The DaVinci Code

potatobroth · #1 05-15-2006, 08:30 AM

anyone else looking forward to seeing this? I thought the book was a lot of fun, and from seeing the trailers expect the movie to be as well.

I know this topic has been getting a strange amount of publicity from the Catholic sect because evidentally they don't trust their followers to seperate fact from fiction.

King of Snake · #2 05-15-2006, 10:46 AM

haven't read the book (from what i heard it was a good story but not so good writing) but I hope the film is good cause i like the premise of the whole thing.

potatobroth · #3 05-15-2006, 11:40 AM

the writing was fine, but nothing ground-breaking. his style is to write in short chapters that leave a cliffhanger for the next short chapter. "just gotta read three more pages.." and the likes.

holden · #4 05-15-2006, 12:14 PM

Not bothering with the film. It'll be a huge hit, cause controversy, and probably get Ron Howard/Tom Hanks Oscar nods. i think these are safe bets. But i'm not interested for several reasons: (1) Ron Howard's movies always make me feel toyed with...he pulls out all sorts of sentimental stops to manipulate your emotions. Maybe that makes for uplifting endings, but i leave the theater feeling used. (2) The book's premise isn't original and it's got lots of facts wrong. Even though it's listed as fiction, however, too many people will accept this interpretation as the gospel truth, and that's too bad, imho.

Kennrr · #5 05-15-2006, 12:43 PM

yeah, holden. stupid, guilable people. the same people that believe the blair witch project is real. if your talking about originality, are you talking about the writer who sued brown? The book was good, loved the story and premise.

also, isn't the whole point of a movie is being able manipulate your emotions? you want to root for the hero, you want to hate the villian... or I miss you point competely.

adam · #6 05-15-2006, 01:04 PM

No, I understand his point, Kennrr. There are occurences in a movie that are true to the plot and the characters, and there are occurences that are contrived simply for an emotional response. Obsiously the distinction is pretty fine, but it's really irritating once you spot it. I've always felt that way about Spielberg films, too.

An example would be in Pearl Harbour, right before the bombs start dropping, there's a scene with children dressed as angels dancing. This is plainly designed to pull on the heartstrings, and it's super cheesy. Ron Howard is better than that, but he's a total heartstring-puller.

cured · #7 05-15-2006, 01:14 PM

I'm seeing it this weekend...looking forward to it. I've only read bits and pieces of the book but it was definitely a page turner whether I agreed with the subject matter or not.

I like Ron Howard. He made "Willow," one of my favorite movies ever.

holden · #8 05-15-2006, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kennrr

yeah, holden. stupid, guilable people. the same people that believe the blair witch project is real. if your talking about originality, are you talking about the writer who sued brown? The book was good, loved the story and premise.

also, isn't the whole point of a movie is being able manipulate your emotions? you want to root for the hero, you want to hate the villian... or I miss you point competely.

Adam got my point right on. It is a fine line between good storytelling/moviegoing and manipulation, but movies like "Cinderella Man", "Apollo 13" and "A Beautiful Mind" definitely took creative licences with real stories. Surely "Da Vinci Code" isn't truth, but it also claims to be based on facts. There are tons of gullible people who will buy it all hook, line and sinker. They already have. The fact that there are lots of websites, study groups, tv documentaries, other books based on it, trying to explain it, debunk it, whatever, is proof that people already bought this for something bigger than it is: an entertaining work of fiction. Comparison with "Blair Witch" is limited, because, except for that film's festival debut which took some by surprise, it was revealed to be fake and the buzz died. Did anyone bother with Blair Witch 2? Nope.
Maybe the movie and books are good things in that they get people discussing matters of faith rather than just accepting what they're told. I'm just saying the opposite also applies: people will blindly accept Da Vinci Code as well-researched fact. Woops!
Just my opinion, though! Like i wrote in prev. post, it'll be a huge hit film! Enjoy it!

adam · #9 05-15-2006, 01:27 PM

I like Ron Howard - I thought he was great on both Arrested Development and The Simpsons. Apollo 13 was pretty fun, too. But his movies tend not to be much more than brain candy - like Spielberg's. They are consistently well done, but they tend to be manipulative (in the above sense) and fairly simple.

cured · #10 05-15-2006, 01:30 PM

"Blair Witch" was something to be enjoyed and talked about...what the studio was thinking when they thought they could recycle every other horror movie and attach "Blair Witch" to the name and have it sell is beyond me but it's just another one of those bad Hollywood moments.

I enjoyed watching all the publicity MTV was giving the movie, though...it was such a perfect marriage.

A LOT of people I know have read "The DaVinci Code" and, yes, many of those people have used their Dr. Phil skills to come up with their own conclusions about what's true and what's not.

I just hope to be entertained. Magneto is usually worth the price of admission by himself