinister look which adds to the brooding atmosphere of suspense and conspiracy.

The film-makers were refused permission to shoot in Westminster Abbey because the novel was deemed "theologically unsound" by Abbey officials.

But Lincoln and Winchester cathedrals co-operated, as did the Temple Church in London and Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland.

FRANCE'S President Jacques Chirac gave his personal stamp of approval to the Louvre being used as a location.

But the Mona Lisa, which plays a key role in the story's opening, was ruled off-limits and a replica had to be used. With the film due to have its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, the controversy surrounding the story continues to grow.

A Papal official, Archbishop Angelo Amato, last week denounced the book as "stridently anti-Christian" and called for a boycott of the film.

The Catholic organisation Opus Dei and the Catholic League have also protested and unsuccessfully petitioned for changes to the movie. Even an albino rights group has added its voice to the clamour.

But Sony Pictures and Howard have resisted all attempts to change the plot or to screen a disclaimer over the credits, and rightly so.

As it is, the film stands as a superb thriller which cleverly blends action and intrigue with some thought-provoking theories.

If anything, Howard has improved on the book by some judicious pruning and by going back into history to depict scenes that the novel referred to only briefly.

There is no mystery about The Da Vinci Code's future at the box office.

It will be a massive hit.
Source: Perez Hilton

[Equinox]

Its starting to rise a little bit.

Where?

All I see is,

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/?critic=all

[Darth Elektra]

^ There's one... that was just posted on the IMDB board.

[War Party]

One of the biggest complaints I see is the length. If it takes 2hrs 30min. to tell the story, then it shouldn't be a issue. Plus, if I'm paying almost $9 for my ticket, the movie better be long.

[Equinox]

One of the biggest complaints I see is the length. If it takes 2hrs 30min. to tell the story, then it shouldn't be a issue. Plus, if I'm paying almost $9 for my ticket, the movie better be long.

Exactly..:up:

[BatMatt]

Hanks+Howard=6% positive :eek:

I never would have guessed it

[A.J.Rimmer(BSC)]

I'm supprised, its a shame that either the film sucks, or no-one likes it...

[Nivek]

Eh, critics dont make good art, they just point out what they dont like.

I might be seeing this over the weekend. The story intrests me, so Im more than willing to give it a fair shot. I've always been a sucker for religious conspiracies.

[War Party]

COULD BAD REVIEWS HELP?
The service also reported that 74 percent of those buying tickets said their religious beliefs did not affect their decision. The book has come under criticism from religious groups who object to its premise that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married and had a child together.
By comparison, advance ticket purchases for DreamWorks Animation Studio's "Over the Hedge," also opening Friday, accounted for 4 percent of sales.
Box office watcher Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations Inc., said the bad reviews may help the box office, at least in the short term.
"It means people are talking about this movie, and you have to remember that there is often a disconnect between critics and audiences. What will really count for this film is word of mouth, and that will not make itself felt until the second or third weekend," he said.
He said he would expect that the film would make about $50 million in its opening weekend.

Chad Hartigan, box office analyst for Reel Source said he expected the film to do between $60 million and $80 million in its first weekend, helped in no small part by the public's awareness of the novel.
"Our office saw the film and thought it was great. The general public will be more forgiving than the mainstream critics," he said.
MovieTickets.com said "The Da Vinci Code" was tracking very high in advance of its weekend opener and had 10 times more tickets sold than "Mission: Impossible III" during the same time in its sales cycle.
The Tom Cruise (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hc&cf=gen&id=1800015725) action film, the first of the summer's big-budget movies, opened two weeks ago to a disappointing weekend gross of just under $48 million.
Brandon Gray of Boxofficemojo.com said he thought "The Da Vinci Code" would gross about $70 million in its first three days. "It has real audience interest and a real fan base," he said.


http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20060517/114792073200.html

[The Riddler]

ian mckellan is awesome.

[spideylover89]

I'm seeing it anyway. I stopped listening to critics when I found out that a lot of them don't even see the films they review, they just go by what other critics say. Besides with a film based around a book that has had a pretty controversial affect on people, I can imagine some critics being a little biased. It was a good book, so even if the film isn't a masterpiece, there's no way it is worse than Poseiden. :rolleyes:

[The Riddler]

was poseidon that bad?

from the trailers it looked decent.

[Spider-X]

"Retarded, rediculous, and crushingly dull."
-Devin Faraci CHUD

Christ!...i'm still going to see this on friday 'cause i love Hanks and the book...but Christ!

[Downhere]

That, and also Xmen fans are voting this film down.

That is one of the most idiotic statements I have seen. X-Men fans are voting this film down? Right. Can't the movie just be plain old bad? Just because Tom Hanks and Ron Howard are behind this doesn't mean it's going to be pure gold. DVC is hardly the best story ever told.

[Darth Elektra]

Just because Tom Hanks and Ron Howard are behind this doesn't mean it's going to be pure gold. DVC is hardly the best story ever told.

Yes, And you have a very bias opionion, because you can't get off you butt as a christian and accept that this book is selling millions every day, why? Because yes its one of the best stories ever told!

[Downhere]

Yes, And you have a very bias opionion, because you can't get off you butt as a christian and accept that this book is selling millions every day, why? Because yes its one of the best stories ever told!

You don't know me and you don't know what opinions I hold. So what if the book is selling millions every day. Harry Potter does and many others and they are not considered the best stories ever told. I'm sorry, DVC is no where near one of the best stories ever told. All it is, is a run of the mill thriller that uses controversy to sell. That is all it is and all it will be.

You just can't face the fact that the movie might actually suck.

[Darth Elektra]

was poseidon that bad?

from the trailers it looked decent.

Personally I thought it was ok.

[Downhere]

Personally I thought it was ok.

I agree with that statement, it was ok in the mindless action popcorn film kinda way.

[Darth Elektra]

COULD BAD REVIEWS HELP?
The service also reported that 74 percent of those buying tickets said their religious beliefs did not affect their decision. The book has come under criticism from religious groups who object to its premise that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married and had a child together.
By comparison, advance ticket purchases for DreamWorks Animation Studio's "Over the Hedge," also opening Friday, accounted for 4 percent of sales.
Box office watcher Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations Inc., said the bad reviews may help the box office, at least in the short term.
"It means people are talking about this movie, and you have to remember that there is often a disconnect between critics and audiences. What will really count for this film is word of mouth, and that will not make itself felt until the second or third weekend," he said.
He said he would expect that the film would make about $50 million in its opening weekend.

Chad Hartigan, box office analyst for Reel Source said he expected the film to do between $60 million and $80 million in its first weekend, helped in no small part by the public's awareness of the novel.
"Our office saw the film and thought it was great. The general public will be more forgiving than the mainstream critics," he said.
MovieTickets.com said "The Da Vinci Code" was tracking very high in advance of its weekend opener and had 10 times more tickets sold than "Mission: Impossible III" during the same time in its sales cycle.
The Tom Cruise (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hc&cf=gen&id=1800015725) action film, the first of the summer's big-budget movies, opened two weeks ago to a disappointing weekend gross of just under $48 million.
Brandon Gray of Boxofficemojo.com said he thought "The Da Vinci Code" would gross about $70 million in its first three days. "It has real audience interest and a real fan base," he said.


http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20060517/114792073200.html




Awsome I still predict a 70million weekend.

[Darth Elektra]

I agree with that statement, it was ok in the mindless action popcorn film kinda way.

Yea, I paid matinee. So I was happy.:)

[Downhere]

DVC will open huge but fall off quickly if word-of-mouth is as bad as the current reviews.

[Darth Elektra]

Downhere, Sorry I jumped just a secont ago. I tend to go over board sometimes.

[Darth Elektra]

DVC will open huge but fall off quickly if word-of-mouth is as bad as the current reviews.

I would agree with that especially with X3 next weekend.

[grey_jeanie]

I think people will be intrigued by it and watch it. Also it will attract those who heard good comments about the book but couldn't be bothered to read i

[Downhere]

Downhere, Sorry I jumped just a secont ago. I tend to go over board sometimes.

No problem, when I saw that I had this whole "Oh no he didn't!" go through my mind. lol. But it's cool though...I understand you love DVC...I don't mean to come off as rude or anything when talking about DVC, just expressing my opinion is all.

[Darth Elektra]

No problem, when I saw that I had this whole "Oh no he didn't!" go through my mind. lol. But it's cool though...I understand you love DVC...I don't mean to come off as rude or anything when talking about DVC, just expressing my opinion is all.

lol, Yea, Its one of my favorite books, And I understand its completly Fictional. But anyways I had no right to jump.

[grey_jeanie]

I don't know abut anywhere else but in the UK they have really been plugged these 'Behind the DaVinci Code' type documentaries. They interview all these stuck-up, toff-nosed historians who are just going on about how it is all crap and how Dan Brown has put such stupid facts and concepts in his book.

Is it's fiction people! Dan Brown is telling a story not trying to start some new religion, and he has been very successful in doing so!

They just annoyed me although the programs were quite fascinating.

[Downhere]

lol, Yea, Its one of my favorite books, And I understand its completly Fictional. But anyways I had no right to jump.

That's cool. I understand it's totally fictional too, I've read some of it but I just could not get into it. Even though it's fictional, the story still bother's me. Maybe that's why I can't get into it...who knows. lol. Either way, I think it's possible that the film is going to make it's budget back and some change. Possibly do better internationally than domestically which should help keep it in the black.

[Darth Elektra]

I don't know abut anywhere else but in the UK they have really been plugged these 'Behind the DaVinci Code' type documentaries. They interview all these stuck-up, toff-nosed historians who are just going on about how it is all crap and how Dan Brown has put such stupid facts and concepts in his book.

Is it's fiction people! Dan Brown is telling a story not trying to start some new religion, and he has been very successful in doing so!

They just annoyed me although the programs were quite fascinating.

Yep,were getting the same stuff. History channel is doing alot of that stuff.

[Darth Elektra]

That's cool. I understand it's totally fictional too, I've read some of it but I just could not get into it. Even though it's fictional, the story still bother's me. Maybe that's why I can't get into it...who knows. lol. Either way, I think it's possible that the film is going to make it's budget back and some change. Possibly do better internationally than domestically which should help keep it in the black.

With the budget rumored at 125 million it should be able to make that back. Im not so sure how it will do Overseas because of so many countries banning the film.

[grey_jeanie]

Yep,were getting the same stuff. History channel is doing alot of that stuff.

From wtching it I'm thinking of also reading Holy Blood and Holy Grail. It sounds like there is alot of new theories and 'evidence' in there that Dan Brown didn't include. Stuff about Templar churches in France positioned in penticles, also an island of Finland has the same. also about a legend of Mary Magdalene arriving in France in an oarless boat with the 'grail' and marrying into the Meravingian (spelling?) dynasty.

[Downhere]

I think it has the UK and other European nations in the bag. I mean, it should do well enough in European nations to make at least 200 million internationally. Add another 150 (or so) million domestically and that's 350 million which the studio gets about 55% so 185 million which gives sony around 20-30 million profit just from the theatrical release. Then you have DVD's and all that good stuff so I think Sony will be ok, it may not be what they expect, but they will come out in the black.

[Darth Elektra]

From wtching it I'm thinking of also reading Holy Blood and Holy Grail. It sounds like there is alot of new theories and 'evidence' in there that Dan Brown didn't include. Stuff about Templar churches in France positioned in penticles, also an island of Finland has the same. also about a legend of Mary Magdalene arriving in France in an oarless boat with the 'grail' and marrying into the Meravingian (spelling?) dynasty.

The Holy Blood and Holy Grail is "bad" Because the writers say that they have proof that Jesus did marry, and that Mary went to France. Dan Brown has said a million times, the da vinci code is fictional. So thats sorta of the differance. I prefer the Da Vinci Code over Holy Blood and Holy Grail. Much better written.

Have you read 'Angels and Demons' by Dan Brown ?

[Darth Elektra]

Something the Da Vinci has going for it is that alot of people will wait for the secont weekend to avoid the crowds.

[Downhere]

Something the Da Vinci has going for it is that alot of people will wait for the secont weekend to avoid the crowds.

True, especially the older crowd. I don't see the older crowd rushing out...that would probably be the younger crowd...50 and under.

[myword]

http://img28.imagevenue.com/loc162/th_36384_poster_ver2.jpg (http://img28.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=loc162&image=36384_poster_ver2.jpg)

Title: The Da Vinci Code
Directed By: Ron Howard
Written By: Akiva Goldsman (Screenplay), Dan Brown (Novel)
Starring: Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellen, Jean Reno, Paul Bettany & Alfred Molina

Reviewed By Sarhan "Tsar" Rashid

I’ve read many complaints from avid readers about the mishandling of their favorite works of literature by Hollywood studios. I always viewed this as a rather silly debate, one which was never based on a valid argument to begin with.

The two mediums are worlds apart. While a story penned on paper has the luxury of length to unfold and intricately weave characterizations and plot elements a cinematic opus suffers at the merciless hands of its running time (i.e. a 500 page novel could never justifiably be translated into a 2 hour movie).

The trend of releasing “Extended Editions”, birthed by Peter Jackson’s “The Lord of The Rings” trilogy, has now allowed filmmakers the ability to present a more accurate version of the novel to fans of the source material. And I hope this is a liberty the makers of the big screen adaptation of “The Da Vinci Code” decide to exercise.

There is a chance, albeit a small one in my eyes, viewers unfamiliar with the novel will enjoy it but as someone who has read it I find it hard to conceal my disappointment. To add insult to injury it is directed by the dependable (and Oscar winning as the advertisements never fail to highlight) Ron Howard (“Ransom”, “Cinderella Man”). I guess I should’ve deciphered this when I learnt Akiva Goldsman (“Batman & Robin”, “A Beautiful Mind”) was credited with the screenplay.

From the offset it becomes obvious they have no clue what made this story a fun read as they race to get the mystery going. With quick succession Robert Landgon (Tom Hanks) and Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) manage to solve the puzzles thrown at them. This kills the thrill instantly and the audience never has the chance to get involved in the proceedings. It’s hard to sustain ones interest when our protagonists appear far too intelligent for the challenges thrown at that.

While reading the book it wasn’t hard for me to picture it as a movie. It was fast paced, offered a lot of mysteries to keep one occupied and dabbled in an aspect of religion we’re rarely exposed to. Whether that last bit is fact or fiction is highly debatable but it was interesting nonetheless.
This adaptation takes all these elements, ideal for a cinematic outing, and messes them up. Every filmmaker would offer his or her own take but the vision displayed here is both unimaginative and lost in translation. Some of the creative decisions made here are highly questionable. For instance why focus on the back story of the albino monk Silas (Paul Bettany)? Even in the book his character was rather pointless. He was merely a unique henchman. It’s not like they would focus on Jaw’s back story in a James Bond movie right?

What irks me most though is the filmmakers need to balance the argument between the religious theories offered in the book to those which exist in popular belief. The exchange between Robert Langdon and that of Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen) in his residence is cringe worthy. It’s a method of appeasement we’ve often seen Hollywood liberals apply in the past (most recently “V For Vendetta”). It’s a disgusting display really.

Everyone in the cast, excluding a very wooden and uninterested Audrey Tautou, try to bring their characters to life with great conviction even the totally wasted Alfred Molina (“Spiderman II”) and Jean Reno (”The Professional”). Ian McKellen, I feel, will unfairly walk away with a great deal of applause for his role. That’s not to say he doesn’t deliver a fine performance it’s just that he gets the juiciest of parts.

The end product is hardly memorable. An extended cut could fix many of the issues (including a very abrupt bank escape) but the emergence of such a version is highly doubtful. In any case the theatrical version is one I would highly recommend you miss in favor of reading the novel. If you’ve already read the novel then watch the movie. It’ll give you a good idea what NOT to do if ever faced with the task of adapting a popular work of literature for the big screen.

[Cinemaman]

As I said again, critics are always wrong.

[Galactus]

A lot of people hates Titanic and says "just because it made so much money it doesn't mean it's good". Then the same goes for The Da Vinci Code. Just because the book is selling like crazy it doesn't mean it's good. Remember that a lot of people are probably bying it just out of curiosity. In the end, though, I suppose you could call it both good and bad, because there are just different opinions.

[Cinemaman]

A lot of people hates Titanic and says "just because it made so much money it doesn't mean it's good". Then the same goes for The Da Vinci Code. Just because the book is selling like crazy it doesn't mean it's good. Remember that a lot of people are probably bying it just out of curiosity. In the end, though, I suppose you could call it both good and bad, because there are just different opinions.

Intersting. I think Howard should make some changes in movie script, because it isn't book on-screen, it is movie as adaptation of book with some changes.

I didn't like in Narnia only one thing, it was book on-scree.

[War Party]

Da Vinci Code is definitely going to be a hit or miss movie with everyone. You either love it or hate it. From what I have been reading, I'll probably like it. People are saying it's too talky, but I really like talky films so that wouldn't bother me. 2hr 30min? If it takes that long to tell the story, then I'm cool with it. I'm definitely seeing this on Sat. and I'm sure I'll have fun with it.

[War Party]

Ebert gives Da Vinci Code ***/****

They say The Da Vinci Code has sold more copies than any book since the Bible. Good thing it has a different ending. Dan Brown's novel is utterly preposterous; Ron Howard (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Ron%20Howard&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231)'s movie is preposterously entertaining. Both contain accusations against the Catholic Church and its order of Opus Dei that would be scandalous if anyone of sound mind could possibly entertain them. I know there are people who believe Brown's fantasies about the Holy Grail, the descendants of Jesus, the Knights Templar, Opus Dei and the true story of Mary Magdalene. This has the advantage of distracting them from the theory that the Pentagon was not hit by an airplane.
Let us begin, then, by agreeing that The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction. And that since everyone has read the novel, I need only give away one secret -- that the movie follows the book religiously. While the book is a potboiler written with little grace and style, it does supply an intriguing plot. Luckily, Ron Howard (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Ron%20Howard&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231) is a better filmmaker than Dan Brown is a novelist; he follows Brown's formula (exotic location, startling revelation, desperate chase scene, repeat as needed) and elevates it into a superior entertainment, with Tom Hanks (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Tom%20Hanks&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231) as a theo-intellectual Indiana Jones.
Hanks stars as Robert Langdon, a Harvard symbologist in Paris for a lecture when Inspector Fache (Jean Reno (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Jean%20Reno&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231)) informs him of the murder of museum curator Jacques Sauniere (Jean-Pierre Marielle (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Jean-Pierre%20Marielle&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231)). This poor man has been shot and will die late at night inside the Louvre; his wounds, although mortal, fortunately leave him time enough to conceal a safe deposit key, strip himself, cover his body with symbols written in his own blood, arrange his body in a pose and within a design by Da Vinci, and write out, also in blood, an encrypted message, a scrambled numerical sequence and a footnote to Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Audrey%20Tautou&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231)), the pretty French policewoman whom he raised after the death of her parents. Most people are content with a dying word or two; Jacques leaves us with a film treatment.
Having read the novel, we know what happens then. Sophie warns Robert he is in danger from Fache, and they elude capture in the Louvre and set off on a quest that leads them to the vault of a private bank, to the French villa of Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Ian%20McKellen&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231)), to the Temple Church in London, to an isolated Templar church in the British countryside, to a hidden crypt and then back to the Louvre again. The police, both French and British, are one step behind them all of this time, but Sophie and Robert are facile, inventive and daring. Also, perhaps, they have God on their side.
This series of chases, discoveries and escapes is intercut with another story, involving an albino named Silas (Paul Bettany (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Paul%20Bettany&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231)), who works under the command of the Teacher, a mysterious figure at the center of a conspiracy to conceal the location of the Holy Grail, what it really is, and what that implies. The conspiracy involves members of Opus Dei, a society of Catholics who in real life (I learn from a recent issue of the Spectator) are rather conventionally devout and prayerful. Although the movie describes their practices as "maso-chastity," not all of them are chaste and hardly any practice self-flagellation. In the months ahead, I would advise Opus Dei to carefully scrutinize membership applications.
Opus Dei works within but not with the church, which also harbors a secret cell of cardinals who are in on the conspiracy (the pope and most other Catholics apparently don't have backstage passes).
These men keep a secret that, if known, could destroy the church. That's why they keep it. If I were their adviser, I would point out that by preserving the secret, they preserve the threat to the church, and the wisest strategy would have been to destroy the secret, say, 1,000 years ago.
But one of the fascinations of the Catholic Church is that it is the oldest continuously surviving organization in the world, and that's why movies like "The Da Vinci Code" are more fascinating than thrillers about religions founded, for example, by a science-fiction author in the 1950s. All of the places in "The Da Vinci Code" really exist, though the last time I visited the Temple Church I was disappointed to find it closed for "repairs." A likely story.
Tom Hanks (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Tom%20Hanks&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231), Audrey Tautou (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Audrey%20Tautou&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231) and Jean Reno (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Jean%20Reno&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231) do a good job of not overplaying their roles, and Sir Ian McKellen (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Ian%20McKellen&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231) overplays his in just the right way, making Sir Leigh into a fanatic whose study just happens to contain all the materials for an audio-visual presentation that briefs his visitors on the secrets of Da Vinci's "The Last Supper (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=REVIEWS01&TITLESearch=The%20Last%20Supper&ToDate=20061231)" and other matters. Apparently he keeps in close touch with other initiates. On the one hand, we have a conspiracy that lasts 2,000 years and threatens the very foundations of Christianity, and on the other hand a network of rich dilettantes who resemble a theological branch of the Baker Street Irregulars.
Yes, the plot is absurd, but then most movie plots are absurd. That's what we pay to see. What Ron Howard (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=search1&SearchType=1&q=Ron%20Howard&Class=%25&FromDate=19150101&ToDate=20061231) brings to the material is tone and style, and an aura of mystery that is undeniable. He begins right at the top; Columbia Pictures logo falls into shadow as Hans Zimmer's music sounds simultaneously liturgical and ominous. The murder scene in the Louvre is creepy in a ritualistic way, and it's clever the way Langdon is able to look at letters, numbers and symbols and mentally rearrange them to yield their secrets. He's like the Flora Cross character in "Bee Season (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/classifieds?category=REVIEWS01&TITLESearch=Bee%20Season&ToDate=20061231)," who used kabbalistic magic to visualize spelling words floating before her in the air.
The movie works; it's involving, intriguing and constantly seems on the edge of startling revelations. After it's over and we're back on the street, we wonder why this crucial secret needed to be protected by the equivalent of a brain-twister puzzle crossed with a scavenger hunt. The trail that Robert and Sophie follow is so difficult and convoluted that it seems impossible that anyone, including them, could ever follow it. The secret needs to be protected up to a point; beyond that it is absolutely lost, and the whole point of protecting it is beside the point. Here's another question: Considering where the trail begins, isn't it sort of curious where it leads? Still, as T.S. Eliot wrote, "In my beginning is my end." Maybe he was on to something.




http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060517/REVIEWS/60419009

[Cmill216]

Wow, this thing is getting pretty weak reviews. Ebert's is one of the few positive ones.

[A.J.Rimmer(BSC)]

The reviews I've been reading rip into the film AND the book. It would be interesting to see a review from a fan of the book.

Nice avvy cmill216 :D

[A.J.Rimmer(BSC)]

However, the general concensus is that McKellan is the best part of the film though...

[BloodyWolverine]

Well atleast Ebert gave a fair opinion thats seems unbiased. He often surprises you by liking films you would not think he would.

[Mentok]

God... I made the mistake of watching the film simply because Ron Howard directed it... :(

Seriously people, dont waste your time or money. Rent it in two months when it hits DVD (if you really want to see it).

[War Party]

God... I made the mistake of watching the film simply because Ron Howard directed it... :(

Seriously people, dont waste your time or money. Rent it in two months when it hits DVD (if you really want to see it).

Would you mind saying what you didn't like about it? I would at least like to know.

[Mentok]

Would you mind saying what you didn't like about it? I would at least like to know.

The film has no real direction, its obvious about 20 minutes into it after the coolness of the code stuff wears off.

Its far too long and drawn out. Most of what is done could have been done so much better and so much faster.

It gets lost in the puzzle/code stuff way too often and the characters are constantly babbling on about something or another. Even in tense scenes when the characters should just shut the hell up they start talking.

The acting is pretty good though. Not hanks best performance but still good. The general cast all fit well and do a good job. Ian is great :up:

The cinamatography is cool in parts, especially when they are trying to set a mood for the place they are in (the stuff in Paris is quite well done).

[terry78]

Strike three for this summer, huh? I sense the comedies are going to hit it big. Nacho Libre shall hit 100 million, I predict.

[Timstuff]

I just hope that X3 and POTC2 turn out good, even if everything else flops.

[War Party]

The film has no real direction, its obvious about 20 minutes into it after the coolness of the code stuff wears off.

Its far too long and drawn out. Most of what is done could have been done so much better and so much faster.

It gets lost in the puzzle/code stuff way too often and the characters are constantly babbling on about something or another. Even in tense scenes when the characters should just shut the hell up they start talking.

The acting is pretty good though. Not hanks best performance but still good. The general cast all fit well and do a good job. Ian is great :up:

The cinamatography is cool in parts, especially when they are trying to set a mood for the place they are in (the stuff in Paris is quite well done).

Thanks for posting what you thought. It bothers me when people don't say what they liked or didn't liked. I'm seeing this regardless of what the reviews are saying and going in with an open mind. I'll probably like it, because all the stuff I'm hearing that is bad don't bother me too much in movies.

[thealiasman2000]

The controversy surrounding the film was actually more intresting and exciting that the film itself.

But given that thw writer of "Batman & Robin" wrote it, it should come as no suprise.

I already know which movie will win the 2007 Razzie awards...

[War Party]

The controversy surrounding the film was actually more intresting and exciting that the film itself.

But given that thw writer of "Batman & Robin" wrote it, it should come as no suprise.

I already know which movie will win the 2007 Razzie awards...

Did you see it? If so, what was bad about it? If you have time to type it out.

[thealiasman2000]

I take it YOU didn't see it.

Or maybe you are Dan Brown in disguise...

[War Party]

No I didn't see it. But if you look at my previous post, I like to read in detail why people didn't like or liked it. And the book was alright, nothing spetacular, but I'm still interested in seeing it. Like I said, if you don't have time. I'm not trying to be rude or a jerk, I'm just curious.

[Galactus]

Comingsoon gives it 4 out of 10.

The Bottom Line:
Fans of the book may enjoy finally seeing the characters on the screen, but for the most part, the movie adds nothing new to the experience for anyone who's read the book, and little of interest to anyone who hasn't. Ultimately, it makes the flaws in Brown's source material--the storytelling ones, not anything to do with the religious theories--that much more apparent. "The Da Vinci Code" may just be one of those cases of a book that doesn't translate well onto the screen, but at least it will ensure that the lines to the Louvre will be even longer.

[블라스]

I am STILL going to see it! :mad:
It's obvious that Dan Brown is an excellent historian and everything he's saying is the TRUTH! People just don't want to believe, lol @ them for being sheep.
I feel sorry for them, but at least the truth will be known to much more people, thanks to this sure to be excellent movie adaptation.













































































:O

[War Party]

I love the sarcasm. But Dan Brown is far from a great historian. Not even close. But I found the book entertaining.

[블라스]

Hahaha thanks :D
Yeah, I don't care if he went to "Ancient Conspiracy Hooey" College, the book is just that, fiction, and it was a very entertaining read.

[amazingfantasy15]

Guess the producers should've pulled a Running Man or Bourne Identity on this and use the book only for the title than trying to actually adapt it.

I liked the book, thought it was a fun ride. I think a lot of reviewers think the movie should be like the second coming (pun intended) due to the popularity and controversy and when it's not it's seen as a failure. It's gonna be a movie that people will love to hate. Ebert's review is the one that rings truest to me, he seemed to ignore the book and controversy and just looked at how the movie worked.

[War Party]

Guess the producers should've pulled a Running Man or Bourne Identity on this and use the book only for the title than trying to actually adapt it.

I liked the book, thought it was a fun ride. I think a lot of reviewers think the movie should be like the second coming (pun intended) due to the popularity and controversy and when it's not it's seen as a failure. It's gonna be a movie that people will love to hate. Ebert's review is the one that rings truest to me, he seemed to ignore the book and controversy and just looked at how the movie worked.

That's what I liked about Ebert's review.

[Killgore]

WTF is POTC2? EFF these stupid anagrams. FTUTSA.

Need to be Robert Langdon just to read the goddamn message boards. sheesh.

[Killgore]

BTW, FTUTSA -- EFF them up thier stupid asses

[War Party]

Pirates of The Carribbean 2

[Cinemaman]

I have just seen DVC, my review you can read in Reviews thread.

I can give it only 5 out of 10, sadly, but movie is crap :(

[War Party]

What review thread?

[Cinemaman]

I've just seen it.

Well, I didn't want to say this, but the whole movie is the big piece of crap!

Yeah it is so.

What I think about DVC?

1 Script? OMG! It isn't movie adaptation of the book, it is book on-screen, as I thought before. There is no intersting scenes and too many dialogues, what is really bad. I think Langdon is one big stain without any sense. Hanks looks really stupid in 1st part of film. But then, Sophie takes up Langdon's place and becomes next stupid character without any sense. The whole 2nd part she pretends to be character, who cant understand what is happening. Others are too banal. The only character, who has intersting story of nest Hannibal is Silas. He looks more like Frankenstein than Hannibal, I would say. And the whole script is too boring without any real action scenes. It isn't entertainment, it is another boring hystory leacture. Sadly, I didn't expect this.

2 Casting? Big stars from Hollywood (except Tautou and Reno) are really bad.
As I've just said, the most stupid and bad characters/actors are Hanks/Langdon and Tautou/Sophie. Especially that scene after escape from museum, it was so boring. And these scenes when Sophie makes hints that Langdon is the last hope and when Langdon says that Sophie is descendant of Jesus are so boring and rediculous that I was thinking about leaving theatre! Hanks couldn't even show his emotions in this film, it is very bad for him as an actor. Reno makes no sense in this film also. Ian McKellen? I'd like see him in every role, but not this. He plys at first intersting old man, who becomes a CRAZY bad guy. LOL! Bettany have better movies, but this role wasn't for him so bad. He played his character like I expect from him, good acting. He played the beast.

3 Vissual style and effects? There is no intersting scene with vissual effects. No more words.

4 The editing? OMG! It was the most terrible editings in movie blockbusters I've even seen before! I would cut many scenes and change that dumb end. Also, scenes with knights and ancient time are not necessary there. Thats all.

5 Direction? Howard made his WORST movie. It is strange, that director like he is, makes so intersting movie to look like the most boring films!

6 The whole movie have no sense. And the end sucked big times!

My rate is 5 out of 10. I gave 5 for respecting of actors, who acted very bad.

[War Party]

From what I have been reading, Sir Ian is the saving grace of the film. I'm surprised you didn't like him. He's usually solid in everything he does. And you should change your sig about critics always being wrong. It should say critics are sometimes wrong with predictions.

[Cinemaman]

From what I have been reading, Sir Ian is the saving grace of the film. I'm surprised you didn't like him. He's usually solid in everything he does.

No, I likes him. But I didn't like his acting in this film.

[BloodyWolverine]

I've been pretty sure that the three biggest box office summer hits would be X-3, Superman Returns and P.O.T.C 2.

[Cinemaman]

What review thread?

DVC review thread.

[Cinemaman]

I've been pretty sure that the three biggest box office summer hits would be X-3, Superman Returns and P.O.T.C 2.

I think the most successful movies in box office will be SR, POTC2 and Cars.

[Downhere]

I think the most successful movies in box office will be SR, POTC2 and Cars.

Don't underestimate X3, it's in the perfect position to really make a boat load of cash. It will be one of the biggest hits of the summer.

[Cinemaman]

Don't underestimate X3, it's in the perfect position to really make a boat load of cash. It will be one of the biggest hits of the summer.

Look, I dont know exactly what I can expect from X3. For me it looks a bit poor.

But I will see it next week and understand was I right or not.

[Cinemaman]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/reviewsnews.php?id=14604

http://www.totalfilm.com/cinema_reviews/films_out_this_week/the_da_vinci_code

[Sentinel X]

Not really...doesnt look all that interesting to me.But I might check it out on DVD

[Iceman]

Rotten Tomatoes @ 18% from 36 reviews

[블라스]

Oh oh.
I wanted this movie to be good.
I'm still going to see it, this could also be one of those things where it's trendy to bash something.
If it sucks though, I'll just buy National Treasure :D :O

[Cinemaman]

Oh oh.
I wanted this movie to be good.
I'm still going to see it, this could also be one of those things where it's trendy to bash something.
If it sucks though, I'll just buy National Treasure :D :O

When I saw this movie, I was thinking that it wasn't even DVC, it was a copy of Passion of Christ with National Treasure.

[War Party]

When I saw this movie, I was thinking that it wasn't even DVC, it was a copy of Passion of Christ with National Treasure.

Just curious... did you read the book?

[War Party]

Da Vinci Code reviews "frustrating," says director
Thursday May 18 4:00 PM ET

"Frustrating" was how director Ron Howard (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hc&cf=gen&id=1800017103) described the overwhelmingly negative reviews of his eagerly awaited movie "The Da Vinci Code," but he believed the news was not all bad.
Critics and movie goers often disagreed, Howard said in an interview on Thursday, and some people at preview screenings had found the film starring Tom Hanks (http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hc&cf=gen&id=1800010392) more rewarding on the second viewing than on the first.
"I don't really read them (reviews) at the time that we're coming out, because it's too touchy a subject for me," Howard, 52, told Reuters at exclusive hotel on the Mediterranean coast outside Cannes.

"I like to know what's going on, so I get a sentence or two of description."
Months after a film's release, Howard said he collected reviews to see what the consensus among critics was.
The reaction immediately after the first press screening at the Cannes film festival on Tuesday was mainly negative, with trade publication Variety setting the tone by calling the $125 million picture "stodgy" and "grim."
Many people in the audience at the screening laughed at the pivotal moment, and the ending was greeted with stony silence.
The New York Post was in the minority with a glowing appraisal, calling the film "crackling" and "irresistible."
The Da Vinci Code has attracted unusual attention thanks to the religious controversy surrounding the Dan Brown bestseller on which it is based.
One of the characters suggests Jesus married Mary Magdalene, had a child by her and that the Church resorted to murder to try to cover up the truth, prompting objections from Christian groups and officials at the Vatican.
The film's performance at the box office is also important this year after the summer's first two blockbusters -- "Mission: Impossible III" and "Poseidon" -- failed to meet expectations.
CRITICS, AUDIENCES CAN DISAGREE
Howard said the critical reaction did not necessarily reflect what the public would think.
"There's a disconnect between the audience response and the critics. The critics are running a bit more to the negative and with audiences we've been running much more to the positive."
That has been supported by forecasts from experts in the key United States market for a strong opening weekend from Friday. They say the film could earn $50 to $80 million in its first three days.
Howard even had a suggestion on how to boost that number.
"This sounds a little 'hucksterish', but people really respond to the movie better the second time than they do the first time."
But Howard added: "Of course it's frustrating that some of the critics have been harsh with it and that's disappointing, because I'm the type of person that likes to please everyone.
"I think with this project, that's an impossibility and I've kind of known that all along."
The director of critically acclaimed movies including "Apollo 13" and "A Beautiful Mind" realized he was taking a risk by agreeing to make The Da Vinci Code.
"If you're not willing to take some chances, particularly at this stage of my career, then what are you doing? I know I've been commercially successful, but I'm not really a guy looking for safe, middle-of-the-road success."

[Cinemaman]

Just curious... did you read the book?

Yep.

And as I said, DVC looks like book on-screen.

But it has details from POC and NT.

[War Party]

I do not know what POC and NT is? And wordy films rule. That's why I usually agree with Ebert a lot.

[Cinemaman]

I do not know what POC and NT is? And wordy films rule. That's why I usually agree with Ebert a lot.

POC - Passion of the Christ.

NT - National Treasure.

Who is Elbert???

[War Party]

You mean Ebert? The only critic whose opinion I take value in.

[Cinemaman]

You mean Ebert? The only critic whose opinion I take value in.

So he said that DVC is good movie???

[War Party]

Yes, he did. But I have disagreed with many of his reviews before, but I usually share the same opinions as him. I'm seeing the movie on Sat. but from the beginning, I never expected a masterpiece. The book is far from a great peice of literature but it was entertaining and that's what I expect from the movie.

[Sam Fisher]

I don't care what critics say. I'm still going to see it this weekend. And I will buy the DVD.

[myword]

Oh oh.
I wanted this movie to be good.
I'm still going to see it, this could also be one of those things where it's trendy to bash something.
If it sucks though, I'll just buy National Treasure :D :O
I know what you mean but this isn't one of those cases where it's trendy to bash a movie. It's a glaringly poor adaptation and an uninteresting one at that. Please share your comments once you have seen the movie. Would love to know what you think of it.

[블라스]

I know what you mean but this isn't one of those cases where it's trendy to bash a movie. It's a glaringly poor adaptation and an uninteresting one at that. Please share your comments once you have seen the movie. Would love to know what you think of it.

I definitely will, although your post worries me a bit :(

[Lazlo Panaflex]

I like Tom Hanks but I've never read the book nor do I plan on seeing the film.

[Bat Attack]

I like Tom Hanks but I've never read the book nor do I plan on seeing the film.
Same here.

[Immortalfire]

Reading the book at present, and I'll probably see it eventually...but not before X-Men 3.

Local paper have The Code two stars.

[Isildur´s Heir]

I just saw the movie, and let me say that i liked it.

First of all let me tell that i didn´t read the book, second, let me tell you that, to bash The Da Vinci Code, is the new trend in town right now.

The reason why i went to see this movie was one, because i didn´t read the book, and i wanted to know what everyone was talking about.
Yes, the characters are not that developed, yes, it´s hasn´t the best pace in the world, and yes, for all i know, it might be a little too literal for it´s won good (a movie is not a book), but, for the story and provocative material, i liked it.

[Equinox]

^ Good... Im watching this tomorrow :up:

And my expectations have never been so low for a Tom Hanks movie:( .. Which might be a good thing at this point.!

[The Ether]

I was planning to watch the movie. I read the book and I'm a Tom Hanks fan also but everyone's opinion about the movie right now is making me really worried:(

[The Riddler]

hopefully i enjoy it more than the critics have tomorrow.

[HUMAN]

I think the story would've benefitted better if the producers of 24 got a hold of the rights like they wanted to.

[HUMAN]

I guess this means no Angels & Demons adaptation? :(

That was the better book, damnit!

[Immortalfire]

Seems to me that McKellen is a miscast as Teabing, the book describes him as fat/portly, redhaired dude. :confused:

[Timstuff]

Movies that do badly with critics but do well with mainstream audiences are typically the ones that don't require a lot of thinking.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

I saw this last night.

To each his own, but the more I think about it the more I like it. Hopefully we'll see it again (my brother wants to see it but didn't come last night with us)

[Red Mask]

I'm Catholic, and I still enjoyed the film.

You want something that's really offensive? Check out P.O.S comic book called "Preacher". Now THAT'S utter blasphemy.

[~†~§iX~†~]

I am really surprised that after 3 years of people going on about the book and now the movie, with all the right ingredients seems to not work. I can only think that filming in sunny Croydon cursed production!......

[Super Flight]

the only person who liked it was a group of old folks who said it really helped them fall asleep that when they woke up they all felt refreshed

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Meh. I really don't see how you can find a work of fiction horrid and offensive. Sure, it can be blasphemic, but still.

After we came home from The Da Vinci Code, I said to my dad: "So why was there such controvery over it? Because it isn't quite contraversial :o"

[War Party]

I never really saw the big deal with the contents of the story. It's fiction. Does Dan Brown claim its non-fiction? Because if he does, that is just wrong.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

No, but he did say he uses elements of non fiction to make up a fictitious story...or something to that extent.

[Addendum]

I'm Catholic, and I still enjoyed the film.

You want something that's really offensive? Check out P.O.S comic book called "Preacher". Now THAT'S utter blasphemy.
I found Preacher to be hilarious :D

I could see where some would be offended by it, however they wouldn't have made it past the first issue.

[War Party]

No, but he did say he uses elements of non fiction to make up a fictitious story...or something to that extent.

Still fiction.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Yeah...what's your point? That's what we've been saying: major Catholics can't understand fiction, they can't tell the difference when they read a Bible (hey, I'm Catholic too...) but they just want a book to blame any conversions or devilry on from time to time. First, it was Harry potter, now, it's The Da Vinci Code, what's it going to be next? Animorphs?!?!

[thealiasman2000]

"Preacher" is a lot of things, and funny ain't one of them.

And Ron Howard is nowhere near as good as Garth Ennis.

But seriously, the book consisted mostly of dialogue and facts. How the hell do you translate that into a movie, a medium that relies on images to tell a story?

[War Party]

Yeah...what's your point?

My point? I don't have one. I was just agreeing with you.

[Red Mask]

I found Preacher to be hilarious :D

I could see where some would be offended by it, however they wouldn't have made it past the first issue.

You see? Ennis got away with it but there's a hoopla over Brown and Howard? It's all about the media; it's what one can accomplish below the radar.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Okay, fair enouhg lol, sorry...it just sounded like I was saying something wrong, and you were correcting me...my bad :O

[The Lizard]

Can't say I'm surprised by the crappy reviews.

I guess this means no Angels & Demons adaptation? :(



One of the many things that kept annoying me about Angels & Demons was all the times that the ambigrams (the forward-backward-upside-down words) kept being described as these amazing mysterious works of artistic genius, when in fact it was quite obvious what they said, and also despite the fact that graphic designers have been making ambigrams like that just for fun for decades now.

Dan Brown is a satisfactory writer of airport novels, but that's it.

[aaron]

empire gave it 2 out of 5 stars, im not sure now :(

[Addendum]

You see? Ennis got away with it but there's a hoopla over Brown and Howard? It's all about the media; it's what one can accomplish below the radar.
It's because Ennis made use of gratuitous head shots, the Old West, Irish vampires, the repetitive joke of "How can we **** with Herr Starr", a dude with a face like an arse, and then some dude saying "Humperdido. Blessed are the meek"

The comic never took itself seriously, even though there were serious and poignant moments. Those moments ended with a gunshot, gratuitous head shots, or in one instance the Reverend Custer urinating on a 6 inch tall burning cross. For 9 tradebacks, it's a fun ride

[LastSunrise1981]

I'm seeing it in a few minutes. Personally I think critics and audiences are bashing it because of the controversy, and that it's become part of the trend now to bash it.

[amazingfantasy15]

I'm seeing it in a few minutes. Personally I think critics and audiences are bashing it because of the controversy, and that it's become part of the trend now to bash it.

That's what I think too. Something I've also noticed is that a lot of people say the pace is too slow, there isn't enough action, maybe it wasn't released during the right time, maybe during the fall or winter it would've been better received. One review blurb was people looking for a summer blockbuster should look elsewhere, well duh! this isn't a big guns and explosion movie like Mission Impossible 3. I'm still planning on seeing it after work today, I read the book over a year ago and thought it was fun, which is what I'm expecting of the movie.

[Cinemaman]

That's what I think too. Something I've also noticed is that a lot of people say the pace is too slow, there isn't enough action, maybe it wasn't released during the right time, maybe during the fall or winter it would've been better received. One review blurb was people looking for a summer blockbuster should look elsewhere, well duh! this isn't a big guns and explosion movie like Mission Impossible 3. I'm still planning on seeing it after work today, I read the book over a year ago and thought it was fun, which is what I'm expecting of the movie.

As I said, for me it was more boring hystorical leacture than intersting movie entertainment.

[Two-Face]

Well I seen The Da Vinci Code it is very excellent movie and Paul Bettany was good as Silas (he's great actor if chosen for Joker) who's monk goes on mudering three teachers and last one was Professor Robert Langdon Ian McKellen is always great didn't have bad moment in the movie.

Tom Hanks' acting was good but seemed he didn't look as he suppose to be concern about the all thing. Let me say first of all that Audrey Tautou is very beautiful French woman but her acting seemed bit dull, the reason I might said cos I never seen her acting before so I check her act again when she makes new films.

I never read the book so I can't compare the movie with the book but I think Ron Howard done great job with the movie and A Beautiful Mind is one of my favourite Ron Howard folms. 8/10.

[vegeta21]

I think Angels and Demons would have translated better on screen than DaVinci, though I still have yet to see this film.

[Golgo-13]

It was 'the trend' at the time to bash 'The Passion of the Christ' also but that didn't effect it negatively at the box office.

I'll see it in a week or so, when the crowds die down.

[kytrigger]

As I said, for me it was more boring hystorical leacture than intersting movie entertainment.

Which is bad since it isn't historically accurate at all.

[BloodyWolverine]

I have planned to go see this a long time ago. Three Summer films were on my list. The Da Vinci Code, X-men 3 which looks really good. Pirates Of THE Caribbean 2 which looks really really good. As for people who hate it well thats you opinion. I like mystery movies so i will most likely like it.

[Cinemaman]

Which is bad since it isn't historically accurate at all.

Of course, it should have some intersting hystorical facts and theories, but not so much.

And I have not seen even one good action scene. It is summer movie blockbuster at all and it should have more action than so long and so boring dialogues, if creators wants to get positive reviews.

Also characters are too banal, I'd say. Hanks have no emotions, it looks like he is a bio-robot/hystorical teacher in this film.

I was so disappointed :(

[Wilhelm-Scream]

I'm glad that people are starting to realize that emporers Howard and Hanks aren't wearing any clothes.:up:

[dpm07]

I just got back from seeing the film and the theatre was packed. In fact, there was a lineup for the next showing of the film as well.

I really liked the movie a lot. I thought it was well done. Some deviation from the book, but that normally happens from book to film. Some really good performances, IMO.

[Strange]

I just got back from seeing the film and the theatre was packed. In fact, there was a lineup for the next showing of the film as well.

I really liked the movie a lot. I thought it was well done. Some deviation from the book, but that normally happens from book to film. Some really good performances, IMO.

I agree, my theater was packed as well. I have the book but have not read it yet, I will now read it to see if it is better than the movie. It did seem a little long but overall I would give it 7 out of 10. It was worth the price of the ticket.

[A.J.Rimmer(BSC)]

All the bad reviews are putting me off finishing the book...

[dpm07]

All the bad reviews are putting me off finishing the book...

Don't let it. The book is really good, and I liked the film a lot. Let yourself be the judge. You can listen to what the reviewers say, but you may be better off forming your own opinion. Take a chance and go see the movie. If you like Tom Hanks, Ron Howard, and Ian McKellan, you'll probably like the film.

[green]

I just got back and gotta say I really enjoy it. Its a pretty good book adaptation which is quite often not the case. Howard definately pulled it off and did so beautifully. The performances are all strong including Hanks, who I never really saw in the role but quickly had me believe in the character. I love the fact that Ian Mckellan is going to own this summer with two great roles. If you liked the book you should check it out, it's well worth it.
My theatre was packed too and most shows for the day evening sold out.

[Matt]

Some books just don't work on film. That was the case with this. Where I really enjoyed the book from front to cover, I felt the movie was an utter snore fest. It was boring with terrible pacing. Some books just don't work on film.

[Fifty Euros]

Gawd, this movie sucked. :down: That's kinda sad, I was hoping for this movie to be good, I love Audrey and Ian - btw, Ian really steals it, I was half-asleep until Teabing showed up.

[Strgts]

It seems alot were expecting this to be an Action Movie of some kind

[The Riddler]

i have no idea where it's coming from that it sucks.

da vinci code wasn't a great movie but it was not bad by any means and it was a good, enjoyable flick.

[Red Mask]

People shouldn't take the Da Vinci Code seriously either. But I found it more tasteful than Preacher.

[Downhere]

I guess this means no Angels & Demons adaptation? :(

That was the better book, damnit!

I'm sure they will adapt that book. DVC looks to be making a huge weekend. It's legs may suffer, but it will probably make 200 million domestically. Either way Sony will make a profit.

[Spider-Man Luvr28]

I liked the movie. I felt it was a little too long but I don't know. Maybe it was because time passed by too slowly.:O Still, I thought it was a good movie.:up:

[Red Mask]

I liked the movie. I felt it was a little too long but I don't know. Maybe it was because time passed by too slowly.:O Still, I thought it was a good movie.:up:

It was soooooo long I went to the restroom twice!

[Shifty]

It seems alot were expecting this to be an Action Movie of some kind

The producers of 24 wanted to buy the rights of the novel and use the story for the third season. Brown wanted big movie adaptation money/continued book sales and turned them down. Now it looks like the film is a massive disapointment. Brown is filthy rich; 24 would've adapted the book properly to make a great story.

[LastSunrise1981]

I watched the movie and it's far from disappointing. It's very thought provoking(Like the book), original(Like the book), and is very suspenseful and fast paced with an intelligent concept.

I think those who complain about it either, A) Have short attention spans, B) Want to hop on the bashing bandwagon, or C) A combination of both A and B in my opinion.

As I watched the movie I was completely drawn in by the film. None of it was dull, boring, stupid, or left me rolling my eyes or looking at my watch. In the end I accepted it as an intellectual entertaining movie and I wish others could do the same.

Tom Hanks, Ian McKellen, and Paul Bettany put on brilliant performances. Molina was misused once again(ala Spider-Man 2), Jean Reno could've been used more, and Audrey was alright, but I could've casted some one else for the role she was chosen for.

Tom Hanks portrayed Langdon as I seen him from reading Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code. Believe it or not, Langdon is a bland personality and unique at the same time. What didn't change in this movie was him using his intelligence and expertise in symbology and codes.

Hanks, as far as I'm concerned, is Langdon and I couldn't and can't picture anyone else playing him as he did.

Bettany was just downright scary. Words can't express how I got the impression to stay a good 500 feet away from him.

[BloodyWolverine]

This was a great film. I saw it in the evening and the theator was packed. I have no idea what movie the critics were screening . Sure this movie is not the typical summer flick. But it is a nice mystery thriller. Hanks was pretty good. And i need not tell anyone about Ian McKellan for he pretty much does a good job in just about anything.

I liked the film because it showed the Louve. It was cgi replicka studio in Hollywood. Ron Howard really filmed there and didn't cheat us. I am a action movie comic fan and i just can't wait for X-men 3 but this was a movie i'll indeed add to my dvd collection when it comes out. I give it a 7.8/10. I rarely vote a 10/10 for movies. Around 8/10 and 9/10 is usually my high marks.

Go see this movie if you liked the book and like thriller movies. However if you have any dislikes prior and decide not to go. There is always the Jason rip off See No Evil with Kane and the Nice little kiddy flick Over The Hedge.

[The Undertaker]

I too have not a clue as to what movie these critics have been screening. I thought the movie was great. From some reviews I was really expecting a crap movie but since I read the book I figured i'd go see it, ya know, form my own opinion. Howard did a great job bringing the book to life. It was not boring or slow paced or too long. People must be really lacking attention spans these days.

I just hope all these negative reviews don't discourage Howard, he really did an awesome job here. I guess theres really not too much of a chance of seeing him direct Angels and Demons. =[

[The Guard]

Not surprised it's getting bad reviews. The book was formulaic, obvious, derivative tripe, in my mind, and I'm usually pretty forgiving about those things. Brown's saving grace is that he does a lot with his characters and manages to tell a fairly interesting story and shove some "Facts" in along the way, but a film does not have that luxury. I'll see it, but I'm not expecting much.

[Banshee]

The movie was pretty good, but obviously it falls short compared to the book. Its just a story better suited for novel format as you can go more indepth into things in a book. Apart from that I thought it was pretty good.

[블라스]

I watched the movie and it's far from disappointing. It's very thought provoking(Like the book), original(Like the book), and is very suspenseful and fast paced with an intelligent concept.

I think those who complain about it either, A) Have short attention spans, B) Want to hop on the bashing bandwagon, or C) A combination of both A and B in my opinion.

As I watched the movie I was completely drawn in by the film. None of it was dull, boring, stupid, or left me rolling my eyes or looking at my watch. In the end I accepted it as an intellectual entertaining movie and I wish others could do the same.

Tom Hanks, Ian McKellen, and Paul Bettany put on brilliant performances. Molina was misused once again(ala Spider-Man 2), Jean Reno could've been used more, and Audrey was alright, but I could've casted some one else for the role she was chosen for.

Tom Hanks portrayed Langdon as I seen him from reading Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code. Believe it or not, Langdon is a bland personality and unique at the same time. What didn't change in this movie was him using his intelligence and expertise in symbology and codes.

Hanks, as far as I'm concerned, is Langdon and I couldn't and can't picture anyone else playing him as he did.

Bettany was just downright scary. Words can't express how I got the impression to say a good 500 feet away from him.

Your review gives me a lot of hope, I'm going to see it tomorrow :up:
Oh, and your avatar is tops.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

I saw it again. I still love it. Don't know what those stupid critics are complaining about.

Audrey Tatou is such a beautiful woman :O

[Equinox]

I just came back from watching the movie after a packed screening, which I think was sold out for virtually every show today in Chicago.

On to the movie, I have really no idea, why everyone are bashing this movie so much.. It maybe a little long, but its not a bit boring. It moves along at a good pace and its a faithful adaptation of the novel. I liked it a lot and everyone put in pretty good performances...Word of mouth should be pretty good for it too and Im hoping this film has legs after a definite huge weekend! :)

[Equinox]

I saw it again. I still love it. Don't know what those stupid critics are complaining about.

Audrey Tatou is such a beautiful woman :O

:up::up::up:

[freelancer]

I'm going to see it tomorrow...

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

I hope you enjoy it, it's a great film. I applaud Ron Howard.

It's just the choices he does, but make sure you hold your blader,it's 150 mins. I sat through it for 300 mins :D

Not once did I head off to the toilet...Im starting to think there's something wrong with me...:(:p

[theJust]

i couldnt help but compare it to Dogma (in mind) while watching it.

[theJust]

and on another note, i read the lengthy 'critics vs. audience' speculation/comparison thing a page back...
simply put, critics are often smart and picky. veryselective, they live for it.
the general audience are viewers who need distraction and take Anything
as entertainment.
especially in this case, this holds true.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Not really. If critics can live for their choices, why can the moviegoing public?!

The description of a movie critic is to hate every movie they see anyway :o

[Two-Face]

I was watching Newsnight on BBC TV and critics were bad mouth it a lots cos it wasn't faithfull to Dan Brown's book and only one critic said it was faithfull to the book.

I don't care what critics say if I like it that's what matters to me, in my opinion the movie was very excellent and see it on DVD.

[Smirnoff]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/


(http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/)


Ouch.

[roach]

short and sweet.......I saw the movie and was entertained and at the end of the day that's all that matters.

[Cmill216]

Despite terrible reviews, things are looking mighty fine for The Da Vinci Code...

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=14636

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

It deserves it

[terry78]

Went last night around 10 something, because the last couple of shows were sold out, but they were all teenagers and what not, which shocked me. Didn't expect them to be all interested in this flick, but after about 30 minutes in I saw the brats leaving out and talking amongst themselves and playing around, obviously not into the movie at all. :rolleyes: They were expecting some big action adventure flick and it wasn't what they got. Me personally, I liked it regardless of it dragging quite a bit, but whatever.

[BloodyWolverine]

Da Vinci Code scored 30 million on friday if the first days totals are accurate this sould a a very solid weekend. Not no Spiderman or Shrek numbers but still by far the higest opener this year. Until X-men 3 or Pirates Of The Piartes Of The Caribbean 2 comes out.

[ultimatefan]

Unlike MI III and Poseidon, it´s opening ABOVE predictions, should make around 80 millions first weekend... With a budget of 125m, That makes it very safe for Sony, even if it has bad word of mouth, it will make at least 170m, plus the overseas numbers, a pretty profitable movie.

[Spider-Fan]

I really enjoyed the movie. I never read the book, but found the movie very interesting. I don't see why it got the bad reviews it did, but I never put much stock in what critics say anyway.

[ultimatefan]

One thing is for sure, the disappointment on MI III and Poseidon can´t be blamed on merely a slump thing, there IS interest in new summer movies, but not in these ones.

[Darthphere]

One thing is for sure, the disappointment on MI III and Poseidon can´t be blamed on merely a slump thing, there IS interest in new summer movies, but not in these ones.


Does it make you feel better about Da Vinci Code bashing the box office numbers of other movies? Just a question.

[terry78]

While it's a decent flick, it's naive to think the "controversy" isn't helping it profit wise.

[cabel]

Saw it last night. Good movie. Very well made. Good performances all round. Only complaint is that the ending seemed to drag forever, even for my paitence. Although, maybe it was beacuse it one in the morning, cold, and I was suffering a migraine through the last third.

It was also kind of fun to see a movie that people were protesting outside.

Now that I've seen the movie and have heard some of the protests, I can only come up with this response:

Yeah, so?

1) It's fiction.

2) If God does exist, I'm pretty sure he has more important things to worry about than a movie.

3) So what if Jesus might have been a husband and father? Like Langdon said in his little speech at the end, isn't what Jesus taught and what he represented and inspired the important thing?

[TheVileOne]

I'm surprised, but I'm sure the studio bigwigs are breathing a sigh of relief after all the bad early buzz.

[Movies205]

I'm surprised, but I'm sure the studio bigwigs are breathing a sigh of relief after all the bad early buzz.

I'm not, it like I told someone earlier before I saw the numbers. A movie like the Davinci Code is not dependent on numbers, it's merely a hollywood spectacle, the magazines and newspaper make up a controversy in which they make tons of money by selling copies of there papers while the movie makes money off the controversy. The real question was whether or not people care enough in the controversy to see it, and the answer was yes. Just like with Flight 93, no one really care enough in the controversy or paying 10 dollars to see it.

[Sabretooth]

I can't believe some of the negative buzz Da Vinci Code is getting. I saw it this afternoon and man,what a film. I was confused at some points though (I never read the book) but other than that,top notch. :up:

Why is there never anything positive about Ron Howard and his movies? He's become one of my favorites and yet all of his projects automatically get the thumbs down. :(

[JOELLY]

I just came back from watching the movie.Its quite an impressive movie.
The performances were the best thing cause we alresdy knew about the story n stuff.

9/10

[Downhere]

29,500,000 opening day...should get an 80-85 million opening weekend...I see a 200 million total for this one domestically. Sony should be relieved.

[Movies205]

I can't believe some of the negative buzz Da Vinci Code is getting. I saw it this afternoon and man,what a film. I was confused at some points though (I never read the book) but other than that,top notch. :up:

Why is there never anything positive about Ron Howard and his movies? He's become one of my favorites and yet all of his projects automatically get the thumbs down. :(

Beautiful Mind won best picture and Cinderella Man last year was pretty much praised by all the critics, so much so that AMC had a promotion guarenteening you'd like it or your money back so I think you're a little off base there.

[Sabretooth]

Beautiful Mind won best picture and Cinderella Man last year was pretty much praised by all the critics, so much so that AMC had a promotion guarenteening you'd like it or your money back so I think you're a little off base there.
Really? I don't remember hearing much of anything about Cinderella Man....

[Matt]

I get that the story was good, and I loved the book. But the movie, its kind of like if someone told you the story in 15 minutes you'd say "oh, thats interesting"...but 2 and a half hours of people talking is just boring.

[GoldGoblin]

Looks like christians have nothing to worry about.

[Cmill216]

Really? I don't remember hearing much of anything about Cinderella Man....

Cinderella Man had some amazing boxing action, IMO. Really intense and made you forget for a moment that you were watching a film, and not an actual boxing match.

The movie itself? Meh.

[Scooter]

Just saw this. Much better than the reviews made it out to be, IMO. If I wasn't confused by the reviews before I saw the movie, I certainly am now.

[Scooter]

Just saw the movie. Much better than the critics make it out to be, IMO.

[The Riddler]

the reviewers are all religious pricks, that's why.

[Threshold]

It was really lacking any sort of solid energy for the audience to feed off of, I saw it last night and then saw Over the Hedge tonight and found the latter to deliver a far more engaging cinematic experience because there are big ups and downs for the audience to go along with and pay attention to, the Code was just dull and uninteresting (except for McKellan, who rocked his S--t).

[Timstuff]

Now here's a funny coincidence... The Da Vinci Code came out last night, and today I saw a real albino who resembled Paul Bettany's character while I was at work. Most odd indeed...

[The Storm]

I was really amped to see this film and I have to admit I was slightly disappointed. Howard did a great job of translating as much of the complex story for viewers who haven't read the book. At the same time I was disappointed with some of the changes. I understand that some changes are needed but in this case I didn't see the point in them.

Sophie's story was changed which gave the ending a different meaning, which didn't work for me. Some scenes felt rushed and I found Tom and Audrey struggled with some of their early scenes, the chemistry between them was also missing. Having said that this film is worth a look, as I said Howard translates the main jist of the story. He goes into detail where the book only touched upon such as the Pagan witch hunts and the birth of the Bible.

Overall 7 out of 10, I think it needs a second viewing.

[Timstuff]

the reviewers are all religious pricks, that's why.

Then how did Brokeback Mountain get such good marks?

People always try to find a way to dis-credit the critics. It's understandable that people would want to defend a movie they want to like, but sometimes it gets really silly.

[deathshead2]

Now I never read the book but dang everything was so easy to find out. I sat through a 2 hour and whatever how long movie and as soon as we meet new people I go hey they must(insert whatever they did in the movie here) Ron Howard made it way to easy to find out everything it was like a M.night movie. Why to easy sigh:( also the police were very very dumb in this movie. 4 out of 10

[spideylover89]

I thought it was excellent. Not as good as the book (that's a given), but certainly better than the critics have made it out to be. Granted it's long, but most of the film is so fascinating that it doesn't really matter. Also considering the line that formed in the theatre for this film, it's obvious that the negative reviews have done nothing to spike people's interest.

[The Dark Defender]

There is always the Jason rip off See No Evil with Kane and the Nice little kiddy flick Over The Hedge.

It's not a Jason rip off...at all. I'll be seeing TDV tomorrow and I have no doubt it won't be half as good as SNE, even if exceeds my expectations.

[Truthteller]

Merging

[Sam Fisher]

I liked it. 7/10

[HUMAN]

Thought it was great. There's a few changes from the book that I liked and some things I wish they would've kept. But overall, it was a satisfying ride. I'll probably see it once more in theaters and get both the theatrical edition dvd and the extended edition if one ever comes to fruition.

[NOFX]

Never read the book, but I was interested because all of the hype surrounding the da vinci code. Now I am a Christian but I thought this was a good movie not great but a solid movie. It wasnt really an attack on christianity but more of theory of what might have happen. It was a little bit too long for my taste but I would give it a 7.7.

[cabel]

If anything, I consider it religious fanfiction

[NOFX]

If anything, I consider it religious fanfiction
I agree. I was expecting the entire movie as a huge attack on christianity but it wasnt. I mean yea it had some bits and parts of it that was trying to disprove Jesus being the son of god but overall it was like you said cable its a religious fanfiction.

[블라스]

Hello!
So, I really liked The DaVinci Code.
It's not an action movie, it's a nice little mystery-thriller thing about ancient stuff, which I love.
I couldn't care less about the religious aspects because it's just fiction and that would never change my beliefs (raised Catholic but I'm much more inclined to the belief that as long as you have faith and act nice, you're A-OK with God), but it's a damned good movie :up:
8.5/10

[Assassin]

next week it will be forgotten because of X3

[블라스]

Ugh, I can't wait for X3.

[War Party]

X3 is going to be amazing. I preordered tickets for the midnight showing, so it's going to be a fun night. I saw the movie a second time because my mom wanted to see it and it was better the in my second viewing. But it was great the first time though. And everyone clapped at the end in my theater and I was kind of surprised by that, because that was only second time I was in a theater when people clapped. First time was Spider-Man 2.

[Proteus-X312]

X-men 3

[Hunter Rider]

X-men 3:confused:

[nightwing06]

I have only read excerpts of Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code.
So when i watched the film 85% of it was new to me.
With all of the bashing i expected to be offended and bored
But i was pleasantly surprised.
The story had a good pace to it,but not as intriguing as i had hoped it would be.I thought Tom Hanks did a good job,the same can be said of Audrey Tautou.Ian McKellen was excellent but his speach seemed a bit warbled and i found myself saying what did he say a few times.
I have been a part of many organized religions from Catholic to Jehovahs Witness,and i wasnt offended by any of the statements made about Christ,because the statements made were not brought out as factual,cannon,or this is the truth and nothing but the truth.
The statements made are even debated within the film by the characters.
Are there sinister people like Alfred Molina's Bishop Aringarosa in religion?, of course there are,but in turn there are truly righteous and sincere people also.
And in the end as Tom Hanks character Robert Langdon states its all about what you believe.

8/10

[kane9321]

i liked the movie alot,there were a few changes from the book..but thats to be expected.The visual flashbacks were stunning.I'm still tryin to figure out,why all the hate from critics.

[Hunter Rider]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=14643

Da Vinci Code Deciphers the Box Office

Source: Box Office Mojo (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/), Edward Douglas
May 21, 2006




http://comingsoon.net/nextraimages/davincibo.jpg
The ComingSoon.net Box Office Report (http://www.comingsoon.net/boxoffice/2006/may19.php) has been updated with studio estimates for the weekend. Be sure to check back on Monday for the final figures based on actual box office.

After a disappointing weekend at the box office, things picked up with the release of Ron Howard's adaptation (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=14643#) of Dan Brown's worldwide bestseller The Da Vinci Code (http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=7413), starring Tom Hanks (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=14643#) as Professor Robert Langdon. After selling nearly 60 million copies worldwide, the movie grossed nearly $30 million its opening day, leading to an opening weekend of roughly $77 million, averaging over $20 thousand in 3,735 theatres. The religious thriller made almost twice that amount outside the States to wind up with a three-day worldwide gross of $224 million, the second-biggest debut ever at the global box office behind only Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith ($253 million). "Da Vinci Code (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=14643#)" ranks as the 13th biggest opening weekend domestically ever.

[Kmack]

^:eek:

[GoldenAgeHero]

yeah, im proud it did well!

[ultimatefan]

That comes to prove there´s still a lot of interest in summer blockbusters, just not in... Tom Cruise! (just kidding!)

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

this movie did not deserve the panning it got.

I give it an 8/10

Fantastic movie if not a little slow on the uptake..but the actors kept it going..and for once Tom Hanks didn't steel the light of the other Actors.

[ampersand]

I give it a 3/10 and all 3 points came out of the scene where Sophie gets the guy to lend them his phone rather than go to the library. I consider that to be a poke at the absurdity of the way that scene went down in the book.

Really though, this movie was garbage. It apparently took place in one 36 hour period including a trip to and from London. There was absolutely no suspense involved and the whole thing moved at a snails pace. Even though I thought the book was garbage, atleast I had fun reading it and it was suspenseful.

[Immortalfire]

77 mil intake at present, a decent haul I guess. Bet they expected more.

[Punisher 04]

next week it will be forgotten because of X3

Hell yeah, I'm tired of hearing about Da Vinci code. X3 is getting my cash. I'm glad Da Vinci Code made money this weekend because it's going down next week.:)

[The Storm]

Its given our cinema a much needed boost, we had a 1000 people come to see it on Friday! (Trust me thats good). I'm taking my dad & nan to see it some time this week. I wasn't that taken on GoF the first time I saw it but loved it the second time, will probably be the same for Da Vinci Code.

[The Dark Defender]

One of the worst movies of the year.

This film is nothing but one huge barrage of exposition after another with some generic car chases thrown in while doing nothing whatsoever to pull me into the story.

Bettany and McKellan were good(Bettany especially), but Hanks the female lead were wooden.

Zimmer's score, which is what I was looking forward to the most about this movie was pretty weak; didn't build the tension or enhance the emotion(not that there was much to build or enhance).

The flashback sequences were visually stunning, but other than that and when Bettany was onscreen, I was bored out of my mind. This is a movie that merely provides a ton of exposition, it just tells, it doesn't captivate. It was also predictable.

[WormyT]

Now I never read the book but dang everything was so easy to find out. I sat through a 2 hour and whatever how long movie and as soon as we meet new people I go hey they must(insert whatever they did in the movie here) Ron Howard made it way to easy to find out everything it was like a M.night movie. Why to easy sigh:( also the police were very very dumb in this movie. 4 out of 10
I agrees.
It was very predictable but I found myself wondering if it was meant to be so predictable.
I also found the editing to be pretty bad especially at the beginning. Important scenes were being cut inbetween other scenes and it all seemed a bit unnatural.
But...entertaning overall.
Not as good as previous Ron Howard movies.

[Kid Flash!]

Nice movie.
Entertaining.

[BloodyWolverine]

I can't believe some of the negative buzz Da Vinci Code is getting. I saw it this afternoon and man,what a film. I was confused at some points though (I never read the book) but other than that,top notch. :up:

Why is there never anything positive about Ron Howard and his movies? He's become one of my favorites and yet all of his projects automatically get the thumbs down. :(
Ron Howard has made some really good movies. I however only have liked a few that i would buy. I liked Apollo 13, Willow yes Willow. I can't get enough of fantasy films. If Willow was mad enow it would eb a lot bigger hit. The Missing was by far Ron Howard best movie ever made. If you have not seen it Rent it for its not just a western. It has Tommy Lee Jones and Cate Blanchett.

[Compi716]

Despite low(ered) expectation because of the reviews, I actually really enjoyed The DaVinci Code. I found it very entertaining.

[LastSunrise1981]

Ron Howard has made some really good movies. I however only have liked a few that i would buy. I liked Apollo 13, Willow yes Willow. I can't get enough of fantasy films. If Willow was mad enow it would eb a lot bigger hit. The Missing was by far Ron Howard best movie ever made. If you have not seen it Rent it for its not just a western. It has Tommy Lee Jones and Cate Blanchett.

Ron Howard made Willow? I never knew that. Cool deal. :up:

Willow has always been one of my favorite movies.

[LastSunrise1981]

One of the worst movies of the year.

This film is nothing but one huge barrage of exposition after another with some generic car chases thrown in while doing nothing whatsoever to pull me into the story.

Bettany and McKellan were good(Bettany especially), but Hanks the female lead were wooden.

Zimmer's score, which is what I was looking forward to the most about this movie was pretty weak; didn't build the tension or enhance the emotion(not that there was much to build or enhance).

The flashback sequences were visually stunning, but other than that and when Bettany was onscreen, I was bored out of my mind. This is a movie that merely provides a ton of exposition, it just tells, it doesn't captivate. It was also predictable.

I take it you've never read Angels and Demons or The Da Vinci Code? Langdon is an intellectual teacher/symbolist with a bland personality, so Hanks played him to perfection in my opinion.

[Mr. Credible]

this movie was the definition of 'blah'... i'm one of the 4 people on the planet that hasn't read the book, so...

about the only thing i enjoyed on any level about the movie was the idea that christ had a wife and child, and all that jazz, which had nothing to do with the movie, but the book instead. i went with my dad, who'd read the unabridged (sp?) version of the boook, and watched every special on the history/discovery channel, and he didn't like the movie at all, either.

i give it a 3/10. i can't belive anybody is praising this as a film. it simply wasn't good at all. it was mediocre at best.

[LastSunrise1981]

this movie was the definition of 'blah'... i'm one of the 4 people on the planet that hasn't read the book, so...

about the only thing i enjoyed on any level about the movie was the idea that christ had a wife and child, and all that jazz, which had nothing to do with the movie, but the book instead. i went with my dad, who'd read the unabridged (sp?) version of the boook, and watched every special on the history/discovery channel, and he didn't like the movie at all, either.

i give it a 3/10. i can't belive anybody is praising this as a film. it simply wasn't good at all. it was mediocre at best.

Wow, so it's not okay for someone to like a movie that you didn't like? :rolleyes:

Typical childlike behavior from Mr. Credible.

[Timstuff]

77 mil intake at present, a decent haul I guess. Bet they expected more.

77 mil is just over half of the movie's budget. Unless sales really drop off I'd estimate it will make it's budget back, but that's still not very impressive considering the book sold 40 million copies.

[The Dark Defender]

I take it you've never read Angels and Demons or The Da Vinci Code? Langdon is an intellectual teacher/symbolist with a bland personality, so Hanks played him to perfection in my opinion.

It doesn't really matter, it didn't translate well on film at all. I thought Hanks just had no passion for the project, and felt so even more aftering hearing about why he took it(basically as a favor to Howard with little knowledge of the source material).

It was a "give me my paycheck so I can leave" performance imo.

[dpm07]

I take it you've never read Angels and Demons or The Da Vinci Code? Langdon is an intellectual teacher/symbolist with a bland personality, so Hanks played him to perfection in my opinion.

Well said. I think a person really has to have an appreciation for the book and literary pursuits translated intelllectually on-screen. The people who I've talked to that didn't care for the book, movie, etc. are really the ones who probably don't read very much or have a strong interest in this type of suspense.

Whether or not one agrees with the topic depicted on-screen, the film definitely generates much conversation and debate one can talk about at dinner parties.

[Super Flight]

I saw The Davinci Code last night, I havent read the book, AND i thought the movie was really really Good!! I don't know what the hell the critics are talking about! i'd love to go out a see it again, its a very smart interasting story. The story is just amazing! and everything ture! yup, i believe my friends! I believe!
I hope dan brown has his other books turned into a movie!


What does the church and the Mob have in common?

1.They both want power over peace
2. They would kill innoceant people to obtain power
3. to this day they have lots of power
4. They only care about themselves

[amazingfantasy15]

this movie was the definition of 'blah'... i'm one of the 4 people on the planet that hasn't read the book, so...

about the only thing i enjoyed on any level about the movie was the idea that christ had a wife and child, and all that jazz, which had nothing to do with the movie, but the book instead.

Did you even watch the movie? The whole idea of christ having a wife and child was the movie, that was why the guy got killed to begin with, why he left clues to send Langdon and Sophie on this quest, why they were being hunted and tried to be silenced. This is the book on screen, so how does it belong in the book, but not the movie?

I personally liked it a lot, everyone played their parts perfectly and it did what the past two Harry Potters haven't, actually gave the details from the book and didn't go into cliff notes mode to get from one action set piece to the next. I can sort of understand why people wouldn't like this movie, they might go in thinking it'll be Indiana Jones and therefore disappointed with the lack of action, but the book was never about action, it was about solving the riddle and learning the next bit of info. People say it reads fast because you can't wait to find out what happens next. I really think it would've been received much better if it was released during the fall/winter when people aren't seeing movies for gunfights and car chases.

[tupelohoney]

i thought the movie was extremely well-done and the performances were top-notch (ian mckellen was FANTASTIC... he actually made me laugh out loud several times).

i'm glad most folks ignored the critics and turned out for the film anyway. almost everyone i talked to enjoyed it immensely.

[y2jversion1]

...

[y2jversion1]

Went opening day..

[freelancer]

Saw it, loved it. I'll see it again. :)

[Mr. Credible]

Did you even watch the movie? The whole idea of christ having a wife and child was the movie, that was why the guy got killed to begin with, why he left clues to send Langdon and Sophie on this quest, why they were being hunted and tried to be silenced. This is the book on screen, so how does it belong in the book, but not the movie?

I personally liked it a lot, everyone played their parts perfectly and it did what the past two Harry Potters haven't, actually gave the details from the book and didn't go into cliff notes mode to get from one action set piece to the next. I can sort of understand why people wouldn't like this movie, they might go in thinking it'll be Indiana Jones and therefore disappointed with the lack of action, but the book was never about action, it was about solving the riddle and learning the next bit of info. People say it reads fast because you can't wait to find out what happens next. I really think it would've been received much better if it was released during the fall/winter when people aren't seeing movies for gunfights and car chases.

maybe you misunderstood what i said... i suppose i should have phrased it better. what i meant was that the only thing i liked about the movie was the idea. and seeing as that idea didn't come from the movie, but the book, it really isn't a reason for me to praise the movie in any way.

know what i mean?

[Darth Elektra]

I loved the film.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

It's an excellent film. I'm currently reading the book and I love comparing scenarios to whats happening on screen.

I'm up to something that wasn't in the film, however. PHI.

[Timstuff]

My brother saw it on saturday and said it was teh suck.

[JewishHobbit]

I considered seeing this movie, but so far not one person I've spoken to has liked it. Only one person thought it was 'okay.' Most of them share my tastes in movies, so I probably won't waste my time on it.

[Darth Elektra]

I considered seeing this movie, but so far not one person I've spoken to has liked it. Only one person thought it was 'okay.' Most of them share my tastes in movies, so I probably won't waste my time on it.

I thought it was really good.

[JewishHobbit]

Yeah, but if I'm going to listen to someone I'd prefur to listen to people that I know share my opinions of film. No offense, but thanks.